Added: 2 years ago
From: historiasdelmotortv
Views: 203,146
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (356)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Rigs of rods XD

  • 今となってはもったいない気もするが・・・「テスト」だからね・­・・

  • @vxss26 what? :-)

  • A 60's car with a modern rollcage would be safe. Of course, emissions must be addresses as well.

  • why dont they have saetbelts?

  • aside from seat belts....i think the cabins held up pretty well in those tests! so what happened now, to where if you so much as sneeze next to a new car, it disintegrates(but you have 40million airbags +onstar) ?

  • @ahmonrah40 watch?v=joMK1WZjP7g&feature=re­lated

  • @micmac99 I stand corrected....and am not too proud to admit it!

  • det vore ju bra om det var med en gm product oxå inte nå annat

  • that's some creative ways to die in crash )

  • 2:07 OH SH"T!!!

  • Comment removed

  • 0:46 holly shit!! kiss the floor!

  • never seen before new release video's of the JFK assassination clearly cause by bad driving

  • If this a GM video why are all the cars Chrysler products??

  • I think all of them survived

  • The 9th Symphony = win

  • I'm glad I'm on a motorcycle, wearing a helmet, Kevlar jacket, and no kids allowed on it. If I get wiped out, so be it, at least I knew the risk getting on the bike. I feel bad for the public back then that were clueless they were in suicide machines. seat belts 1964, collapsible steering column 1968, headrests 1968, side marker lights 1968, 5 mph bumpers 1975. Still, I would never get in a Fiat 500 or Mini Cooper with bubba riding around in a F-350 dually.

  • Amazing thing is the engineers looked at the video and said "great, it's a wrap!!". Ship it!! LOL

  • @buixrule

    Best comment. Ship it!!!! hahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Alway about the dollars and why would you ever go over 30miles and hour.

    My mom had a Ford Fairlane 500. She got into an accident with a new car and total the new car. My moms car didn't have a dent...it was a tank. (No lie)

  • 1:16 is fucking gnarly.... both dummies heads go through the windscreen, while in the other car the dummy is thrown out....

  • All I am seeing rather safe cars if the had seat belts in them .

  • How did us baby boomers ever survive riding in those death traps!

  • Poor guy at 1:21....

  • CARnage!

  • I thought the Chevy looked well preserved, but I've been wrong before. I will say those things were flimsy new. That joke of a front bumper wasnt even there for show; shame on GM's design studio. I was kid in the early '70's and never saw one, but I saw '58's and '57's. See the wraparound windshield fly over the '09's roof? I wonder how a '58 would have done. Yes, all the cars here were Mopars.

  • These cars look much stronger than Chevy Bel Air in 2009 Impala vs 1959 Bel Air crash test. I wonder why, maybe Bel Air had very rusted chassis.

    Better seats, headrests and seatbelts for those old cars would make them much safer (maybe).

  • 1:21 LOL

  • MORE, MORE, MORE!!!!!!!!!!!

  • i wish i had those cars :(

  • If these are GM crash tests why are they using Chrysler products

    as the test vehicles? Corporations LIE AGAIN.

    Tell you what. Get in a crash with a 60's car while driving a 2000's

    car, THEN comment how that worked out for you.

    Either that or we'll read it in your OBITUARY.

  • shame on gm wasting so many good classic cars!

  • I really think the game Carmageddon was inspired by  this video.

  • thumbs up if u never ever get into a 60s car again

  • Japanese & European cars usually fared better. safety wise... 

  • This is why Americans shouldn't make freaking cars!!!

  • A truly nightmare. I want a 1948 Lincoln continental.

  • song?

  • Car for Dummies

  • The cars for the bads

  • those crash tests were considered good too

  • ...and in the '70's, Detroit Iron had "Designer Headrest" for looks only, the whole car was one big crumple zone and the seat belts were to keep your lifeless body in the car because the ambulance drivers were too lazy to look for your body.

  • Thanks to Ralph Nader for forcing Detroit to smarten up

    By the 1970's the Japanese were sending in cars with headrests ,crumple zones,seat belts all around

  • Thanks to Ralph Nader for forcing Detroit to smarten up

  • Nice to see the childrens days of car security technology. Btw, is it true that american street cruiser such asthe AMC had their fuel tanks been installed inside the doors and rear fenders really?

