Added: 5 years ago
From: MigVW
Views: 257,885
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (226)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Rewind to 2:11 to skip all blah blah blah

  • new espace amazing

  • @Hammer0165 what second was it when u noticed?

  • this test is bull shit the old car needs to be a old russain 1990 lada! vz a newer car like a holden barina 2011

    the lada will drive away the holden wont. i bet my left night the lada will win

  • @75bAdam75b And you'd probably lose, as is would probably be the case as 2009 Chevy Malibu vs 1959 Chevy Bel Air. Anyway, this test was done with two cars of the same maker, of same size and of the same weight. The Lada you mean would weigh more that the Barina and would be bigger in height, thus using up just the crumple zone of the latter (see Audi Q7 vs Fiat 500). Jack the Lada against a 2000 Range Rover of the same weight and height and it would not stand a chance, believe me.

  • @Gavichap i have a lada 2105 , afew years back my dad drove up the ass of another car. not a dent in the lada, not a scratch in the paint, the numberplate was not bent ect.... i didnt ethen no that my lada had bin in a crash until my dad told me

  • @75bAdam75b Yes, what you say it's perfectly plausible in small shunts. Old cars have metal bumpers which are more robust than plastic ones, so they come out unscathed. But in severe crashes it's the whole structure that matters (see the Malibu/Bel Air crash test by IIHS) and old cars' shells are simply NOT engineered to dissipate the impact forces. Your Lada will be OK versus a small car, but against a modern SUV or off-roader it would be curtains for it. Don't be misled.

  • Fake. They have taken the engine out of the old car. Watch closely and you can tell. They did the same trick on the Volvo 940 vs Renault Modus crash test. It's a shame they have to do that to make the new car win.

  • @Hammer0165 - You can see the engine on the passenger side of the old car in numerous shots. Get your eyes checked.

  • @Hammer0165 See watch?v=RoG9wDAmkcQ&feature=en­dscreen&NR=1 "IIHS Demo Debunked". The engine of the Bel Air is clearly visible. As regards the Volvo vs the Renault your speculation is frankly ludicrous.

  • Just speculating here, but I'm guessing the newer Renault is heavier than the older one.

    My guess was that they'd do equally well, but I was completely off. Interesting test.

  • Excuse me? The sensor didn't believe that was a severe enough collision to fire the airbag? What the hell would it take to set it off if not this?

    If the new car is so stiff, how would it fare against another one just like it? We've been told stiffness is a bad thing, so they would have to have figured a way around that.

  • @MaestroTJS Same as two cars that aren't stiff, really. Maybe they'd bounce off each other and skid.

  • i rolled my 16 year old Volvo 850 T5-R at over 110 MPH at the nurburgring and walked away...... I will never buy a new car.

  • Put a lorrry vs Justin Bieber

  • Both suck.

  • what about airbags???????/

  • @missBasescu

    Airbags fire at a specified deceleration.

    Low deceleration just seat-belt tensioners. higher deceleraton seat-belt tensioners and after that airbags.

    the impact was not strong enough.

  • @TriumphBiker1980

    I understand,thx a lot !

  • the new car have an airbag failure..you can see the dummy driver hit the steering wheels.

  • That model Espace still had the engineering of the original model from 1984. Its body was fiberglass, and it was on a steel chassis. They just put airbags in it, but that wouldn't do any good against a tougher car, like the new one.

  • where is renault espace 09´s airbag?

  • That's much more informative than all wall impact - crash tests I saw recently.

    If You think the same agree with me on this one :)

  • what the hell the air bag didn't open and they did not get hurt as bad.

  • @crazyme1957 There were seat belt pretensioners, and this car had some better crumple zones that absorbed the impact instead of sending the force into the passengers.

  • how aboat a '85 volvo 740 vs a '09 dacia sandero:>

  • I CAN SHOW THIS MY MOTHER BECAUSE SCHE GOT THE RENAULT ESPACE so i can show her how safe this car is

  • It would be interesting to have a crash with a Hummer H3 and the "new" Espace. I bet the Espace would smash through the Hummer

  • Where's the Chrysler Imperials?

  • @rocknoutamerica where's the what now?

  • Where's the Chrysler Imperials?

  • The old Espace has a fibreglass body on a galvanised steel platform. The newer Espace has a conventional steel body and is a LOT heavier (and in V6 petrol automatic form it is classed as a gas-guzzler) Not really a fair test then is it?

