Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I also think that they cherry picked that specific model and year because it was the very first production car without a full frame, and no one had figured out how to really make a car with no frame yet. Had they gone to anything other than the 59 Bel-Air the results may have been different.

 

The crash test I would love to see is a newer econo box with its 5 star crash rating, up against a full size HD pickup truck with its 3 star crash rating, head on at 65 MPH.

I have bet my money and life on the HD pickup.

Posted
I also think that they cherry picked that specific model and year because it was the very first production car without a full frame, and no one had figured out how to really make a car with no frame yet. Had they gone to anything other than the 59 Bel-Air the results may have been different.

 

I was wondering about that. It seemed to me that there should have been a frame rail sticking clear through the Malibu.

 

The Bel-Air being frame-less explains a lot.

 

Last month I hit some black ice with my '04 Colorado. When the wild ride stopped I went head on into the concrete barrier between me and the oncoming traffic. I was doing maybe 50 when it broke loose and the Colorado was totaled. It crumpled so nicely I didn't even have any bruises from the shoulder harness.

 

I'd almost driven my '97 Yukon that day. I'll bet the Yukon would have been drivable after but don't know if I'd been able to drive it.......

Posted

Oh man. That was a nice 59 Chev. I am not sure what they were trying to prove. I just don't see very many 59 Bel-Air econo box crashes. But that is just me. Perhaps there is an epidemic of old 50s vs new car crashes going around and I am just unaware.

 

Mike

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...