Over at RYPN, a fellow posted this and yes, they don't make them like they used to. I suspect cars today trying this would immediately fold like a cheap suit.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Already posted back on Feb.2, about three pages back, titled "Pere Marquett and 1938 Chevy".
Originally Posted by electroliner:
Over at RYPN, a fellow posted this and yes, they don't make them like they used to. I suspect cars today trying this would immediately fold like a cheap suit.
They actually make them better, as long as you stay off of the tracks.
I suspect cars today trying this would immediately fold like a cheap suit.
You're right. That's because they are designed to be crash worthy which means they have to dissipate the energy of the impact.
I had a 40 Olds for a few years back in the late 60's and early 70's. It was nowhere near as safe as today's cars. However, autos had full frames back then, which made them better suited for pushing freight cars.
How about those steel dashboards or metal shifters on the steering column? Wipe off the blood and resume driving. Sorry about the repeat performance of the video as a rerun. Then again, comparing the steam engine's safety features to a contemporary diesel is apt as well. Another reason for folding cars are today's mileage mandates as well. Add couplers to the Chevy and some Roadrailer wheels it might be a cheaper means and less polluting and fuel efficent means to go coast to coast.
Tough on the tires.
been doing autobody and collition repaires for over 30+years..Yes new car are subposed to be crash worthy??Not..those car once you wreck them there done..most to all new cars are disposable..yes you can straiten frames .you want to know the real truth..once the frame is damaged its will never be wright ever again..even if you cut out the bad frame section out and weld a good one on.it will never be wright..If you get in a very bad wreck with thses new car,you might as well make it your coffin too....I never like that crash test video with the 2 chevys..do a head on crash test not no hit apart of the front end...They didnt want to do a real head on crash test because the new chevy will fold up like a accorden compaired to the 58 full real steal frame..as for air bags? yes they can save lifes but there also the neg to them too..they pop out 1000mhp!! ..you can have serious bruses broken nose broken neck, whiplash,a friend of mine broke most of his fingers..why do little kid are put in there child seat backwords in the back set for? and warn you not to have a child in the front set for? The force of the airbags would kill your child..I'd rather have a real car made for 1930-1971..made of real USA steel..Not the jap steel cars are made from now!!1972 US automakers switched over to Jap made steal..guess what? Cars rusted out quickly!!Junk steel!!..I've seen all type of wrecks in my life time..and I do not care for the new junk thin sheetmetal plastic cars are being made now..pay 25.000+ for cheaply made cars..
I have heard of three basic flaws with that particular crash test video:
1. The cloud of rust, making many people question the condition of the 59 Chevy
2. The front end collision, trying to make the steering column fly into the passenger compartment.
3. The fact that the 59 Chevy has an X frame, a frame which was considered unsafe even in 1959.
Interesting videos, thanks for posting. So a 1938 Chevy has a stout frame ... but I'll take a newer car for better occupant protection in a crash.
As far as folding cars and joseywales comment, I was in one of these theoretically "much more crash worthy" vehicles when it folded. A Toyota Corolla. A elderly fellow made a right turn onto my path at an intersection while driving one of those old heavy boats. I fractured my kneecap when the engine compartment was pushed into it. The steering column pinned my head back and broke my nose. I had to undergo plastic surgery to reform my nose as mine resembled Porgy Pigs. Both my ex wife and myself were cut by splintered glass. It was officially deemed crash worthy by the powers that be.
I bought my daughter a F150 with a built up bumper and lift kit..it drives like a dump truck and swallows gas like a man in the desert drinks water. Would I buy her a car designed to crumple based on both my experience and controlled safety tests, or sales pitches?
Not on your life.
Most if not all crash tests done today are based upon a 35 MPH impact. This is done because they have done "studies"and based upon those they assume that during braking the average impact speed falls to around 35 MPH. Those of us in the real world know that is a bunch of BS. Yes the new cars spend a lot of engineering to produced precise and predictable crumple effects during all sorts of impacts, but that is basically driven by CARB regulations. A truly "safe" car would use 1950's steel with modern crumple designs built into it, but it would still only get 12 MPG and we can't have that now can we.
Ain't no way I'm gonna put my '40 plymouth on a set of tracks and tes that...X frame or not...nope!
..and that just hurt watching the '59 chevy get whacked...what a waste of clean american metal...shoulda used a Yugo!
Originally Posted by electroliner:
How about those steel dashboards or metal shifters on the steering column? Wipe off the blood and resume driving. Sorry about the repeat performance of the video as a rerun. Then again, comparing the steam engine's safety features to a contemporary diesel is apt as well. Another reason for folding cars are today's mileage mandates as well. Add couplers to the Chevy and some Roadrailer wheels it might be a cheaper means and less polluting and fuel efficent means to go coast to coast. Tough on the tires.
Very true about all the metal there...the woodgrain paint doesn't change that...but don't forget if you had the radio option..5lbs of projectile waiting to happen.
Tires...don't get me started...got a flat on mine last fall.....took 3 days to finally find a place around here that would do a new "tube"- got all sorts of comments like "why get a tube in there, just buy a new tire....yeah, wide white 16x6's aren't cheap and "it's supposed to have a tube!" Finally got a white haired gent at farm and fleet who laughed and took care of it for me...he showed me how to do it so next time I'll take care of it myself...talcom powder uses, who knew? I'm only 48 today, all this 6v pos ground, 3 on the tree, foot starter, flathead 6's and lockheed brakes are new to me...hehehe-well, not so much any more.
Originally Posted by CarGuyZM10:
...
3. The fact that the 59 Chevy has an X frame, a frame which was considered unsafe even in 1959.
That was the era though...the "X" was extra strength...a unibody was laughed at...though I'd love an old chrysler airflow! Powerglides were the hot ticket with one less gear....AC and OD were seldomly needed options{depending where you lived, maybe a swamp cooler instead!} Picture folks in the 30s and 40s that didn't spend the money on a heater...blankets in the trunk! You listened to the radio at "home"..not in the car...suicide doors...vented radiators- cap was just a cap- held no pressure. The "ideas" they had back then....
