Register now to get rid of these ads!

The destruction of a nice 59 chevy

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by junkyardjeff, Sep 11, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. junkyardjeff
    Joined: Jul 23, 2005
    Posts: 7,850


    I was on another website and checked out a link where a national news network (ABC I think) and some insurance study group ran a 59 belair head on into a 09 malibu,if I knew more about computers I would post the link but the destruction of a nice original or restored 59 chevy made my blood boil. If it was a 79 or 89 I could live with it but not a 59 and I thought I would let everyone know about this.
  2. roadrash
    Joined: Sep 3, 2008
    Posts: 49


    Could have spared a classic Chev,if those boneheads would have just asked the question . 2009 impala vs 1959 Belair who would win ? I think we all know the answer !
  3. titus
    Joined: Dec 6, 2003
    Posts: 5,074


    aw, its just a 4 door.:)

  4. junkyardjeff
    Joined: Jul 23, 2005
    Posts: 7,850


    Even thought it might be a 4 door those valuable front end parts are not made anymore,from the one picture its hard to tell if its a 4 door or 2 door sedan.
  5. ....ya, but it had a perfect front clip!
  6. Bigchuck
    Joined: Oct 23, 2007
    Posts: 1,141

    from Austin, TX

    "Those old cars just are not safe." I can hear it now. This kinda crap just gives more ammo to lawmakers that want us off the road.
  7. pwschuh
    Joined: Oct 27, 2008
    Posts: 2,396


    I'm a little surprised at the outcome. Thought the 59 would have done a little more damage to the new car and suffered a little less damage itself, just based on throw weight and amount of metal. Hate to see that old Chevy die but it does appear to prove the point about modern crash science pretty conclusively.

    Wonder if the car belonged to Chevy or if the person who sold it to them knew it would be used for this? I know the car companies are selling off their heritage collections because they need the money.
  8. whameeee!!! that hurt!! one more bites the dust.
  9. retro54
    Joined: Apr 1, 2004
    Posts: 736

    from PA

    It wasn't ABC who did the test (not that I'm defending that network)... it was the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety...

    The average person today just does not have respect for the past... that video brings a tear to my eye...
  10. K204DR
    Joined: Apr 5, 2008
    Posts: 98

    from Chatt TN

    the good news is all 59 chevys just moved up a notch in value, including 4drs!
    I could never work where they crashed cars all the time. i'd be trying to take them home!
  11. LOWCAB
    Joined: Aug 21, 2006
    Posts: 1,989

    from Houston

    Watching that video definetly made me pucker up. Did you see the cloud of what looked like rust come out of that car? I too thought it would do better than it did, crash wise.
    I had a 48 chev pickup that I was involved in an accident with, hardly anything happened to the truck, but it sure mangled the car.
  12. pwschuh
    Joined: Oct 27, 2008
    Posts: 2,396


    An interesting point. You assume, based on appearances and test standards, that the 59 would have to have been pristine and rust-free to provide valid test results. Unless they weren't trying to show old tech vs. new tech at all, but rather how an average old car that might be on the road (and might have some rust and fatigue) stacks up in a wreck with a new car. Two totally different tests.
  13. thechopperguy
    Joined: Oct 27, 2007
    Posts: 149


    I wouldn't put it past them to rig this test by making some modifications to the '59 to prove their point. It's been done before.
  14. uniquecoaches
    Joined: Oct 26, 2008
    Posts: 264


    What a waste. They took a perfectly good 09 malibu and destroyed it. They should have used a Prius and then it would be one less suppository shaped vehicle on the road. They should have a Cash for Ugly Cars campaign. Make America Beautiful restore an old car and reduce the footprint caused by building a plastic battery operated pos.
  15. olcurmdgeon
    Joined: Dec 15, 2007
    Posts: 2,242


    My first impression on seeing the clip on the national news was the same as other posters. A prelude to "saving us from ourselves" by getting older "unsafe" cars off the road at some point. Perhaps driven by higher insurance prices if you register your car as an everyday driver, forcing us to go to specialty insurance with mileage limits on operation. Unfortunately we are going that way in this country!
    I got an idea, lets crash test the same model 1959 Chevrolet against one of those little Smart Cars they sell today and see what the hell happens!!!
  16. Kustomkarma
    Joined: Mar 31, 2007
    Posts: 898


    I know they did it to make a point, but they should have run two modern cars into each other or an enormous SUV into a mid sized car. I'm all for safety, but it all starts with being a good driver. If you're distracted with cell phones, radios, the newspaper, (your math homework - not making that one up), etc. all the safety measures in the world may not be enough to save you - well right now. I seems like drivers are becoming more and more dependent on the vehicle and less on their skill. Just my .02.
  17. thepolecat
    Joined: Mar 24, 2009
    Posts: 687

    1. S.F.C.C.

    A tear rolls down my cheek

    and who cares if it is a four door- I would have LOVED to have the car!!!
  18. Ozzie
    Joined: Sep 1, 2006
    Posts: 458


    I freaked when I saw how the 59 crumbled, could have been a rusty frame or not. the main cell of the malibu didn't look mangled. I'm sure in 50 years our kids will say the exact same thing "No one has respect for the past" If it was a 1909 against the 59, now that would have been interesting... Still SAD, but interesting.
  19. Did anyone listen to that whole article?? Talks about new safety features that will make it even easier to avoid accidents. That is a good thing, no question. However, what may happen in reality is that the dumb blondes on their cellphones driving their Suburbans in reverse (yes, just happened to me, why do you ask?) will feel even less pressure (if that's possible) to pay attention.