  • i say we pull a 59 Ford Galaxie vs a smart car!!! loook up that car...ITS HUGE!!!

  • What old car??????LOLOLOL!

  • yhey even macht up the people lol old with old and almost new with new lol

  • boy would you be sore after a hit like that

  • @britneytimberlake11 fucking britneytimberlake11

    what a pointless comment you made there, omg

  • Renault escape

  • The styling hasn't changed at all, they're both ugly as fuck

  • She needs a good pounding.

  • i like these videos

  • haha, the dummy hit his head so hard on the steering wheel

  • @minikillaa224 You said it! This video is BULL SHIT! The "safer" failed to open the air bag and if you were inside that car, your nose would be stuck somewhere in the back of your head!

  • Oh no i better by a new car!! pull my pants down at the dealership sign me up into dept im just a sheeple take my money mr sales man safty safety im so scared take my money

  • Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2

  • When it said new vs old I pictured a amercan 60s car vs 2008-9 car.. Woulda been way more exciting

  • @Maktrevino There's a 50 something Bel-Aire vs a 2008 Malibu somewhere on Youtube. Just look up old vs new crash test.

  • renault in US please

  • Can't say I agree, it looked to me like they didn't hit straight on enough, too far to the side, noting like the government 40% offset tests. That's why the airbag didn't go off in the black one it probably didn't even impact the sensor. All I know is my AMERICAN Ford Escort of 12 years ago protected me like a champ when I hit a big car at 37.....the glass didn't even crack on a full frontal impact. And it's "old" and light and cheap too.....

  • they don't make them like they used too is true. Fiberglass body cars and plastic bumpers ha sure they are more lightweight and easier to mold than steel. But the steal cars from 1964-1992 in my opinion were some of the strongest cars we ever had. The modern cars 1993-now, even though they look good, use tons of airbags to mask their weak structures. my dad had a '87 Custom D Chevy and he accidentally hit a pole. The only thing that was damaged was the bumper. don't believe me, hey I have a pic.

  • I say the strongest cars were from 1950 to 1990. In fact, modern cars are recicled plastic bottles on wheels. I've a '05 Mazda 6, and its steal and plastic are weak as paper.

  • Dumbass u dont know shit about cars. 1950-1985 cars were heavy and doesnt had any pasive security like a collapsable structure, they were graves on wheels.

  • @SuperMrBentley You must insult to answer somebody who has a different oppinon like yours? Maybe the real one who doesn't know about cars is you, rude.

  • @FURY1958 Alrigth car guru.

  • @FURY1958 just simple things most new cars have bars under dash' if u put them into a bell air then see who wins!

  • You learn English, morron! Пидорас!

  • those airbags should have gone off anyway, just to be on the safe side

  • If they would have gone of pretentiously, then they could have caused MORE damage than the crash would have on its own.

  • This is abut the stupidest video I have seen yet. Lets pit an OLD 9 year old car against a new car. My book a 2000 somethig is still a new car. Go over and check out the 59 Chevy against the 2009 Chevy. Results are amazing but sad.

  • yeah but put a 1971 impala vs a 2010 impala and see what happens the reason that they used that 59 is because it has an x-frame and a straight 6 engine it would have been different if they used a 71 impala with a v8 and straight frame

  • stop driving new cars and people wont die :=)

  • Aren't the old cars death traps?

  • No, stop making new cars and let people drive good looking cars from the 90s and 90s. Msotly BMW Volvo Merc and those beadcuse they are safe.

    and when they crash with each other they are not death traps.

  • What will we do when we run out of cars to buy if we stop making new ones? Rebuild them by hand like in Cuba? Would the public like that? Millions are sold each year. Are there enough safer old ones to rebuild over and over? Would they crash well with bigger cars outsider their size class like new ones do?

  • That would motivate peopel to propbery maintain their cars.

    Which we in europe and america can do beacuse of the availibilty of spare parts, unlike cuba.

  • Thanks for posting this poor quality video. Good on you.

  • oh your one of those HD fags.

  • God hates Sweden.

  • no but homophobics does.

  • You have to admit, this is TERRIBLE quality.

  • an old renault disintegrated in a crash? no way! I never would have guessed it.