  • Like buttah!

  • I'm like.. "WHY ARE THEY FALLING OUT OF THEIR VEHICLES???"

    Then it just hit me.. 1960s... no seat belts....

  • @NuBzOrX - It could get pretty nasty. Saw and/or heard of some pretty nasty injuries. Cars today are MUCH safer.

  • those are mopars not GM

  • These pioneering crash tests by UCLA and ITTE led to improvements in door latches, seat latches, the requiring of seat belts in cars and other safety improvements over the years. I was an EMT in the late '70's and early '80's and saw what can happen to someone in an older car. It wasn't pretty.

  • @16924fps Jeez, your job must of been brutal...

  • everyone is bailing out at the last second

  • Adam West just testing out the safety of his Batmobile.

  • Safe to say a seat belt wouldn't help any...

  • Looks like some of the new offerings being built in China today......

  • Old cars were crap.

  • @myphonyaccount yeah and probably some worth more than your ass

  • 2:03 and that is the mother of the pinto

  • unos autos muy seguros  sin lugar a dudas hahaha

  • At the end of this vid it appears that by 1967 Ford had perfected the exploding gas tank

  • What is most disturbing is how much the car companies fought safety improvements knowing full well the results of these tests. By 1946 a neurologist in CA had developed retractable seat belts and was studying the issues; in 1955, proposed not only the retractable seat belt, but also recessed steering wheels, reinforced roofs, roll bars, door locks and passive restraints such as the now-and-ever-popular air bag.It took laws passed by Congress to get them into automobiles.

  • Still safer than modern Chinese cars.

  • ist zwar schade um die Oldies aber es zeigt sehr deutlich was für Kräfte bei einem Zusammenstoss wirken.

  • chrysler vehicles .....not gm

  • @jeepers2655 hey dumbass gm makes chrysler

  • @MrAcuralvr You're a complete fucking idiot.. You might wanna think before you start preaching..

  • @JIMMIEEC nope gm makes chrysler

  • @MrAcuralvr Chrysler is owned by Fiat - was sold in June of 09.

  • @bodyvegas when this movie was made they were owned by gm maybe you need to look at the video b4 you speak

  • @MrAcuralvr Maybe you need to watch the video before opening your own mouth. There wasn't a Chrysler in it, you pathetic turd!

  • @bodyvegas lol i wasnt the one that said it maybe you should read the comments first 

  • @MrAcuralvr You said Chrysler was made by GM. They were never made by GM. They have always been their own separate company. (Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep). Do a little research before you post info that is not correct. I can't stand people who open then mouth only to insert their foot!!!

  • @bodyvegas maybe you need to do research all those companies are gm related then chrystler got bought out omg youre dumb go troll another video were other people are as stupid as you!

  • @MrAcuralvr You stupid fuck!! Chrysler was never owned by GM - Is your fucking browser broken?? Go look under Chrysler Corp and READ, or do you not know how to read, you brain dead, read neck asshole? What a stupid fuck you are!!!

  • @MrAcuralvr .......wow since when?....Honda makes Acura! Toyota makes Lexus,etc......just overpriced!

  • Many people of vintage vehicles have retrofitted their ignition systems to electronic ignition systems further enhancing engine performance and efficiency. Also vintage suspension systems can be made to perform incredibly well with gas shocks, the addition of rear sway bars and polyurethane bushings; disc brake retrofits; stock power steering boxes rebuilt to have a firm feel and quicker response, etc. I know old cars well. Stock looking modern upgrades can really enhance the driving experience.

  • Most vintage auto collectors know the importance of proper maintenance of their vintage cars and trucks. With general maintenance of tuneups (points, condenser, spark plug changes and periodic carb adjustments those vintage vehicles will run very smoothly and some quite efficiently. Okay, so they don't have all the bells and whistles and safety galore that a modern vehicle has. But I love those gorgeous creations that came out of Detroit way back when, and so do A LOT of other people.

  • @palmz4u I'M ON THE SAME PAGE!

  • *you're*

  • It amazes me how many people believe that small car=unsafe, and big car=safe, no matter what the year.

