Two years ago, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety celebrated its fiftieth anniversary by taping the offset frontal crash of a 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air into a 2009 Chevy Malibu. The Bel Air did not handle it well. The Speed TV show Stuntbusters, which airs on Tuesdays and "explores motoring myths behind the latest automotive technology," did the same with two Cadillacs.

The show parked a 1962 Cadillac Sedan de Ville a mile from a 2002 Deville and ran them into each other, head-on, at 50 miles per hour. Enthusiasts are constantly complaining about how big and heavy cars have become, but you do not want to be in a crash while driving a car that predates modern passive safety innovations. For a reminder why, there's a video after the jump.



I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 171 Comments
      Karl T
      • 3 Years Ago
      Why no dummy in the new car? Why no accelerometer in the new car? Obviously the air bag would have helped the dummy, but still, it's flawed from a comparison standpoint.
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        • 3 Years Ago
        [blocked]
      JamesJ
      • 3 Years Ago
      15 ft seems kinda short for a 1962 Cadillac. My 1990 Cadillac was more than 18 ft long (which is much shorter than the ones made in the mid 70s).
        Kurt
        • 3 Years Ago
        @JamesJ
        Yeah, they are wrong about the length of the 62. Even the short deck cars of that year (Town Sedan & Park Avenue) were 215" (17.9') . The full sized cars were 222" (18.5')
      dukeisduke
      • 3 Years Ago
      Shows like Stuntbusters just illustrate why we need a real motorsports and auto enthusiast channel. SPEED has really gone downhill over the years.
      leventpascha
      • 3 Years Ago
      Northstar is NOT a big block...
      tcp0690
      • 3 Years Ago
      "big block 4.6" what a joke.
      Thunder938
      • 3 Years Ago
      I HATE these videos, as a "car guy" I hate to see all that restoreble chorme on the older car smashed. What a waste to make a TV show..I an sure that there are poeple out there looking for those parts
      Jay Annunziato
      • 3 Years Ago
      Foot pounds of force? I didnt know smacking 2 cars head on created torque... :-/
        Cameron
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Jay Annunziato
        Torque is actually measured in pound-feet (lb-ft)
      TheBull
      • 3 Years Ago
      Why the hell do these copycat shows always copy the WORST parts of the original (Mythbusters)?? There could be a LOT less talking and a LOT more science or other interesting parts.
      gldminx
      • 3 Years Ago
      Would be worse if comparing with a concrete barrier. I think the deceleration would be similar, since the 59 benefits from the 02's crumple zone as well
      oRenj9
      • 3 Years Ago
      This had an obvious outcome. I want to see a 2012 CTS vs. a 2003 DeVille. We've come a LONG way in just the past ten years, nearly as much as we have in the thirty years preceding that. In a frontal crash, the driver of the new CTS would experience no contact with the steering wheel and very little load on the legs/chest (21lbs). In contrast, the 2003 DeVille driver would experience 40x as much force on their legs (almost 900lbs worth) and over 100gs of acceleration on their head.
      moparman426w
      • 3 Years Ago
      What a dweeb, the 62 is close to 20 feet long.
    • Load More Comments