    Build idiot-proof machines, and you make better idiots.


    Oh, and the '59? Refer to this the next time someone states that their 40-50-60 year old car is safer than a new car because it has a lot of metal.
    It's NOT the amount of metal, it's how it is placed that matters.
  20. thepolecat
    Joined: Mar 24, 2009
    Posts: 687

    1. S.F.C.C.

    The thing is that people now know the old cars were unsafe- there were dash boards that decapitated people, and we have learned from that- there is no need to rub it in.
  21. wvenfield
    Joined: Nov 23, 2006
    Posts: 5,240


    Did the last one of these get deleted?
  22. InMyBlood
    Joined: Jun 12, 2009
    Posts: 39


    That car wasn't worth saving! I could have sworn I saw a ding on the bumper! Just in case you're reading:
    Dear Insurance Institute for Highway Safety,
    Next time you have an old car that you are willing to destroy to prove how sucky old cars are, please send me a PM and I will be glad to take the car off your hands for Crash Avoidance Tech Testing. I would gladly spend years on highway and city roads making sure my findings are accurate. I am a very dedicated worker!
  23. Hodad
    Joined: Dec 26, 2001
    Posts: 250


    From a consumer's point of view.. all this fancy ass radar shit adds more crap that is going to fail a few years down the road. So rather than driving the car like your life depends on it .. we can text message and talk on the phone and let the "radar" tell us what to do.. I am fuming over my airbag light that went on just before my inspection was due.. Of course they won't pass you if your check engine light is on.. or your airbag light or ..."pay general motors now" light is on.. and I can't fix the air bag light myself.. sooo.. GM wants 625 bucks to replace a "sensor module" What a bite in the ass.. which in a round about way makes me wish I had that car like that 59 ( pre crash) for a daily driver.. I can fix and maintain that one on my own.. with all this technology and need for computers to fix stuff.. the car makers and legislators have us by the short hairs.. Yes technically vehicles are safer.. and I suppose with all the multi-tasking that goes on while driving I should be thankful for all the "safety" built in my newer vehicle.. but I sure feel vulnerable trusting GM not to screw me for this repair.
  24. skajaquada
    Joined: Sep 14, 2004
    Posts: 1,642

    from SLC Utard

    you know, i think all this "safety" stuff they've been putting in cars has taken natural selection outta the mix. morons that we don't need around are living longer and spreading their stupid genes. it also makes people less safe while behind the wheel because there isn't that sense of being careful when there are crumple zones and airbags to protect you rather than your wits.
  25. Tony
    Joined: Dec 3, 2002
    Posts: 7,350


    Wow....i understand thing's like this are done to "better" things...but damn, they could have used a car that didn't seem to be so fucking nice..
    There truly is a lack of respect for history.
    It's like burning down a late 1800's building just to show how it burns differently that todays..I doubt too many historians would be up for that..but for some reason this must be different...what bullshit.
  26. bulletproof1
    Joined: Feb 23, 2004
    Posts: 2,080

    from tulsa okla

    yep they will want to take old cars off the road ,cause it will cost to much for medical care....good thing its going to be FREE ....cover me im heading to the post office......
  27. X426X
    Joined: Jul 22, 2009
    Posts: 174

    from OhiO

    Let me help ya'll. This was a DIRECT ATTCK ON OUR HOBBY by the huge insurance lobby. The '59 was obviously and deliberately weakend before the "test". Look for more and more of shit like this to happen during the massive gov't power, property and money GRAB going on now.

    Was the thread yesterday deleted by a moderator who apparently has a vested interest in big insurance and/or highway safety gadgets and gimmicks??? Installing IPODs in rat rods and putting '52 Desotos on S-10 frames is more important anyway...
  28. froghawk
    Joined: May 9, 2008
    Posts: 852


    Sorry to see that nice '59 Chevy wrecked in a test to proof what should be obvious by now; that auto safety has come a long way in 50 years.

    As much as I liked them I'm pretty sure the '58 Fords, '58 and '59 Pontiacs and all the other old cars I owned would've been death traps in a bad crash. With mediocre brakes, non-telescoping steering columns, no seat belts and in the case of the Pontiacs, X-frames (with virtually no side impact protection) they would've folded up just like the BelAir in the video, with an exponentially higher risk of death for the occupants than a modern car.

    You only have to those swell driver-ed films, we sat through in '60s and early '70s to see what damage an average 1950's vintage car would suffer in a serious crash...

    Check out "Signal 30" on Youtube...
  29. So thats why they quit doing X-frames.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!


Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.