Are our Slants "Unsafe"?

-
One of the safest types of cars are mid 70's fullsize luxory barges. Ask anyone that investigates accidents.

That's because they are all driven by 85 year olds doing 54 mph on the expressway.


(Actually, I can't wait until I'm 85 because I will be "that guy". Always 5 mph under the speed limit and 100% oblivious to what's going on around me. lol )
 
It sounds like we have two different definitions of "safe" in this thread. We have:

1. Less damage to car = safe (older car argument)
2. Less damage to humans = safe (newer car argument)

I used to be of the argument number 1 crowd, that is until about 4 months ago when we got rear-ended in our 2005 focus by a mid-80's chevy pickup going about 30 - 40 by the time of impact (50 mph highway traffic that stopped short). The focus was really something else. It crumpled right up and took almost all of the energy of that impact. Car was a total loss, which was upsetting because it was paid for, but we walked away and didn't have so much as a hint of soreness the next morning.

Can you imagine being in a dart with the stock lowback seats that my GT originally had and getting hit like that? The mrs and I would have been in neck braces for a while, at the least, and who knows what longer lasting aches and pains would have resulted. Thank you focus, you will be missed.
 
I keep hearing about how "safe" new cars are and I saw a crash test of a 1959 Chevy Bel Air vs. a new Chevy Malibu.
I just have a real hard time believing that a Chrysler Newport isn't as safe as a Scion xB. What would you rather get T-Boned in? I'm picking the Newport.

I am an appointed member of the US National Academy of Sciences Transportation Research Board, so I see a great deal of data (i.e., actual results of actual crashes) without having to worry that USA Today or CNN or Fox or whoever might be spinning it this way or that way for whatever reason, and in the event I'm not sure what I'm seeing I get to ask the scientists and researchers directly.

The factual answer is that you're much, much safer in the xB. The fantasy answer with all the handwaving and bogus rationalisation is that you're safer in the Newport. The Newport itself is less likely to sustain fatal damage in the crash, but the Newport's occupants are much more likely to get hurt or get dead. The human mind has a great capacity for self-deception. We do it all day, every day just to get along in life without going postal.

Here, take a look at this:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siT-SIfOnQw"]1960s Crash Tests - YouTube[/ame]

A lot of Mopars in those '68 GM tests. Note how well the stronger, improved 1964 door latches work (not) to prevent the door flying open in a crash. I see a lot of very dead and very maimed people when I view that video. And here's what happens when a '78 Plymouth hits a barrier at 65 mph (the really revealing views start at about 0:50):

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sCMm1oOIM8"]1978 Plymouth Crash Test.flv - YouTube[/ame]

That said, just as those who babble about how the invisible hand of the free market would've solved the problem of auto safety all by itself without meddlesome interference by government regulators need to shut up a lot because they're full of poo, so do those who pat themselves on the back and crow about what a great job American regulators and the rules they write have done of improving vehicle safety. There are still a lot of unreasonably unsafe cars in the American market. Ford's been one of the worst offenders, though their latest stuff is mostly quite good, and Chrysler's built a lot of vehicles with poor safety performance recently, too (but even these laggards are much safer than an old car). Fact is, America's progress in improving auto safety has lagged badly compared to the rest of the first world. We're doing a comparatively lousy job.

But the likelihood of dying or sustaining any given amount of injury in traffic just keeps going lower and lower and lower even as there are more and more and more cars driving more and more and more miles. Part of that is much less tolerant attitudes toward drunken driving, part of it is better tires on a new or an old car alike, but a giant chunk of it is a result of the enormous improvement in the safety performance of automobiles now compared to 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago.

And them's the facts. Believe 'em or don't.
 
*shrug* Workin' here, and I'm just as remote from the server as you are. The "horrible noise" is an unrelated song whoever put together the video decided to use as background noise. Turn the volume down and watch the footage.
 
Ford pinto! *BOOM* LOL :D!!! I remember seeing pics of a slight rear end hit to pintos crushing the gas tank and literally...... BOOM!

My sister is dumb... she drove without her seatbelt in a dodge ram i think 1998? one of the big dual cab ones..... she lost control, flipped, totaled her truck and survived.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcNeorjXMrE"]Ford Pinto Crash Test - YouTube[/ame]

I like how the whole dash literally pops out lmfao
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Shotgc4U__4&feature=related"]2011 Dodge Charger side impact test - YouTube[/ame]
 
*shrug* Workin' here, and I'm just as remote from the server as you are. The "horrible noise" is an unrelated song whoever put together the video decided to use as background noise. Turn the volume down and watch the footage.

song??? you sure the projector wasn't broken or something? :joker::joker::joker:

like the pinto bomb flic!
 