    It also amazes me all the folks who want to drive 'vintage' cars. To me, they all sucked. They handle like crap, pollute like crazy (you can smell the exhaust, and they spew out like 500x the noxious fumes when you measure them) get crappy gas mileage, and are just plain unsafe.

  • @pimpb0tt They look better and have way more personality. Prius.........what, are you gay? [im not homophobic, im making a reference]. Pull up in a 65 Impala, you think anyone is going to ask you that? Old cars are just cooler and there are brand new engines and retrofit technology, as well as hq aftermarket seatbelts that many people are investing to make ligitamately green, safer vintage cars. AAND as far as gas mileage goes... the cars seen here do better than a new v6 midsize suv. 1sthand

  • @regalbeagleable

    What... seatbelts? For serious? You gonna retrofit 3 point seatbels with explosive retractors (tied to the air bags), a uni-body, crumple zones, ABS, ESP, Airbags in the steering wheel, dash, in the seats and in the A and B pillars? Puh-leeze. You gonna retrofit drive by wire throttle (for the ESP), close loop fuel injection, EGR, Air injection and catalytic converters?

    Heck, most of those cars didn't even have head rests in them.

  • @pimpb0tt What the fuck ever guy. Your right im wrong. Nobody in their right mind would own an antique car.

  • @regalbeagleable

    And asking if I'm gay, even in jest pretty much means you are a bigoted homophobe.

    And FYI, I dive an Audi A4 that gets 30 mpg, and even bone stock will still smoke your Impala land yacht in a straight line or on the track. Not that my car defines me. It's just a car. Just saying things have progressed in the last 50 years a bit.

  • @pimpb0tt U completely missed every point I tried to make, and again I insist I am not homophobic. It was a Jeff Dunham [the ventriloquist comedian] reference. Cars have improved, you are 100% right.

  • There they go, all real, good, and pretty cars.. Well there's not much use for those REAL cars these days, unless you're millionaire. Normal fuel in Finland is about 1,65e per 1L, when it was 2 or 3 years ago 1,20e.. Fuck that shit.

  • Can't stand the music...

  • The music is telling me in such nice classical tones "You are going to die, die die, die die die DIE DIE DIE DIE.... die!"

  • Man! They sure have improved cars from the '60's!

  • @rosiesam2 Hardly. Have you seen the Cherry Amulet or some of the Suzuki/ Mitsubishi tests from the last decade? 

  • 50 years later American cars are still almost as poor.

  • @bergsteinlife You should check out the crash test between a '59 Bel Air and an '09 Malibu. Watch that one and then tell me there's been no progress in 50 years.

  • @fisquid and watch the rust fall out of the bel air too. that bel air only looked good. underneath it was rusted to hell.

  • this was back when cars had ejection seats as standard safety equipment

  • yeah all the first cars shown are Plymouths not GMs

  • GM crash test??? All the cars looked like late 50's Plymouths to me.

  • 1:24 guy falls out the car 1:25 hes dead from his head getting ran over and the impact of the concrete and then him and a nuthher persons stuck to the car

  • 1:24 guy falls out the car 1:25 hes dead from his head getting ran over and the impact of the concrete

  • one word....... FAIL

  • Holy shit, Those impacts look like they are at over 60mph especially the last one at 02:00 I'm not suprised they would fly apart like that.

  • what did they make cars from back then cheese? They just crumple up.

  • @2000jeepsahara no 2000jeepsahara there made out of all american metal not that shit there made out of now i mean im 12 but i know this cause im into old american classic or any other classic i also like newer cars

  • Dang. I guess we take for granted that doors these days actually stay closed haha

  • ppls like to fly!

  • problem with the door... sucks!!!

  • general motors, they look skrikingly like chrysler products to me, perhaps do a bit more research?

  • @boykitten5 There's a 58 Chrysler Imperial in there.

  • id kill for any of those cars lol

  • it was catastrophick when these cars crashed so what passed for safe then? I can imagine the test examiner saying 'i didn't see that,ok'

  • Love the fire @ the end.

  • i thought classic cars r made of steel??

  • 0:39 ARE A PLYMOUTH FURY 1962¡¡¡

    no have other video of this car

  • пила 7 отдыхает !!

  • The cars are like paper

  • bodies!!!!everywhere!?!?!?

