Re:Head-On Crash: 2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1959 Bel Air (2009)
by userbinator on Wednesday September 14, 2022 @10:11PM
(#32846175)
As someone whose daily driver is a "land yacht" from the early 70s, I'm not too worried... the crumple-zone is huge.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Head-On Crash: 2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1959 Bel Air (2009)
by ehnto on Wednesday September 14, 2022 @11:22PM
(#32846582)
There were some cars with crumple zones back then, but you very likely do not have a crumple zone capable of protecting you. No matter how long your bonnet, you will probably take the brunt of the impact with your body in a car from the 70s.
Not saying don't drive it, I drive a 90s car with no airbags as a daily so I am only marginally better off.
Re:Head-On Crash: 2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1959 Bel Air (2009)
by emmelaich on Wednesday September 14, 2022 @11:42PM
(#32846710)
They don't crumple much, despite the size.
Re:Head-On Crash: 2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1959 Bel Air (2009)
by hef19898 on Thursday September 15, 2022 @05:56AM
(#32849474)
What ever other car hit will so. In such an accident, the combined crumble zone is halved so. If you a concrete wall, good luck so.
I know what would happen if I have a serious accident in my week-end hobby car so. A likely hood that is significantly reduced by current fuel prices. And a serious maintenance backlog...
Re:Head-On Crash: 2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1959 Bel Air (2009)
by prmoustache on Thursday September 15, 2022 @06:47AM
(#32849840)
While you can't control all the outside parameters we also don't tend to drive them the same way.