Vintage Cars Are Death Traps II

[Auggie56]

OK, this really ought to convince you. The Ohio Highway Patrol, produced this film in 59', using actual accident scenes, to drive home how dangerous driving is. I hope this changes your mind, that the first car, the 59' Chevy in that first clip wasn't tampered with. We were shown this film in JR high. It must have not had it's effect, they hoped it would. As One my class mates died in a crash, and another spent the remainder of his life a paraplegic. This is part one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSgAuKRMTyQ

 

[Dennis H]

Seen them all. Signal 30, mechanized death, etc. The 59 was not in the same condition as it was when new. Yes, safety has improved. What's the point? I lost some classmates back then. Alcohol and speed. it is what it is.

Drivers Ed didn't have the effect they wanted because they just tried to scare us. Don't remember any specifics like speed for conditions, checking mirrors etc. Just fear.

 

[monaco66coupe]

Back then the vast majority of fatalities were kids running into a fixed object, or Kids drunk and/or drag racing. At least where I grew up. Cars were dangerous if not driven properly, and Seat belts were non existent. Most of us made it though!

 

[Moparsmitty]

I don't dispute that new cars are generally much safer in a crash than a 40+ year old car, but ask yourself why the Insurance Institute set up this crash test in the first place. Are they trying to justify their rates? Are they trying to force old cars off the road? You can bet it's about the $. I'm interested in what you think their motives are.

 

[Ghostrider 67]

Is this supposed to be some new idea? Of course the newer cars are safer. What's the point? Are we all supposed to go right out and sell our old cars so that we can be safe? Thanks there, Captain Obvious.

 

[Cranky]

I saw Signal 30 in driver's ed too. Why isn't driver's ed taught in public schools anymore?? S30 didn't scare me from driving fast but it did make me a better driver imo because I went out and learned what I could and couldn't do with a car!! :grin:

 

[Dennis H]

OK, I just drive the 09' 6 speed Challenger to work. That goddam throttle tries to anticipate my moves. When bumping it cold out of the driveway the rpm's ramped up. I'll take the Coronet anytime. Choke or no choke. At least it does what I tell it. All this technology can (sometimes) be bullshit.

 

[GetX'd]

I thInk of basic things like the blindsides on Windows, smaller and fewer mirrors, seat belts that are just lap belts. Air bags - frame construction built to handle crashes better. Older cars are much less safe. Like someone above said - understand that and drive the car accordingly. Not like we used to when we were kids......

 

[monaco66coupe]

My 2010 R/T six speed did the same thing.Plus, from a dead stop it would lock out second if I stepped on it wrong from a stop sign. It did it all the time, and nearly killed me once. The dealer said it was a computer program. I said that car is as good as GONE. I traded it for a Jeep for my Wife. Now I just drag out the old 68' If I want to have fun.

OK, I just drive the 09' 6 speed Challenger to work. That goddam throttle tries to anticipate my moves. When bumping it cold out of the driveway the rpm's ramped up. I'll take the Coronet anytime. Choke or no choke. At least it does what I tell it. All this technology can (sometimes) be bullshit.

 

[Kern Dog]

In the 80s, I recall people saying that the new downsized cars were deathtraps compared to old classic American cars. I clearly recall the days between 18 foot American cars and the advent of crumple zones, air bags and 3 point safety belts.

 

[Lets Roll]

I wonder what would happen if a new car ran into a classic? The new cars crumple and the classics don't like to. So There may be some extra energy that has to go somewhere.

 

[Bb70charger500]

New cars are designed to fall apart that's the only reason why there safer ! When an old car gets in a wreck you can fix it and continue to drive it with out any major problems. A new car gets hit it's totaled ! End of story throw it away it's over. Yes old cars don't look so safe when they get hit because the metal go's where ever it wants new cars go where it's designed to go I've seen many old cars "totaled " and with in two weeks back on the road like it never happened. New cars are junk there throw away beer cans I'd rather be in a old car any day of the week.
I had a 14 charger and after 2 months sold it because it sucked compared to my 72 driver.

