crash test between a classic car and a modern car
#car #carstr
https://video.nostr.build/da1e04a519b98185f78b390f89491c244fc9be39e36b1fb474f53373cb106a4a.mp4
Discussion
Wow! It's the opposite of what I would think. I guess the energy is transferred more efficiently around the cockpit in the new vehicle.
My other question is how well kept was the original old car. It's there a document stating the frame was as manufactured or better? Or was this a show?
Superficially it says a lot.
Many accused the IIHS of using a rusted out hulk with no engine.
The vehicle was purchased in Indiana, was in driving condition, original engine (235ci i6), solid frame and panels.
Vehicle weight is listed as 3603lb.
For comparison- the listed curb weight of the 2009 Malibu is, depending on trim level, 3415lb-3649lb
Mechanics note - this is why we've had to use higher load lifts over the last decades to accommodate vehicles that, while dimensionally smaller, have been increasing in weight.
Thanks for the information. I agree with the comment about the straight 6. That leaves a huge gap under the hood. A V8 would have spread the energy around the driver.
That lines up with my surprise initially.
Knowing how many plastic boxes are in the frame of modern cars makes sense on the energy distribution verses the right angle framing of legacy vehicles.
The x-frame in that 59 being even more rigid than average probably didn't help with the massive energy transfer into the body, either.
If you can clear away enough stuff under the hood of most modern, unibody vehicles, you can see the dimpling on the structural frame horns that attach to the front bumper. Those are a good example of crush zones that have proven to absorb energy quite well.
You mean we understand how to direct and dissipate kinetic energy better than we did in the mid 50's?
It's a good example of how testing and observation produces empirical existence that can result in improvements over time.
The automobile has been an equal opportunity death trap. I'm pretty sure that the standards are based on the incentive to keep the people alive. I don't think that they ever were not intended that way but it also might be a matter of us using materials to equalize the lowest common denominator.
Still very interesting.
I would what things would be like if we had hard money?
Technically, that Bel Air was designed and built by an organization that was backed, ultimately, by a gold standard currency. (Most recently tied to gold from 1934-1971)
Anything that humans design and build will undergo an iterative progression through design responding to incentives.
Some of those incentives are- don't kill customers, users, and occupants.
Others are units produced and sold, profit margin, and market control.