Some people in this thread are confused about how passenger safety and car damage relate to each-other.

Yup. And they make big talk about what they think they understand of what they think they've seen to back up their deluded, ignorant ideas of how traffic safety works. They're wrong, but *shrug*

Ask an old time collision repair guy which are safer. They will tell you. You don't need to clean the blood, hair and teeth out of a vehicle like you did back in the old days.

Exactly.
 
Well in an ultimate test my bud was involved in a crash. He was in the middle of the front seat of a newport that got t boned by a dump truck going 55 mph. He was the only one to survive. I'll bet money that there would have been NO SURVIVORS in a scion..
 
new cars are definitely safer packed with their safety technology but I find it ironic that manufactures make many cars way too powerful. (My Dad's Acura TL is like a rocket ship). Newer cars are easy to drive thus enabling drivers to go too fast, follow too close, zip around corners, park without looking and my personal favorite, race to the red-light. Speed kills.
Most of us who drive A-bodies try to compensate by knowing the capabilities of our car; braking, accelerating, cornering ability and having a total awareness to where everybody else is on the road because if hit we're screwed.
 
Well in an ultimate test my bud was involved in a crash. He was in the middle of the front seat of a newport that got t boned by a dump truck going 55 mph. He was the only one to survive. I'll bet money that there would have been NO SURVIVORS in a scion..


So 1 out of 3 in the front seat lived..... Well, you convinced me.
 
So 1 out of 3 in the front seat lived..... Well, you convinced me.

Id rather take my chances in a big metal coffin car than a scion..cant imagine what a scion would look like after a 55 mph t bone from a dump truck..

As a tow truck driver in my youth I saw a fox body Mustang from the 80's suffer the same fate.There were 3 folks in that car,one in back no survivors..

The fire fighters hosed out what was left of the driver. His body got squished through the door frame...

I saw a fiero break in half right behind the seats as well. The little car hit a concrete power pole and the back half was completely destroyed. The passenger was thrown clear,no seat belt but died from injuries. The driver burned to death while still alive,there was nothing anyone could do.

These little cars dont take much to tear apart and fragment.

At least there was some strength in the old designs.
 
Id rather take my chances in a big metal coffin car than a scion..cant imagine what a scion would look like after a 55 mph t bone from a dump truck.

Okeh, let's grant your guess and say the big metal coffin's safer in the kind of crash you have in mind -- even though it's not. Now let's look at how likely you are to be on the receiving end of a 55mph T-bone from a dump truck vs. the many other kinds of much more common crashes.
 
These little cars dont take much to tear apart and fragment.

At least there was some strength in the old designs.


And this is the same argument that goes in circles in this thread.

People make a false assumption based on what the outside of these new cars look like after a collision when it's really only the passenger compartment that matters.

Hell, just the "super high strength steel" inner door beam of a Scion is stronger than any part of a car built in the early 70s.

Look at the side impact of the 2011 Charger in post #62. See the red paint left on the side airbag? That would be a head going through side glass in a Newport.

These little cars deform, and crumple in an effort to use up collision energy before it gets to the people inside.
 
i agree, new cars are softer, more impact friendly on the inside compartment especially... I also still believe that if a '66 chrysler 300 was to hit a focus,prius,vw,civic,volt or vommit etc...that the 300 would plow right through it.
Thats lopsided ...but accurate to me.

now...a 64 dodge dart against a civic?

Id rather die in a dodge...but the civic would be the safer.
 
btw..the thing about that 2nd video from dan was if you look at the pick I posted of the vw...you will see far more damage, death & almost sliced down the middle, though the 2 mannequin's bumped coconuts so hard im sure there'd be BD..
 
Yup. And they make big talk about what they think they understand of what they think they've seen to back up their deluded, ignorant ideas of how traffic safety works. They're wrong, but *shrug*


Wow...You've convinced me Dan.

To be honest, I now feel horribly UNSAFE driving my Valiant...But more for my wife - she drives a 1991 Volvo 240.

We're moving in June of next year and I'm going to have to get her a new car since we're not going to ship the Volvo and we're going to ship my Valiant..

Would you say a mid-90's Honda or Toyota would still be considered safe in today's standards?
 
one guy's weak attempts at belittling others on a public forum is what it takes to convince you? lol

Heres the deal, when comparing old 60's steel to todays plastic...our old cars are death traps, which really makes them all the more fun and i hope people who are scared of driving them will sell theirs to someone who isn't and can appreciate nostalgic feel, style, and power of a classic car.

...btw
the volvo's carry/ied one of the best safety records of all manufactures
 
-
Back
Top