DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
8 comments:
Who would have thought?
What a waste. That was a really nice Malibu.
I would have bet everything I own that he outcome would have been drastically different. Just goes to show that you not only learn something new everyday, but what you learn can change how you feel about so much.
Most cars today are made so that when they are in an accident they do break apart so that it lessens the impact. That's probably why it cost so much to fix them when you do wreck them.
Who what have thought?
Anyone who knows a reasonable amount about science and technology, and has been paying attention to automotive engineering advances of the past 50 years. There is a great lack of knowledge of basic science in the US, including physics. We are practically dead last in that respect when compared to other so-called 'civilized' countries in Europe and Asia. There are way too many myths perpetuated in the US by the members of the antique and special interest automobile culture. All the cliches about how the old 1950s and 1960s cars were 'built like tanks', and how they were so much better, lasted longer, you could go on and on. When the truth is they varied greatly, and most did not have passenger compartments with enough structure around them to prevent collapse in anything but a low speed collision. Today cars are tested at 40 mph offset front end impacts, and most car passenger compartments do not collapse, assuming both cars crashing are of approximate equal weight, as are these two. Most 1950s and 1960s cars' passenger compartments would collapse in a 40 mph offset crash if they crashed into a similar size and weight car. The new one would always do much better. Yet, if you look at all the message boards surrounding this test, those dumb people think the test was 'rigged', the 1959 car had 'no engine', all sorts of conspiracy theories, none of which are true. Soon your blog will probably be filled with those idiots claiming all those things, which has been going on all over the internet since Sept of 2009, when the video first appeared.
I would have bet the farm that the 59 was the winner, we have come a long way! WOW!
You honestly thought that cars were better safety wise 50 years ago? My tin can Honda Civic stood a better chance.
10:16 At least you could work on the damn thing without having to be a computer technician and rocket scientist.
Post a Comment