Not built like they used to.....i think not - Page 3

flappist · 21-09-2009, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wally

Yeah but, yeah but, yeah but, I just wanna see the crash. Don't care about the brand.

Hypothetical, would Henry Gibson drive a soft roader or four wheeler if he was still alive in the Illinois Nazi chapter?

No he and Luke Skywalker would be driving X wings to Hogwarts.....

Scott · 21-09-2009, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wally

Yeah but, yeah but, yeah but, I just wanna see the crash. Don't care about the brand.

Hypothetical, would Henry Gibson drive a soft roader or four wheeler if he was still alive in the Illinois Nazi chapter?

Ok, so random just found a new level... he would be in a Touareg of course.

Padrino90 · 22-09-2009, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

More info

So even with the engine it crumpled as it did....the interior video is even more horrifying.....thank god i wasn't driving in the 70's. lol

MO · 22-09-2009, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Padrino90

So even with the engine it crumpled as it did....the interior video is even more horrifying.....thank god i wasn't driving in the 70's. lol

Driving in the 70s was great,we did'nt have as many idiots on the road like we do now.
You could work your car to whatever level you liked and rarely got hassled by the fun nasties.
One of the really good things was you knew what car was which, makers were all different, not like now they all look the same.
And there was a camaraderie no matter which make you drove.

flappist · 22-09-2009, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MO

Driving in the 70s was great,we did'nt have as many idiots on the road like we do now.
You could work your car to whatever level you liked and rarely got hassled by the fun nasties.
One of the really good things was you knew what car was which, makers were all different, not like now they all look the same.
And there was a camaraderie no matter which make you drove.

The BEST thing about driving in the 70s was that all the young drivers on the road were excellent drivers who were much better than the old drivers on the road at the time.....

irlewy86 · 22-09-2009, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

The BEST thing about driving in the 70s was that all the young drivers on the road were excellent drivers who were much better than the old drivers on the road at the time.....

As reflected by the death toll. Natural selection still had a place in the 70's.

:

MO · 22-09-2009, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

The BEST thing about driving in the 70s was that all the young drivers on the road were excellent drivers who were much better than the old drivers on the road at the time.....

I whole heartedly agree, back then we were taught how to DRIVE a car not like today where they're taught how to STEER the car only.

Wally · 22-09-2009, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MO

Driving in the 70s was great,we did'nt have as many idiots on the road like we do now.
You could work your car to whatever level you liked and rarely got hassled by the fun nasties.
One of the really good things was you knew what car was which, makers were all different, not like now they all look the same.
And there was a camaraderie no matter which make you drove.

Ah yes I remember the Mickey Thompson "fats", the fibreglass whip aerials, the straight through exhausts, the impromptu drags while waiting for the midnights to open and you are 100% correct there wasn't the brand aggression like there appears to be today... if it was a nicely prepped car it was admired; with a little ribbing.

flappist · 22-09-2009, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irlewy86

As reflected by the death toll. Natural selection still had a place in the 70's.

:

So what you are saying is that all the dumb hopeless young drivers in the 70's did not survive as opposed to today where they abound in large numbers?

Fair enough.........

But seriously look at the number of deaths per serious crash now and then, lots more crashes lots less death. I wonder if that has anything to do with the improvement in safety of the cars.........

MO · 22-09-2009, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fev

man! that was a nice bel air! always brings a tear to my eye when i see these videos..

never the less i'd much rather drive a modern car daily then practically anything pre 1990.

70s and earlier were death traps. Ever seen what the steering columns can do to you in a head on? Impalement isnt pretty..

Well I don't know about all of the 70s cars but the XY had a collapsable steering column.

irlewy86 · 22-09-2009, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

So what you are saying is that all the dumb hopeless young drivers in the 70's did not survive as opposed to today where they abound in large numbers?

Fair enough.........

But seriously look at the number of deaths per serious crash now and then, lots more crashes lots less death. I wonder if that has anything to do with the improvement in safety of the cars.........

Cars got easier to control the dimwits just drive more recklessly. Maybe I might suggest we mandate the removal of passive safety features at my next Eugenics meeting.

geckoGT · 22-09-2009, 07:13 PM

For those defending the Bel Air and stating the occupant fatality was only due to seat belts. Watch this video again Bel air crash vid.

Not only is it that the occupant moves forward to meet the dash, but the dash comes up to clean up the occupant.

And if you you think big 4x4 are safe, watch this one.
Silverado 1500
and this one
Dodge Ram
And another
Dodge Dakota

And finally, this one explains the reason really well.
5th gear 4x4 crash test

I have seen real life examples of this at work a number of times, only with crash test dummies that really bleed.