  • OmG.....I so hate Fifth Gear. It's so dull!!!

  • Do you like Top Gear's silly scripted 'challenges'?

  • Hey, at least it's FUNNY.

  • How is this possibly dull????? It's a sodding car crash!!

  • Its dull because I dont see them joking about the aftermath of the crash. Which top gear usually does.

  • i hate brithis accent

  • they should give that to topgear and it will be more itereting!

  • i would like to see TopGear do this testing! :) Jeremy 4 King of UK! :)

  • the audio skipping is annoying

  • I think the crash was strong enough for the airbag deployment. Maybe the new Space had a failure

  • the old car is totaled.....cant believe....still...its from 1997..pretty old

  • i like to see the 58 Plymouth fury vs smart car lol

  • Christine will eat this little shit!!:-DDD

  • lol

  • lol

  • I think the new Espace is at least 200 kilograms heavier.

  • the new one looks better!

  • they're both ugly

  • something some crash tester oeeos forgot about is they test for headon collisions by tjhrowing the car at a solid wall.

    but in a real head on the forces will be much greater than hitting a wall. OBSERVE AS I ADD UP THEIR SPEEDS

    Wall:

    Collision=60mph+0mph Car+wall

    Real Life:

    Collision=60mph+60mphmph Car+Car

  • It's the same thing. A stationary wall will cause the same impact to a car as if it was another car traveling at the same speed.

    So 60 mph into a wall is the same thing as a head on collision where both cars are going 60 mph.

    Had they used a stationary car in place of a wall, then you'd be correct, because that stationary wall has a heck of a lot more give than the wall.

  • no because the forces are twice as much as i have proop try it with your nuckles (not at 60mph though!) into a wall then both together at the same speed!

  • allright now put a 68 impala versus a 08 and lets see how that goes

  • New Impala will get owned lol. Lets do a 1977 Monte Carlo and an 08 Monte Carlo head on too.

  • @dodgechargerdaytona

    The 68 will LOSE BIG TIME!

  • @dodgechargerdaytona look up 59 Bel Aire vs 09 malibu

  • @dodgechargerdaytona Easy. They did it already: watch?v=cJrXViFfMGk The results are ghastly for the oldies, as expected and as it will always happen. Thank goodness, 50 years of engineering in carmaking have not passed in vain. Cheers.

  • @dodgechargerdaytona the 08 Almost anything would still win. safety technology has come a very very long way.

  • @dodgechargerdaytona it been done..very close to same vehicles you describe. look up.. crash test 1959 chevrolet bel air vs 2009 chevrolet malibu. i know this post is 2 years old so just look it up if you have not seen it. new cars will win every time as far as saving your life, they are much safer ( more ridgid)

  • @sublimedward a 68 impala is a lot stroger than a bel air. it has a fully boxed frame, and dual shock tower to firewall braces.

  • @dodgechargerdaytona How about a 59 and an 09?

    PS. The 09 wins.

  • @dodgechargerdaytona I'd rather be in the newer car EVERY time.

  • @dodgechargerdaytona Go check out the vid of a 59 bel air vs a 09 malibu the bel air got destoryed just like the older impala would

  • @FantomLightning the 59 bel air had a straight 6 in it, you had all that space on either side of the motor and that is why it crumabled so. I think anyways, of course newer cars are safer no doubt .

  • @1969pontiac1 Still look at modern cars with straight sixes in them they do wwwwaaaayyyyy better

  • @FantomLightning I agree, they come a long way in making cars safer. I was in a head on collison in a 95 Buick Park Ave, and had a broken foot, and sore, This girl going down the wrong side of the road was in a 2001 Thunder bird I believe she had a broken leg, both very lucky. the battery on those were under the back seat so you would not lose power, after the crash the inside lights came on and the door unlocked all on its on. Thanks Buck for giving your life for mine. and God.

  • @dodgechargerdaytona they put a 59 bel air and an 09 malibu

  • @dodgechargerdaytona They did and it didn't go so well for the older car.

  • @RetroGamerr1991 that was not a 68 impala !

  • @RetroGamerr1991 Yeah but it would have been the same result.

  • is this Beyond Tomorrow on th discovery channel???

  • The thing is,the absorption of force is shared,the older more rigid car uses the "give" in the newer car,granted the hard steel reinforced steering wheel is not going to be nice,but I was under the impression we were talking about damage to the cars,not the occupants.