  • these are mopars pal... you might want to re-title the video

  • Actually, SOMETIMES not wearing seatbelt in a car that's not equipped with airbags is better.

    There have been many accidents where the driver is thrown in the back of car, when the whole front was totally destroyed. They have survived just because they didn't wear seatbelts, what would keep them in their front seats.

    You can never know...

  • want to sell seatbelts =)

  • They are testing them without engines and alot of the interior is not bolted down, hence the way the seat just flys around with ease... look it up there several articles that talk about these videos where they show how "great" new cars are... HA!!! sorry to burst ur bubble but a little common knowledge for ya, metal weighs more then plastic its stronger also, old cars hold up alot better in crashes just cuz their aint airbags doesnt mean anything if the body receives less damage there is no need

  • These tests were performed by the University of California at Los Angeles, (UCLA) not General Motors. The cars were donated by the various auto manufacturers. They were pioneering efforts to study crash dynamics with an eye to improving vehicle safety.

  • those dummys should close their doors harder

  • People falling out of opening doors? I mean come on! How did they deem these results acceptable even back then? There's little chance you would survive any of those crashes.

  • And thats how GM started their reputation

  • they are mopars no chevys get you facts right.

  • Black crashed cars were 1959 Plymouth Fury or Belvedere?

  • Alex would be so proud.

  • WTF windows sample music

  • wow but the people who put this together had to be a ford fan or just didn't like chevy how could you not like chevy

  • Seatbelts are just a form of communism anyway..

  • @jakobnev LOL

  • person fall out of car in crash and get run over by other car....ITS SAFE SHIP IT!

  • These are Plymouth Savoys and Furys and Ford Galaxies. And GM did not conduct these tests. They were all done by UCLA's Institute for Transportation and Traffic Engineering.

  • I LIKE THE WAY THE DRIVER FALLS OUT OF CAR, HITTING HIS HEAD OF THE B PILLAR, GETS CRUSHED BETWEEN THE TWO CARS, GETS RAN OVER BY HIS OWN REAR WHEEL, THEN GETS DRAGGED UP THE ROAD! I WONDER WHAT NCAP WOULD RATE THAT??

  • @2009jimmy2009

    LOL... Prob a -5

  • @2009jimmy2009 NCAP would rate it 0 stars or death trap

  • @2009jimmy2009

    Probably 10 stars! Because that's a pretty wicked awesome way to die. That's how the rating works, right?

  • @2009jimmy2009 IT WOULD BE "A" FOR AWESOME!!!

  • @2009jimmy2009 but yet that plymouth valiant looks very very repairable

  • @2009jimmy2009 "We'll rate that as acceptable!"

  • Nononono not the impala...... Shiiit. No not another! C'mon that's enough! Not a wagon now! Ahhhhh.

    Glad that's over.

  • God, I can't imagine being a cop or an ambulance guy at the scene of a bad crash in those old buckets. The gore must have been horrific.

  • @timon924 it was timon. I used to work for a photographer back in the mid 80's who worked for the Las Vegas police dept in the late fifties, early sixtes. That was his job to take pics of accidents. One day he showed me his pics of head-ons, people falling asleep at the wheel, etc. Be grateful for seatbelts, airbags. They were gross.

  • i dont think the door are supposed to come open. lol

  • There are three big factors to consider. If these cars had these fautres, the tests would not be near as chaotic.

    1. Seat belts (lap AND shoulder).

    2.Better Door Locks.

    3.Airbags

  • @classicautofan1 you don't even need airbags...on your list I think head restraints should replace airbags as one of the three key safety features these cars lack...

  • Even if those cars had airbags, they would be useless as they would deploy into empty space because the passenger would have fallen out of the car.

  • This just proves "real steel" isn't as safe as people think. Cars nowadays are MUCH SAFER.

  • @TheSeaPeopleandMe And cars of 2050 will be safer than today's cars and people will say the same for their. Is the evolution of safety. Try to compare a 1915 car with a 1955 car. Their safety evolved too.

  • door locks suck in 60s!

  • @scagliettileopard but they had no problems leaving the cars... ;-)

  • @scagliettileopard on chevys...

  • So they knew that their products were unsafe and they didn't do nothing!?! what's the word for that action? mmm.........

