VIDEO: GM crash-test footage from the Sixties proves we've come a long way, baby
GM 1968 Crash Test Footage: Click above to view the video after the jump
Back in the Sixties, cars were huge. Some equated the size of their boats-on-wheels with safety, and even if their vehicle actually had seat belts, many didn't bother to use them. Fast forward to today, and we have three-point safety belts for all occupants, crumple zones, and air bags in just about every location possible. Yet some vehicles still only manage to score poorly in IIHS testing.
Beyond the jump is a video that proves just how safe cars are today when compared to some of their counterparts in 1968 (oddly, some of the footage looks older). The video is actually archival footage of some of General Motors' 1968 crash testing procedures. They didn't use cement barriers back then; just two cars hitting one another in every way imaginable. Watch in horror as cars and crash test dummies get mutilated in the name of science and safety. The poor dummies in this video rarely remain in the car post-crash, and one even looks like it got run over by the other car. Metal folds like cardboard, glass flies in slow motion, and one rear-ended vehicle burst into flames. It's amazing that anyone survived crashes 40 years ago. The video is definitely worth your time – especially if you're into carnage and dummy gore.
[Source: Web Rides TV]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
EU_reader 7:36PM (5/28/2009)
holy sh*t
Reply
AMcA 8:19PM (5/28/2009)
Those are Plymouths, not GMs. I think this is mislabeled.
Jung 8:21PM (5/28/2009)
Wow... they really couldn't keep those doors closed, could they....
g00fba11 9:48PM (5/28/2009)
@jung:
that was my first reaction as well. Those doors might as well not be there. Some of them seem to show dragging their passengers out.
PJ 10:05PM (5/28/2009)
That's some scary ish.
Cures my '60s muscle-car lust for a couple of weeks.
XGM 10:25PM (5/28/2009)
Comparing this and the Chinese Brilliance cars seem like a fair comparison.
Noidor 10:52PM (5/28/2009)
This ought to shut those up who think that size is the ONLY thing that matters when it comes to safety.
dukeisduke 10:54PM (5/28/2009)
The video is a compilation of some "1960s Crash Test" videos posted by YouTube user "the3jake2".
Carlo_Carrera 10:57PM (5/28/2009)
It is amazing how the US car makers of the day had seen this footage and still fought every safety standard. It explains why they are in the worse shape now. GM and Chrysler were run by bean counters with no common sense.
Mike P. 12:43AM (5/29/2009)
Wow. Holy whiplash and unsecure seats.
It makes me realize how these days one seldom finds an "unsafe" car (not counting "emerging market" vehicles--though I might take a BS6 over these in terms of safety). Some are safer than others, sure, but most will provide a decent amount of protection.
Kitko 6:30AM (5/29/2009)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_at_Any_Speed
Say what you want, but Nader did a great job with that book. Just read the wiki entry.
chris 9:12AM (5/29/2009)
A. This is not GM
B. This is not 1968
C. A lot of slow motion footage, so it is hard to tell how fast the cars are going, but probably 60 mph, i.e. very fast. Even though cars are much safer today, when two cars collide at a high rate of speed not many people will survive even in today's cars.
hoyaCS08 10:17AM (5/29/2009)
If you think about it, these cars were actually way ahead of their time - the entire car is a crumple zone!
Rich 4:22PM (5/29/2009)
@chris -- it seems to be more like 30-40 mph. Some are plainly only 10-15 mph, judging by how little the dummies move. The one near the end with full speed footage is one of the only faster ones.
CarlosMC 9:54PM (5/29/2009)
@Noidor:
I was going to say about the same.
And for those who might still think that way about their SUVs, check this result of an 8 car collision near Minsk, Belarus and think again:
http://spbcar.ru/photos/galleries/696/17402.jpg
http://spbcar.ru/photos/galleries/696/17409.jpg
http://spbcar.ru/photos/galleries/696/17410.jpg
From this page:
spbcar.ru/gallery/696/
Aprime 7:37PM (5/28/2009)
Well that's a mythbuster.
Reply
ozyran440 7:40PM (5/28/2009)
Wow!
When you have two large objects moving into each other at high speed, it creates destruction and havoc indeed.
I always thought of these cars as tanks, and compared to some of today's cars, they are. My friend Steve has a 1966 Ford Galaxie that he once hit a horse with and still drove home (he still has the car to this day, and the accident was in 1987); a 1995 Honda Civic t-boned the right front wheel of my dad's 1957 Plymouth Belvedere and the Civic was totaled whereas the Belvedere drove home.
However, when two of those tanks hit each other, only massive carnage can result.
Reply
Protzenegger 7:50PM (5/28/2009)
This means, of course, that these cars don't absorb crash energy nearly as well as new ones. In more serious crashes, the passengers would therefore bear the brunt of the force and all kinds of internal organ damage would ensue.
ScuderiaFerrariF1 8:26PM (5/28/2009)
I think I'd actually be safer on a bike!
lyrred 10:32PM (5/28/2009)
how bizarre. I had a '66 Galaxie 500 I wrecked in 1987. Altho it was totaled. I hit another car head on, bounced off and went back end first into a 15 foot ravine, car bounce off the ground and landed on the passenger side, bounced again and struck a telephone pole with the roof of the car while it was 8 feet in the air, peeled off the pole and landed on the drivers side with the car leaning against the broken telephone pole. car was badly battered but I walked away as did my passenger after we hiked it back to the road following the path we cleared.