In high school my friend crashed his '68 Rambler, which I remember well because I was in the passenger seat. We hit the other car twice. I'll put the full story down at the bottom so we can get right to the point of this entry: That crash left me with the distinct impression that older cars were better-suited to handle impacts because they were built more solidly. But that simply isn't true. My friend and I had just gotten lucky.
The technology, analytical capabilities and manufacturing techniques that automakers have today completely trumps the construction methods of old; overbuillding by using thicker, heavier parts would prove no match for modern-day crumple zones and airbags. Here's the best video I can find that illustrates this: It's a 1959 Chevrolet versus a 2009 Chevrolet in one of the nastier types of impact, the front offset crash:
Is it not nauseating to see how completely the A-pillar buckles on the '59, and how far the impact penetrates into the passenger cabin? On the other hand, the cabin of the '09 seems largely intact, and the in-cabin camera views show much less interior disturbance in the latter car. In keeping with the technologies of the time, the '59 was clearly not designed to handle shear forces or offset crashes.
My buddy's Rambler was built in 1968, the same year GM was running the crash tests you'll see in this next video. (Warning: If you're not able to firmly remember that these are dummies and not humans, particularly the child-sized models, you'll find the footage disturbing.)
(more...)