  • @Do335D True, another reason they didn't put in seatbelts until the late 50's or early 60's was because, your going to love this, "It implied that their cars were not safe" But I think Ford started to in the mid-50's, lap belts.

  • seat belt fail

  • And yet they still didn't make seat belts a standard feature? 

  • At least you're dying in style!

  • I would not want any real American Iron from the 80s back down to plow into me in todays Junk.

  • 1:42-1:54

    they r listenin to rock lol

  • "Hey, those Dummys fell out the car!"

    "So...? They'll be alright"

    "But if they were real people they'd die"

    "Screw It - Just give 'em a Pass"

  • Where are the GM cars?...those were Plymouths

  • The very definition of "catastrophic failure" These aren't GM cars, they appear to be Chrysler cars.

  • what's the name of that tune?

  • These a great safety features.

    One is the ejector system; it ejects you clear of the car.

    The other is the sense knocker; if you crash, it had to be because you were being stupid, so the car will knock some sense back into you.

    (Just in case, I'm just joking.)

  • Maybe this is why people drove with more attention to the road back then.

    Could you imagine texting in those cars?

    However, there is not one car on the road today that had the classic design as any in the 60's.

  • whiplash much?

    those things were like little paper cars!

  • This is Chryler, not GM.

  • everyone commenting below me is a fucktard

  • Jesus, what was the speed of these tests? 65mph?

  • trap

  • big heavy thirsty and... stupid

  • @215alessio ur stupid faggot

  • @corvetteboy10

    the faggots are those who drive oversized cars because they don't feel safe to face the road with same cars as the rest.

    Stupid are those who sponsor BP like you! with your faggot monsters like the H2 and H3 thats right real homo's drive those cars here in europe (not offending the homo's)

    I work in my free time as a park gardian so I am not inventing this

  • @215alessio 1. FUCK YOU 2. i dont sponsor bp 3. the hummer h1, h2, and h3 is a very popular car in america and the gay people drive little toyota priuses and shit like that. 4.how in the FUCKING HELL is a fucking chevy impala a fucking over sized car!?

  • @corvetteboy10 H2 and H3 are Dinosaurs and time isn't on theyr side, in fact they are waiting to get extingted.

    Who loves box shaped cars anyway?

    Sponsor of PB are those who drive oversized things.

    Chevy Impala is oversized in world terms oversized body oversized engine....

    Toyota Prius is not a little car, the Smart car is

    In fact you guys are jealous at toyota for theyr avangarde tecnology that recycles brake energy in electric torque to use less fuell

  • @215alessio ok ok here we go with the numbers AGAIN 1. how the FUCK are the h2 and h3 hummers fucking dinosaurs?! they are still in production! 2. how the hell is a impala a fucking box shaped car? 3. how the hell did u arrive at the concept of if u drive a big car u support bp? 4. a toyota prius, yaris, and corolla are fucking SMALL cars and i dont think i wanna be in a toyota when the gas pettle sticks

  • @215alessio well, your prius, has innovative technology. but still. it has the worst gasoline engine ever made. underpowered and if it wasnt for the electric engine, it would be one of the least furl efficient cars in the history. on the highway, the fuel consumption goes at more than 7 litres /100Km. my "oversized" 09 dodge challenger SRT 6.1 uses 10 litres on the highway per 100 km. it has a much better system that makes it run on only the necessary cilinders. and on full 8 if needed.

  • @215alessio you would be surprised on how much people like box shaped cars, and how much people would like to spend gas well rather than looking idiotic in a hideous looking car wich's interior falls out in pieces.

    new impalas look like shit because actual GM designers are on heroin while they say theyre inspired, but old impalas look better than anything you could think of. by the way, if something disappears from the earth, its called to be extinct, not extingted.

  • @machone7I

    Well it was the other guy who started it about the Prius, I don't have one

    Your Challenger looks way better anyway and it is not a box shape the 10 lit/100 km on the highway are good enough surely for such a big car.

    The H2 does in random use 23,0L/100km higway: not specified

    Toyota Pruis 3: According to what toyota promisses :

    Der Verbrauch (NEFZ) liegt bei 3,9 l/100 km (innerorts: 3,9; außerorts: 3,7 l).

    random 3,9 and highway 3,7 L/100km 136 BHP weight 1440kg