X2 on DDD driving. That would explain a LOT too!

:screwy:

 

Did you see the crumple zones on that 59? Everything from the bumper to the dummy!!!!!
Howd we live to grow old!!!!!:dontknow:
Donny

 

Back when it became law to have insurance in ILL, I told my gf "I guess I'll have to get some insurance now". She was a claims adjuster for a major insurance co. and was horrified that I said that. She asked me how long I hadn't had any, and I told her 19 yrs. :shock: She freaked! Then asked me how I could go 19 yrs without insurance. I told her (and this is how we survived to get old too Donny) "You just don't run into anybody!" and walked away.

She was still having a coniption when I got back 15 min later.

sheeesh! women!

:dontknow:

 

What hurts is when you had a car for 20+ years like my 74 and all along you pay for insurance and never use is. I could have bought a jet for the money I spent on insurance I never used. You should a least get a rebate/ refund, something???
Donny

 

Doesn't matter how good you can drive. Around here, slippery winter roads in combination with stupid drivers changes the odds of getting a car pranged. On TV a few days ago, it was said that there is a car accident every 6 seconds in this country. Mostly fender-benders, but last year, over 36,000 folks died in cars. Booze figured into many deaths, as usual.

Seems like unibody cars can absorb a major hit better than old frame type cars. Must be a slower crunch factor!

 

You would think the '59 would be like a tank against that '09 Mailbu. The dash even comes out in that crash in the '59 on impact. What is missing it that vid is the history behind safty features in new cars. Most came from racing, from seat belts to crush zones, all where engineered yrs before on racing cars before they where ever used in todays cars.

 

No one commenting on the fact that they ruined a rather nice looking 50 year old car to make that video:dontknow:

 

:secret:that 59 doesn't look right either. Anyone notice a motor? Wonder what else they removed.

 

Naw, I didn't notice a motor of any kind. Who would have the heart to do that to such a handsome vehicle anyway? Makes me a little mad actually.
But one thing that the older cars have over the new ones is that in minor accidents they seem to hold up better. (from what I have seen) I saw a Toyota Camry that rear-ended a 79 Ford T-Bird. The Camry's entire front bumper was gone just about, while the T-Bird appeared almost unscathed.
- NoWhereMan

 

That car was a perfectly running and nice 59, that belonged to a person that frequents
another board I am on.
He had no idea this car was going to be destroyed.

Engine---yes----6cyl / PG car and was essentially an unrestored car that was in great shape.

The impact was just to left of center----nothing in that area of a 6cyl to help absorb impact.
A v-8 car may have fared better, but not much.

The newer Malibu did okay for mutilple reasons.
Unibody construction to absorb impact
sideways mounted engine/trans to absorb more impact.
Airbags to protect the driver in the Malibu, where the 59 BelAir did not even have
a telescoping steering shaft, and quite possibly no seatbelts (cannot recall if that particular car had belts or not)
Would be driver of the BelAir was doomed the instant the cars made contact, just because of the type of impact.
But then---most headons are offcenter as well

 

So did he sell it cheap enought for them to just trash it? And didn't he have any idea where it was going??
Donny

 

too bad they had to ruin a nice car for this test .

 

He didn't know something was up when these two came to pick up the car?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnKA1gQG2r4&feature=related

 

Im so glad the fins made it out alive,

 

listen at 0:25... "the institute conducted this test to commemorate its 50th anniversary"... that was a nice way to say thanks to one of the cars that gave you success and enough recognition for you to last 50 years