1959 Chevrolet Bel Air Vs. 2009 Chevrolet Malibu

[wooverstone8]

IIHS Offset.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CU-k0XmLUk

[JumpmanYaris]

wow

[JumpmanYaris]

Is the person in ur picture Charles Lindburgh? I cant see what it says on the plane

[Kal-El]

People believe that these old cars are "tanks" but who thought they would crumple like tin foil right through the whole cabin. No seat belts and no air bags needless to say. Ouch. Seat disconnected, windshield went flying, door fell off. They don't build 'em like they used to? Yeah, OK.

[wooverstone8]

Is the person in ur picture Charles Lindburgh? I cant see what it says on the plane

Nope. That's Eddie Rickenbacker, a famous WWI ace.:wink:

[wooverstone8]

People believe that these old cars are "tanks" but who thought they would crumple like tin foil right through the whole cabin. No seat belts and no air bags needless to say. Ouch. Seat disconnected, windshield went flying, door fell off. They don't build 'em like they used to? Yeah, OK.

I was surprise too.

[RedRide]

I don't think we are seeing the full story here.

You see a lot of parts flying from both vehicles but honestly, I failed to see which car fared the worse.

The angle/point of contact and the camera angle its self has been carfully orchestrated to give the impression that the new Chevy is tougher than the old.

The '59 Chevy has a heavey, seperate frame with a heavy V8 that probably would convey to the '09 who is boss in a real head on.

BTW, I had a "'55 and a '57 Chevy and they were "tanks" compared to newer cars.
They were not made to "crumple" back then!

[SilverBack]

Man I hate to see a classic in mint condition get destroyed, especially since they're getting harder to find as time goes on...

People believe that these old cars are "tanks" but who thought they would crumple like tin foil right through the whole cabin. No seat belts and no air bags needless to say. Ouch. Seat disconnected, windshield went flying, door fell off. They don't build 'em like they used to? Yeah, OK.

lol I just saw that vid and posted the almost the same comment there. I didn't even know there was a thread here. Sure it was solid as a tank, but I agree with what you're saying. What good is that gonna do without any interior "padding"? :thumbdown:

Another shot: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d309QCuve7c

The Bel-Aire's interior got thrashed :eek:

[churp]

Did the same angle in my 59 chev with a 58 buick (back in 67) both doing about 30 mph, so it wasn't that bad. neither drivers door would open. No seat belts and the dashes were unpadded and like cookie cutters. Luckily no one got hurt, other than nasty bumps and bruises. Heck of a goose egg on my forehead. I'd much rather be in my Yaris!

[Bob Dog]

and I though I was old because I owned a 65 mustang before they were "classics"

[Gideon]

I don't think we are seeing the full story here.

You see a lot of parts flying from both vehicles but honestly, I failed to see which car fared the worse.

Uh, it's the Bel Air.

They state in the video description:

"The dummy in the Malibu suffered only minor leg injuries while the dummy in the Bel Air would have died instantly"

[RedRide]

and I though I was old because I owned a 65 mustang before they were "classics"

My '55 and '57 Chevys were just old clunkers when I got them. Classic status for them was still years away. :smile:

[Bob Dog]

My family had a 53' Chevy fastback and a 60' 2 door Bel Aire. Both were junked when repair costs exceeded worth. My grand father had 55 Pontiac 2 tone Silver Chief, full house, that was garage when he stopped drivnig with20,00 miles on it. My cousin took and wrecked it inside of three weeks. Smash ups were a lot more dramatic years ago , much less bounce and a lot more crunch and flying metal.