|
hate to be the one to say it, but after restoring, and owning about [60] 57-59 mopars.... all but the imperials will fold faster than a ford or gm of the same vintage. the inner fenderwells are destined to NOT hold back an impact, and the angular nature of the frontal frame horns will fold out towards the tires.... finned mopars however will hold up better in a rear end collision by design. side impacts.... and pre-68 car is doomed..... unitized or divorced frame, perimeter or X
-as observed from an engineering standpoint, and some of my own testing of parts cars against... other parts cars
68 D100 lost to a 73 nova, 87 mitsubishi mighty max lost to an 82 D100.... same D100 triumphed over a 71 duster, same D100 laid to rest by a 76 deville, 59 savoy triumphed over a 77 cutlass then lost to a mature oak, 68 sport fury lost to a 91 fwd caddy deville, and an 80 F100 can drive through cynderblock walls- inexpensive demolition [pre-construction]..... this was all done on my proving grounds over the last 4 yrs!
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Amberger <Magnumguy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Mon, Oct 19, 2009 10:39 pm
Subject: Re: [FWDLK] Crash Test: 1959 vs. 2009
In any case it's a damned shame that they wasted that beautiful Chevy! Well, a waste of a Chevy maybe ; )
Bill The Magnumguy
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 8:15 PM
Subject: Re: [FWDLK] Crash Test: 1959 vs. 2009
In any case it's a damned shame that they wasted that beautiful Chevy!
Bryan
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 5:27 PM
Subject: Re: [FWDLK] Crash Test: 1959 vs. 2009
I also saw that clip about a month ago. I suspect they purposely missed the frame and engine of the 59 so they could scrape off only the soft sheet metal. I’d still rather have my old 57 Buick Roadmaster in a tangle with a new small car.
Dave Homstad
56 dodge D500
i saw that clip about a month ago- look closely- just like an advertisement- there's a little lack of truth..... notice theres no drivetrain installed- also on the pass side shot of the impact- note all the rust and sand/debris ejected from the rocker panel. also- more- the fenders were hardly attached- the pass side clearly visible- is the fact that the door jamb bolts were not present.. as the bosses were not ripped apart- just there unscathed...
the new car would win i guess for safety equipment, but not fold that bad- a good friend crashed a car i sold him- a 63 chevy 2dr with no rust and 30xxx miles- uses the same x-frame as the 59 pictured- he went 70mph into a viaduct support when a bmw cut him off on the parkway- he went out the pass side of the windshield- the water pump broke off and the trans tailshaft came through and poked the back seat cushion... but i took him home from the hospital that same night... lucky? or the car a little stronger than the obama-supporters want us to believe????
i have pics of the aftermath somewhere.... he was on his way to finish the paint job.....
-----Original Message-----
From: Fr. Ray Ball <frray3@xxxxxxxxx>
To: L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Mon, Oct 19, 2009 2:27 pm
Subject: [FWDLK] Crash Test: 1959 vs. 2009
On the 50th Anniversary of the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety.
1959 vs. 2009 in a crash test:
Would a Forward Look car fare any better?
Ray from NH
'58 Belvedere
'59 Star Chief
*************************************************************
*************************************************************
*************************************************************
*************************************************************
*************************************************************
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe or set your subscription options,
please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
|
|
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network