    Sorry about slamming you on your grammar,did not realize you were not an english speaker.

  • First,assuming that you know things is a mistake that another few years will teach you.

    I'm not stupid,only an ignorant 21 year old punk would say that about someone they don't know.If you are running them both into a tree you'd be right.(as far as the occupants were anyway)I've studied physics but maybe I'll look up some "fhisics" and see what that book says,I admit to have never studied fpisics before.

  • BTW,before you call someone stupid maybe you should make sure your grammar and spelling don't make you look like a fool.

  • You must be joking,or know nothing about physics (guessing that what fisics meant)

  • Now I understand that the newer car obviously had less damage done to it and is undoubtedly much safer than the ford, but did anyone see the way the vans hit each other? The ford was sideswiped by the newer van, thus it incurred more damage. The newer van was hit in the frond end, incurring less damage.

  • okay first both cars are renault's. second they both hit eachother in the front dirvers side, the older renault was not side swiped it just crumpled so much because the new renault is very stiff.

  • Où sont les airbags de la Espace IV?

  • Comme dit dans la vidéo, les airbags ne sont pas sortis car la voiture n'a pas jugé l'accident assez sévère pour avoir à les utiliser, se reportant uniquement aux ceintures pour protéger ses occupants.

  • french do it better

  • they need to do like prius vs.67'Camaro or El Dorado

  • I want to see a Caprice VS a Prius!

  • i want to see a 1975 cadillac or grand marquis and a new honda...

  • lol my bro hit a 05 volvo with my dads 1986 grand marquis...the volvo completly disintegrated. cheap plastic all over the road... air bags and all depoyed. only the front grill on the marquis shattered and the hood buckled.

  • the other day, a pacifica hit my Cherokee, his ride is wrecked, and i got a foot kick in the fender in comparison, hahahaa stupid chryslers...

  • ya older cars are fucking tanks compared to these go-carts on the street now.

  • Your Cherokee is a Chrysler...

  • Thats because its designed to crumple.

  • and be a total write off?

  • No it may look completely demolished. Because it is designed  to take away as much energy as possible.

  • its designed to be destroyed so that u will go buy another one.

  • So you would rather die because you hit the steering wheel at five times your body weight but have a car that can be repaired. But anyway have you even seen an old car crashing into an offset barrier at 40 miles per hour. They just tear like tissue paper. Plus I am sure most people insurance.

  • youre an even bigger idiot than i thought.

  • You're a real insightful guy arent you?

  • Lulz troll

  • Comment removed

  • I think this doesn't go for all old cars. I look for frame ratings on IIHS crash tests as well to show what happens when hitting same weight vehicle. Frame tests weren't done on many old cars, just injury risk. Now frame tests are very vigorous. My friend broadsided a Suburban doing 50 in a '95 Lexus ES300 (pimped V6 Camry) and not only were they uninjured, there was no big frame failure of the ES300/Camry. We also saw a new pickup hitting an old camry head on. Only the truck driver was injured

  • The new Espace's safety system is made to "know" when to deploy the Airbags, if the crash doenst warrant their deployment it wont..

    It in this case decided to fire the seatbelt tensioners allowing the load limiters on the belts to work.

    Airbags can cause injury's when they deploy they arn't the saving grace in most accidents look at the old espace its airbag went off but did sweet FA to save the driver...

  • por q no0 se inflaron los airbags de la nueva space?

  • if i was crashing like that...

    id prefer if my airbag would go off...

  • Looks like the new one weighs more than the old hence the fact it "drives" further.

  • its not the weight only. check out the volvo 940 vs renault modus vid...

  • holy shit, that guy is dead

  • My 92 caravan took out a dodge hemi disel, front end crushed in raditor gone, my van i got a scuff from being hit in the back at 60km hr. let my van go after them brits cars!!

  • I wanna see a real test. Citroen C6 vs Citroen DS21

  • I remember Renaults when I was a kid. They were nothing but trouble. Who would want one?

  • They had Renaults in Canada back in the 80's and they were horrible cars. The French did not come up with very many automotive masterpieces.

  • renault are known for being a piece of junk. even in france. cheap material, low costs, underpaid workers.

  • That sums it all up then - if everyone drived crap cars we'll all be safe...Bout time someone tested the "they dont make them like they used to" saying. I've had big arguements about it, but all the old buggers never listen...

