AllAboutPrius.com
GreenCarReports.com
AllCarsElectric.com
AllSmallCars.com
HondaInsightReviews.com
ChevyTruckReviews.com
PickupConnection.com
GMCReports.com
FordF150Reviews.com
MotorAuthority.com
LuxuryCarReport.com
AudiReports.com
BenzConnection.com
LexusReports.com
MINICooperReviews.com
BMWMonitor.com
PorscheReports.com
RangeRoverReviews.com
LotusConnection.com
FerrariReports.com
AllMinivans.com
FamilyCarGuide.com
VolvoReports.com
FordReports.com
ToyotaMonitor.com
HondaReports.com
ChevroletReports.com
VolkswagenReviews.com
AcuraRatings.com
NissanReports.com
KiaReports.com
CadillacReports.com
MustangBlog.com
CamaroBlog.com
ChallengerBlog.com
Forums
RSS
Dealers
Bengt Halvorson
To celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), a 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air has been crashed into a 2009 Chevrolet Malibu—in a head-on frontal-offset test, at 40 mph.
The result is not only interesting viewing for our inner gawkers; it's a lesson in how far occupant protection has advanced over the years.
Watching the modern Malibu, the hood area deforms significantly but the passenger area looks almost entirely intact. Shift your eyes over to the 1959 Chevy and it’s the stuff of old highway-safety and shock-and-scare films, just melodrama and implied gore. There’s plenty of car gore though, with the Bel Air’s steering column slammed forward into the driver, the A-pillar completely mangled, and the dash pushed back to finish the punch. Trim pieces fly, shards of non-safety-glass fly forward, and…well, that’s probably enough of a spoiler.
In case there’s any doubt based on the description above, according to safety engineers at the scene, the driver of the 2009 Chevrolet Malibu would likely have suffered slight knee injury. The driver of the 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air would have died instantly.
TheCarConnection.com gives the 2009 Chevrolet Malibu a score of 9 out of 10 in safety; its crash-test results have been excellent, with top five-star results in frontal impact, side impact, and rollover categories from the federal government and top “good” ratings from the IIHS in frontal offset and side-impact categories, blemished only by a “marginal” score in rear impact. The 2010 Chevrolet Malibu continues without any structural or major feature changes, so TheCarConnection.com expects that its safety scores will carry over.
Check out the video and see exactly how far we’ve come in five decades.
2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs 1959 Chevrolet Bel AirEnlarge Photo To celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), a 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air has been crashed into a 2009 Chevrolet Malibu—in a head-on frontal-offset test, at 40 mph. The result is not only interesting viewing for our inner gawkers; it's a lesson in how far occupant protection has advanced over the years. Watching the modern Malibu, the hood area deforms significantly but the passenger area looks almost entirely intact. Shift your eyes over to the 1959 Chevy and it’s the stuff of old highway-safety and shock-and-scare films, just melodrama and implied gore. There’s plenty of car gore though, with the Bel Air’s steering column slammed forward into the driver, the A-pillar completely mangled, and the dash pushed back to finish the punch. Trim pieces fly, shards of non-safety-glass fly forward, and…well, that’s probably enough of a spoiler. In case there’s any doubt based on the description above, according to safety engineers at the scene, the driver of the 2009 Chevrolet Malibu would likely have suffered slight knee injury. The driver of the 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air would have died instantly. TheCarConnection.com gives the 2009 Chevrolet Malibu a score of 9 out of 10 in safety; its crash-test results have been excellent, with top five-star results in frontal impact, side impact, and rollover categories from the federal government and top “good” ratings from the IIHS in frontal offset and side-impact categories, blemished only by a “marginal” score in rear impact. The 2010 Chevrolet Malibu continues without any structural or major feature changes, so TheCarConnection.com expects that its safety scores will carry over. Check out the video and see exactly how far we’ve come in five decades.
Responses (11 total)
By Jezza #1, Posted: 9/18/2009
Wow this is perhaps one of the most amazing videos I've ever seen.
By Jezza #2, Posted: 9/18/2009
Also funny how the IIHS has to explain that the Bel Air in fact does have it's engine and everything else under the bonnet. The video would certainly make me doubt that!
WOW! That is some amazing video. We all realize that we have come a long way in auto safety, but this really shows how far....Plus, come on, to be honest, it's just F-in cool!!!!
By Robert #4, Posted: 9/18/2009
Yikes...I thought old, heavy vehicles were supposed to stand up well in accidents?
By difference engine #5, Posted: 9/18/2009
Mmm - I dunno - to me it comes off as what it is - industry propaganda...
If this is all we have to show for "five decades" of safety improvement, color me underwhelmed; imagine the crash between cars from 1909 and 1959.
It's an offset crash and they start the video with the Malibu in the foreground, so it looks like there is a more dramatic difference in the level of cabin intrusion than there really is. But by the time you see it from the other side, your first impression has already taken hold.
I am surprised that anyone would still believe that big old cars are actually safer - was that post a plant?
By shlema #6, Posted: 9/18/2009
Bel Air in fact does have it's engine and everything else under the bonnet. The video would certainly make me doubt that!
By Greg #7, Posted: 9/21/2009
One wonders what condition the 50yr old BelAir was in. Although wearing an attractive coat of paint, did it also wear the (common) bondo, patch panels, and rust-weakened structure that most 50 yr old cars exhibit? For such a demonstration, does anyone think they would actually seek out the needle-in-a-haystack car with full virgin (or structurally equivalent) sheetmetal? Or is it more likely a hastily repainted bondo bucket with pop-riveted floors and rust-weakened frame that they picked up cheaply at an auction?
By John #8, Posted: 9/21/2009
I beg to differ with 'difference engine'. The key telling point is when the cars are pirouetting after the impact in the 2 close up side shots. You will notice severe damage in the A-Pillar area and the door is almost peeled off the 59. The Malibu's pillar and door remain pretty much intact. Also, the offset is about the worst of the head on crashes.
By Jim #9, Posted: 9/21/2009
Much of this improvement has been made in the last 30 years.The US Government began a testing program in 1978.
IIHS Started in 1995 as indicated in the following IIHS Document.
http://www.iihs.org/news/2002/iihs_news_070902.pdf
The federal government has been testing new passenger vehicles in 35 mph full-front
crash tests since 1978. This New Car Assessment Program has been a major contributor
to crashworthiness improvements — in particular, improved restraint systems in new
passenger vehicles. The Institute’s (IIHS) offset tests, conducted since 1995, involve 40
percent of a vehicle’s front end hitting a deformable barrier at 40 mph. This test
complements the federal test involving the full width of the front end hitting a rigid
barrier. Both tests are contributing to improvements in crashworthiness — in particular
improved crumple zones and safety cages.
By Dan #10, Posted: 10/21/2009
About Greg's comment - I was thinking the exact same things you posted, but would like to add a few points to it. If you watch closely, the '59 blows a cloud of rust-orange dust out from underneath, especially in 2 of the angles. Definitely a weak specimen. Also I'm pretty sure GM was using the latest-greatest(?) perimiter frame design with that chassis...lighter, x-crossmembers etc. If I remember right, it wasn't very strong to begin with. I know the newer cars are loaded with safety features, lighter high-strength (but thinner)steel, crumple zones etc., but it still is really tough to let go of the old-school way of thinking, especially when you consider the mass differences. I still prefer steel and a full frame to plastic and airbags, just as long as there is a padded dash and full belts. I wonder if the '59 even offered seat belts? They became mandatory 9 years after that car was built.
Post a comment