 

[Kern Dog]

??????

 

[Auggie56]

Is this supposed to be some new idea? Of course the newer cars are safer. What's the point? Are we all supposed to go right out and sell our old cars so that we can be safe? Thanks there, Captain Obvious.

There are those among us who believe, the older bigger cars are safer, because they have more metal, than the new cars. But the new cars have "crumple zones," that absorb the energy of the impact. The older cars just crushed, until that energy was dissipated. A lot of times with disastrous results, for the passengers inside. I have experience in the area of vehicle crashes. The small Fury and Diplomat cars Chrysler built, a decade a go. Did real well on the side impact. The rear also crumpled like it was supposed to, protecting the occupants. The Caprice from that same times was terrible, as side impacts penetrated the interior more readily. Rear impacts were nearly the same as the Chrysler cars.

 

[Dennis H]

I do my best to avoid collisions. That said, I may have one tonight. Hope not. The Nanny state crap on new cars they can keep. I don't need skip-shift to save fuel or the car to think I'm gonna stall it, so the throttle increases. The distracted, low skill, impaired drivers of today think the technology will save them so they don't have to pay attention. For example, the Subaru commercial,where the new (moron) parents would back over something or swerve out of their lane IF NOT FOR the technology. They believe this crap.

 

[Kern Dog]

No ****. Safety stuff often only prolongs the life of stupid *** twerps that should have been eliminated by "Natural selection".
Working in construction, I see overly intrusive safety regulations choking the productivity out of the workers. Safety harnesses, reflective vests, dumb *** EPA style gas can nozzles that are a bitch to use..
Safety is a state of mind, NOT a program that needs to be shoved down your throat.

 

[shag766]

-as far as the insurance co's go it is a numbers game or "odds" if you want. doesn't really matter a lot on what you are driving as the collision cost is not a lot more depending on the value of the car. drive like a dumb *** you will pay more as it will show on your driving record. the odds went up. take 2 identical cars with 2 very similar drivers records. the car in a metro area will pay more than the car in the boonies for identical coverage. less odds. the car in the metro area has higher odds due to much more traffic.
-as for the safer car today versus yesterday, they have to be just due to all the safety stuff built in today. air bags, front and back sensors, speed limiters, etc, etc, etc. and if there is a collision it is between 2 similar equipped cars that weigh roughly 1/2 of the old stuff. the biggest variable, odds, is the shear volume of cars on the road today vs yesterday and the cars were all similar then.
-i pay 800.00 yrly for a newer navigator, 50,000.00, for ins vs 1400.00 for 4 old cars, 160,000.00, for ins.. the odds are the daily driver new car is at much greater risk of a mishap due to the mileage driven, 10,000 mi yrly vs the old cars, approx 6000 mi total for 4 cars that are generally not exposed the hustle and bustle of daily driving.
-in summary, yes the new stuff is safer but the variable is the size of the cars and the volume of traffic today. is the old car safer than todays car, probably not if they are the same weight. but, i would rather be in my newer safety equipped navigator than in a newer safety equipped smart car when the dumb assed driver screws up. better odds, lol.

 

[HawkRod]

New cars are designed to fall apart that's the only reason why there safer ! When an old car gets in a wreck you can fix it and continue to drive it with out any major problems. A new car gets hit it's totaled ! End of story throw it away it's over. Yes old cars don't look so safe when they get hit because the metal go's where ever it wants new cars go where it's designed to go I've seen many old cars "totaled " and with in two weeks back on the road like it never happened. New cars are junk there throw away beer cans I'd rather be in a old car any day of the week.
I had a 14 charger and after 2 months sold it because it sucked compared to my 72 driver.

