1959 Chevy vs 2009 Chevy Crash Test
- Thread starter moparwash
- Start date
note the beige and dark blue front fenders...
The following year, I pulled the engine out of the 63 Olds and overhauled it. I sold the car to a friend in 1978 who had the entire car repainted and drove it to over 200,000 miles.
Proof that a heavier better built car would take a front end hit much better. The Chevy was always a flimsy BOL car.
The following year, I pulled the engine out of the 63 Olds and overhauled it. I sold the car to a friend in 1978 who had the entire car repainted and drove it to over 200,000 miles.
Proof that a heavier better built car would take a front end hit much better. The Chevy was always a flimsy BOL car.
norgeway
Well-known member
63
I had a 63 Starfire....tough as nails, fine car except for the sorry trans...but nothing will stand a 17 year old boy with 345 horses in front of him...that thing would fly.
I had a 63 Starfire....tough as nails, fine car except for the sorry trans...but nothing will stand a 17 year old boy with 345 horses in front of him...that thing would fly.
Seats
Don't forget the importance of the seats in both cars. Notice how today's solidly constructed seats help (along with the seat belts, obviously) to keep the dummy in place. Those bench seats with non-locking backs (or even ones with locks) were very flimsy and notorious for providing drivers with broken backs after-the-fact--a design that lasted into the early eighties.
Also, there's nothing scarier than a metal dash! One show I watched pointed out that metal fittings on the dash were very prone to cut and embed in the driver, and the old fixed-mount, metal rear-view mirrors especially so.
Other posters have covered the steering column, frame, and crumple-zone angles. All I can say is, wow! I'd prefer to be in the Malibu (even though that Bel Air is gorgeous...).
I suppose I'd have to say that I'd certainly want my classic retrofitted with seat belts, if the attachment point would support them...
Don't forget the importance of the seats in both cars. Notice how today's solidly constructed seats help (along with the seat belts, obviously) to keep the dummy in place. Those bench seats with non-locking backs (or even ones with locks) were very flimsy and notorious for providing drivers with broken backs after-the-fact--a design that lasted into the early eighties.
Also, there's nothing scarier than a metal dash! One show I watched pointed out that metal fittings on the dash were very prone to cut and embed in the driver, and the old fixed-mount, metal rear-view mirrors especially so.
Other posters have covered the steering column, frame, and crumple-zone angles. All I can say is, wow! I'd prefer to be in the Malibu (even though that Bel Air is gorgeous...).
I suppose I'd have to say that I'd certainly want my classic retrofitted with seat belts, if the attachment point would support them...
danemodsandy
Well-known member
rickr:
"Proof that a heavier better built car would take a front end hit much better. The Chevy was always a flimsy BOL car."
The X-frame was the problem with Chevy in those years, not Chevy's price point. The X-frame was introduced on Cadillac, and trust me, it performed no better in Caddy crashes than it did in Chevy ones. Olds continued using a ladder-style frame, with diagonal braces in the centre of the car, and that's what made it a safer car for a while there than the same years of Chevy. Chevy itself had been safer when it used a ladder frame, which it did through the '57 model year.
"Proof that a heavier better built car would take a front end hit much better. The Chevy was always a flimsy BOL car."
The X-frame was the problem with Chevy in those years, not Chevy's price point. The X-frame was introduced on Cadillac, and trust me, it performed no better in Caddy crashes than it did in Chevy ones. Olds continued using a ladder-style frame, with diagonal braces in the centre of the car, and that's what made it a safer car for a while there than the same years of Chevy. Chevy itself had been safer when it used a ladder frame, which it did through the '57 model year.
panthera
Well-known member
It is wrong to assume
that any particular GM Line is safer than another merely because it has a particular cachet or higher price.
In 2005, the introduction of the boron-steel frame coupled with several other advanced safety systems which lead to enormously safer GM cars was first rolled out on the Chevy Malibu, Cadillac followed only later in that model year. GM didn't plan it that way, but that's what happened.
I remember going through all the safety reports on new cars in 2005, as I had to buy one for my parents. It was either the VW or the Chevy Malibu, everything else came in behind on safety.
Ironically, all these pregnant cows of super-heavy trucks which have been sold in the US over the last years don't even have to be roll-over safe. And to listen to the screams of the industry because they now must (finally) meet the standards of the early 1970's...
Malibus and S-10s may not be sexy, but I do note that mile for mile our Cadillacs have always been both less reliable and far more expensive to repair. I'll stick with my Malibus and S-10 any day.
And, yes, it does hurt to see that beautiful '59 meet its end. Gosh, I loved that styling.
that any particular GM Line is safer than another merely because it has a particular cachet or higher price.
In 2005, the introduction of the boron-steel frame coupled with several other advanced safety systems which lead to enormously safer GM cars was first rolled out on the Chevy Malibu, Cadillac followed only later in that model year. GM didn't plan it that way, but that's what happened.
I remember going through all the safety reports on new cars in 2005, as I had to buy one for my parents. It was either the VW or the Chevy Malibu, everything else came in behind on safety.
Ironically, all these pregnant cows of super-heavy trucks which have been sold in the US over the last years don't even have to be roll-over safe. And to listen to the screams of the industry because they now must (finally) meet the standards of the early 1970's...
Malibus and S-10s may not be sexy, but I do note that mile for mile our Cadillacs have always been both less reliable and far more expensive to repair. I'll stick with my Malibus and S-10 any day.
And, yes, it does hurt to see that beautiful '59 meet its end. Gosh, I loved that styling.
travlincub321
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2009
- Messages
- 534
I just bought this 05 malibu, but the first year for this style was 2004...
It seems to be the first decent gm product ive driven in ages..And very very safe i might add
It seems to be the first decent gm product ive driven in ages..And very very safe i might add
travlincub321
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2009
- Messages
- 534
Heres an 06 Malibu
Looks to have done fairly well
Looks to have done fairly well
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
The GE HydroWave: One of the worst washers ever
- Latest: gelaundry4ever
-
Most Maddening Washer Commerical
- Latest: gelaundry4ever
-
-
-
Sponsored