  • Moralité les voitures 4 ou 5 * sont trés dangeureuses pour les autres ... :(

  • what the hell, on the new one the airbags didnt deploy. What the hell is that about? This car got the highest rating! Not in my book. Thats severe whip lash with out those airbags.

  • The airbags didn't deploy because the force of the impact was to low for the airbag sensor. The pretensioners and loadlimiters were enough

  • Or, that's what Renualt said. The airbags should fire in any crash over 12mph, because that s the speed it would take to cause neck/head injuries.

  • Totally agree! If your car is gonna be totaled like that new espace, you might as well fire of the airbags...

  • they don't need to go off in every crash that occurs over 12mph.. i've had 2 accidents, one near 25 mph and the other around 20... neither accident caused the airbag to go off.. had my airbag gone off in the first one i probably wouldn't have been able to keep control of the car and avoid hitting a second vehicle.. and no neck injuries to myself at all

  • What exactly do you mean by a crash over 12 mph? I highly doubt the passengers in the new Espace felt a higher deceleration than driving the car straight into concrete at 12 mph. The speed is not everything, you might survive sliding at 80 into a beam barrier, but be dead when crashing at 30 into a pole.

  • Okay, 12mph crashing into a concrete barrier or other solid object should set off the airbags. Crashing at 24mph head on into a car would create the same force.

  • Not if the other car is lighter.

  • Deceleration is the issue. Crash at 12 into a fence and you're fine with no airbag. Crash at 12 into a wall... you'll want the airbag because the car will stop much faster.

  • I don't want the airbag until I'm hitting a wall at about 23+ mph. Below 23, I'd rather be able to fix the car for cheaper. I have a hard head BTW.

  • plus, if you have on a seatbelt, you shouldn't be injured in a safe car untill like 40 (with out airbag).

  • I have my seatbelt on.

  • 12 mph the air bag should not ever come out.

  • Why didn't new one's airbags open?

  • those cars suck!

  • I think the "they dont build them like they used to" saying was more meant for like 40 50 60 ish cars vs. like 80s cars, and I dont think any one really thought they were safer I mean come on they dint have seat belts lol, I think they just meant that they were more durable, and somewhere the line between durability and safety got blurred together.

  • I think you are right, yet the common saying is so untrue it's not even funny. I saw a show about crash testing that showed a head on crash test of some 1960's sedan. The car COMPLETLEY folded in half...the backseat ended up at the dashboard. Keep in mind, back then, things like seatbelts and safety glass weren't even put into use. "They don't built them like they used to" is such a joke.

  • Stupid douche! The airbag SHOULD HAVE DEPLOYED in that severe of a crash. This would have been a mark against this vehicle in the US.

  • The airbag didn't need to deploy as the seatbelt pretensioners where good enough to protect the people in that accident.

    Also the US crash tests are a lot more EASY to pass & get a 5 star result then the Euro Ncap crash tests which test at a higher speed & dont just slam the whole front of the car into the test barrier at 35 mph.

    Id love to see some of the American cars that are available for sale today put through a Euro Ncap crash test, it would rip them to pieces.

  • That's actually not true at all. IIHS (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety) in the US crash tests vehicles offset at 40mph. It is because of their testing that vehicles safety in the US has increased dramatically in the past 10yrs. Check out their site.

  • I looked at the IIHS site, still not as tough a test as euro ncap, only got to look at the results for a 2002 - 2005 Kia Sedona to see.

    A very poor 2 stars from euro ncap.

    IIHS rate the car as acceptable & good for safety

    Also a shame the US doesn't follow Europe for once & make the fitting of ABS anti lock brakes a legal requirement on all new cars / vans sold.

  • Hey I never claimed the US lead the automotive world. That's a no-brainer. Am I wrong? Doesn't NCAP test vehicles offset at 40mph? That's exactly what IIHS does, so I'm not sure how there can be a difference in the overall frontal rating of the same vehicle. What I previously said stands true. Vehicle safety in the US has improved dramatically in the past 10yrs. Because of IIHS, auto companies have improved their designs.

  • Pause at 1:51!

  • You are a buch of cowards.

    Renault spends millions every year in safety, and that´s why they have this kind of products for sale.

    Learn more before posting shit, Europe is ON.