What kills people is sudden force. It's based on the equation Force = Mass x Acceleration. In the case that we humans care about, it is the rate that our bodies decelerate from whatever speed we are going to a dead stop. If you theoretically did this is a perfectly rigid car, you would stop all but instantly and you would die. So the longer it takes the human body to slow down, the greater a chance you have to survive.

The crumple zones in newer cars do exactly that. So yes, you are correct that they are "throw away" cars in an impact. They do that so you can walk away and live another day. Old cars don't have those well designed crumple zones, so they are more dangerous. THEY might survive a crash better than the old cars, but you won't survive better...

 

[Cranky]

-as for the safer car today versus yesterday, they have to be just due to all the safety stuff built in today. air bags, front and back sensors, speed limiters, etc, etc, etc. and if there is a collision it is between 2 similar equipped cars that weigh roughly 1/2 of the old stuff.

I'll have to call you out on that one. Why is the new Challenger so much heavier than the old ones? Even my 97 3/4 ton pickup is heavier than my old 79 1 ton single wheel pickup was. It beats my old one by 1000 lbs!! Even my 95 Dakota reg cab short bed with a V6 weighs close to 3300 and it's not even loaded out. When the newer gen Dakota came out in 97, they were around 3700 with the RT tipping the scales at 3900+. A loaded out new Challenger hits 4500 lbs and a new loaded out Mustang hits the scales at 3700. My 66 Fastback was 3050. The air bag system in the new cars are quite heavy not to mention all of the added emission systems and the wiring to go with it all.....that the old cars didn't have. Not saying the new cars are not safer than the old ones but I'm saying they are a lot heavier. And when I see a smashed up new Mustang it looks to me that they are not built any better than the early ones which folded up pretty easily imo. My old room mate 'tested' a few of them and none of them came home with him lol

 

[Big D A12]

What kills people is sudden force. It's based on the equation Force = Mass x Acceleration. In the case that we humans care about, it is the rate that our bodies decelerate from whatever speed we are going to a dead stop. If you theoretically did this is a perfectly rigid car, you would stop all but instantly and you would die. So the longer it takes the human body to slow down, the greater a chance you have to survive.

The crumple zones in newer cars do exactly that. So yes, you are correct that they are "throw away" cars in an impact. They do that so you can walk away and live another day. Old cars don't have those well designed crumple zones, so they are more dangerous. THEY might survive a crash better than the old cars, but you won't survive better...

I couldn't agree more. Blunt force trama is not tolerated well by the human body. Engineering has brought us to where we are now and will continue to change into the future as we learn. Older cars were about the car, styling, and getting from point A to B, and less about protecting the occupants. Our thought process has evolved to place more value in lives than the car. If 50% of the people who bought a car die in it, do you think it will be a best seller next year? Where is Mr. Obvious?

Today everything within a car is designed to protect the driver and occupants. Regardless if the driver is a bad decision maker. The most simple item is a seat belt. If you drive/ride without one, make sure your donor card is signed. The car is designed to crumple around you to save your life in an accident, period. Listen to the news specifically about auto accidents and if there was a fatality the word "ejected" is usually in the story!

I always tell my teenage driving kids two things: Speed kills and you can't fix stupid.

There is another piece to this puzzle that has not been discussed. While cars have improved leaps and bounds from a safety standpoint, so have the roads they travel on. When you drive on an interstate roadway, EVERYTHING within the right of way has been engineered to protect the occupants of the car driving on it. The next time you drive an interstate, notice the little things: holes drilled in sign posts, beam guard ends, the shape of the parapet (concrete railing), the groves in the road, everything is there for a reason. These little things coupled with the throw away technology of cars save lives, a lot of lives.

Enough ranting....I really enjoy driving my vintage vehicles. I accept the risk they are more dangerous than my modern day cars. I also drive them completely different knowing they don't stop, turn, or accelerate the same. At the end of the day, if I walk away from an accident and the throw away engineering saved my life, great, I can buy a new car. Life cannot be replaced. Remember that when you are driving your classic car.

D