The new 4x4 cars are getting better, but they still have some catching up to do on the sedans.

You also have to consider that 4x4 drivers are statistically more likely to be in an accident in the first place.

Most important point to remember, when considering the chances of survival in a crash, the magnitude of vehicle deformation is not important, it is the way it deforms and the forces applied to an occupant. For example, many drivers of old cars say a large srtrong car that does not crumple much is safer. Well, I used to drive armoured personel carriers, crash one of those into a solid object at 40mph and you will be dead. Sure the body of the vehicle will not deform much at all (if any), but it will also transfer all that force into the occupants, either against hard interior parts or against safety restraints. The force of the human chest hitting a seat belt at 40mph (56km/h) is enough to shear the aorta off the top of the heart (you will not survive this injury), cause tension pneumothorax (highly unlikely to survive this) and perhaps rupture liver, pancreas and/or spleen (again, chance of survival is not good).

Personally, I will take the crash in a newer car with survival cell and crumple zone design over the old tank any day.
The difference is the old car may be able to be repaired by someone else (not you, you are probably dead) in a moderate speed collision. The new car, well you are still alive and can buy a new one.

Final thought, after 5 years as a paramedic and many accidents attended involving deaths or serious trauma, not one of those dead or traumatically injured was in a car less than 10 years old. Food for thought.

geckoGT · 22-09-2009, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

Or ALL soft roader and 4WDs crashed into each other and resulting mess used as target practice for the RAAF

I am liking your thinking, this should be put into legislation, Vote 1 Flappist for PM!

Scott · 22-09-2009, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Final thought, after 5 years as a paramedic and many accidents attended involving deaths or serious trauma, not one of those dead or traumatically injured was in a car less than 10 years old. Food for thought.

Great post, thanks. The last comment is suprising though - I would have thought you'd stumble on atleast some?

geckoGT · 22-09-2009, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTP006

Great post, thanks. The last comment is suprising though - I would have thought you'd stumble on atleast some?

Not one.

The only fatality that I can think of was an audi (I did not attend this one but I was on shift and heard it on the radio). The audi (new model, within 2 years old) hit a power pole at approx 160km/h. Fair enough, modern safety technology is not that good.

Sorry, tell a lie. I can think of another, again I did not attend but heard it over the radio while I was on shift. A late model territory that was hit by another car, impact speed over 100km/h. Again, understandable and not a fault of the vehicle design.

Most of the serious accidents I go to seem to be cars built in the early eighties through to the late nineties. Proabably because they are common cars, perform well but often do not have equal safety features.

In the modern cars, I have been to a lot of prangs where my first tough was "oh bugger, this will be messy", and then the occupant walks up to meet me. Very lucky!

MO · 22-09-2009, 08:24 PM

@Gecko,know where your coming from(retired 30+yrs Rescue/Firefighter)and don't really disagree its just that there are infinite variables at work and no two MVAs are identical.
Stay safe bro.

geckoGT · 22-09-2009, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MO

@Gecko,know where your coming from(retired 30+yrs Rescue/Firefighter)and don't really disagree its just that there are infinite variables at work and no two MVAs are identical.
Stay safe bro.

I agree with you there. Having said that 5 yrs is reasonable time (a hell of a lot of prangs attended in that time, approx 10 per week, 40 weeks a year, 5 years = approx 2000 prangs) to make a general observation, injuries are always less in the newer cars, end of story.

MO · 22-09-2009, 08:41 PM

Have you got a good counselling service don't be afraid to use it mate,before it gets to you.
Far too many prangs for one bloke/crew.

Streets · 22-09-2009, 08:45 PM

Gulp.

I drive an XF and an XD but will definitely be buying a brand newie when I have a family. Regardless of whether old cars can still hold their own in an accident, I'll take ESP and ABS and airbags and crumple zones and intrusion bars over reel steel any day to protect loved ones.

Quote:

Id like to see a FG vs XY crash test.

Quote:

FG up against a VY (dunnydore)

Quote:

Now run a 59 Bel Air into a Smart Car.

Quote:

Corolla Vs Hummer

Quote:

Interesting, lets see the malibu against a uniframe Ford.

Quote:

Smart vs an Original Mini?

Quote:

I'd like to see an FG go head to head with a VE.

Quote:

I'd be more interested in seeing FG/VE crashed into BA/VZs or even AU/VYs.

I want to see Batman take on Superman.

geckoGT · 22-09-2009, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MO

Have you got a good counselling service don't be afraid to use it mate,before it gets to you.
Far too many prangs for one bloke/crew.

Thankfully, the vast majority are low speed, heavy traffic and no injuries. The others, well suck it up, carry on and go to the next case (and for $25 an hour).