PDA

View Full Version : Vehicle safety



overpowered
January 22nd, 2016, 09:31 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPF4fBGNK0U

Kind of sad that they destroyed a classic, but it does show that cars are a lot safer now when you fuck up. I prefer not to fuck up.

Crazed_Insanity
January 26th, 2016, 11:23 AM
Wow! Interesting. I would've thought the mass of the classic car would've won out... or at least not lose out that badly!

thesameguy
January 26th, 2016, 12:02 PM
Old cars are death traps, as we found out 7 years ago. I suspect we would have seen about the same results if Chevy had smashed an '09 Malibu into an '89 Celebrity... the '89 probably just felt to recent to call attention to it.

overpowered
January 26th, 2016, 12:36 PM
Wow! Interesting. I would've thought the mass of the classic car would've won out... or at least not lose out that badly!I think that the mass of newer cars is easily a match for cars from that era. They're smaller now but there's a lot more compacted crap in the engine compartment and suspension and we have things like side impact door beams and other reinforcements they they didn't have that add weight.

Phil_SS
January 26th, 2016, 12:38 PM
I'm pretty sure we discussed this a few years ago when this was posted. But yeah, old cars are deathtraps as TSG mentioned.

And the weight difference isn't as much as you would think.

1959 Bel Air with I6 (Which is supposedly what this car had): 3669 Lbs
2009 Chevy Malibu LTZ: 3649 lbs

Even if you go highest 1959 to lowest 2009 you get about 200 lbs. Even though old cars are big they didn't necessarily weigh a lot. They just took up alot of space. New cars have tons of shit crammed in them like shock and sound proofing, electric motors everywhere etc. Plus the safety cages in new cars are pretty substantial by themselves.

21Kid
January 26th, 2016, 01:44 PM
I don't remember seeing this before. That's pretty impressive.

:eek: That inside cam on the Bel Air. :( Ouch.

Rare White Ape
January 26th, 2016, 03:47 PM
A few really interesting factors are that today 1) there is a lot of engineering development in computers that can show exactly where a material is stressed when force is applied to it, which allows engineers to know where they can shave precious grams off a component e and where they have to add more, or even change the shape of the component to better handle that force.

This then allows manufacturers to 2) use much lighter materials in various parts of the structure. So aluminium vs iron, plastic vs steel, etc. Those weight savings can be put to better use elsewhere, like safety.

I'd like to see a weight comparison between a 1950s bodyshell and a 2000s bodyshell. Not just its overall mass, but also its distribution.

thesameguy
January 26th, 2016, 04:43 PM
I think you'd need to clarify what you mean by "shell." The "shell" of my '62 Falcon is the body panels and there is nothing underneath. The "shell" of a Civic covers up structural members nobody wants to look at. A 10th gen Civic is almost exactly the same size as my Falcon. The Falcon weighs about 2400lbs with a 500lb inline six. The Civic weighs about 3000lbs with a 250lb engine. Electronics just don't weight that much these days with CAN and BCMs, etc. That weight difference is a LOT of metal. A fully gutted Falcon - just the "rolling shell" - weighs around 1500lbs. I don't think there is anything you could get a 10th gen Civic down to 1500lbs if you tried. To get there, you're cutting welded in bits out.

Rare White Ape
January 26th, 2016, 05:15 PM
I'm thinking of whatever the basic equivalent is to this for both cars.

http://pingce.cheping.com.cn/attach/images/article/2015/10/15/820x540L1X7gxsl1tqa.jpg

Although I do realise that the Bel Air might have something closer to this to form its chassis.

http://cdn.speednik.com/files/2015/04/art-morrison-introduces-new-gt-sport-chassis-1959-65-chevrolets.jpg

It's just interesting to think about how each car has come to manage the way impact forces are distributed, is all.

thesameguy
January 26th, 2016, 05:38 PM
An old unibody car won't have any of these things:

http://www.sacsaabs.org/sacsaabs.org/misc/civicnotthis.png

thesameguy
January 26th, 2016, 05:47 PM
For example, here's the trunk with the gas tank removed:

http://jasons64falcon.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/IMG_1972-300x225.jpg

The gas tank is the floor of the trunk.

Here's the fenders removed:

http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/tt97/fastfalcon_19/002.jpg

Only the bare necessities to hang the outer sheel metal.

I was trying to find a picture of the inside of a door, but can't.

George
January 26th, 2016, 07:07 PM
Kind of sad that they destroyed a classic...

*sniff*

I've seen that before and figure maybe that video saved a life or two, if someone traded in his Tailfin Delight for something more safe.

Everyone knows I love old cars, or at least looking at them on craigslist when I should be working and daydreaming about maybe buying one as a third car when the kids go off to college. It'll never happen (the car part, I mean - not college), but it's fun to dream.

And then I think of the years and the miles I drove with a gas tank above my knees in old VW Beetles, and little else up there except the spare tire. When I was in eighth grade, I used to catch a ride to school with Mr. White, the science teacher, in his VW Bus. He lived near us and I sat up front, of course, in the passenger seat.

Today he'd probably be jailed for child endangerment, but it seemed perfectly normal then. Thankfully, I've survived this far, and I seldom worry about such things, but once in a while I have wondered if my 17-year-old airbags would deploy in a crash.

21Kid
January 27th, 2016, 09:12 AM
The gas tank is the floor of the trunk.
Only the bare necessities to hang the outer sheel metal.

That's a scary thought. :eek:

novicius
January 27th, 2016, 10:11 AM
...and here I am shopping for a non-air bag steering wheel for my M00stang. :lol: #illegal

Crazed_Insanity
January 27th, 2016, 10:57 AM
I'm pretty sure we discussed this a few years ago when this was posted. But yeah, old cars are deathtraps as TSG mentioned.

And the weight difference isn't as much as you would think.

1959 Bel Air with I6 (Which is supposedly what this car had): 3669 Lbs
2009 Chevy Malibu LTZ: 3649 lbs

Even if you go highest 1959 to lowest 2009 you get about 200 lbs. Even though old cars are big they didn't necessarily weigh a lot. They just took up alot of space. New cars have tons of shit crammed in them like shock and sound proofing, electric motors everywhere etc. Plus the safety cages in new cars are pretty substantial by themselves.

Didn't realize they're about the same weight! Whoa!

Structurally, for sure older cars are more massive. Modern cars probably have a lot more non-structural weight such as air bags and fancier interior materials. Modern cars also probably tend to have bigger wind shields?

Anyway, I always thought classic cars are pretty tough that they may be death traps if you hit a wall, but if you hit another car, I thought the 'modern' cars would absorb most of the impact. Guess this video proves that I'm wrong to think that... and you better not drive your classic car on the road too often...