When Classics Crash [Colorized] 

what year?

💜💜💜💜

Buses are death traps. They are built like egg shells with zero thought given to any safety features. In any kind of crash the body disintegrates and the passengers go flying. Bus companies and manufacturers must pay big bribes to government regulators to even be allowed on the road.

@@Dustin_McPredridge This would have had to been the late 70's early 80's. He didnt say. But I know he bought and ran a night club after that from 1983-1990.

Bet the guy having a dump had really good clear out !

Great rule to have. I never started wearing seatbelts until I saw those videos in driver's ed. Then, my whole family started using them.

Same ♥️🇬🇧👍 I learned to drive in an old Mini van at age 14 in fields and orchard. In 1977 I started driving on roads with a license. Before it became legal requirement to wear seat belt is was mandatory in my car . No belt 🤔 Walk . Only took me 2 days aged 14 to belt in as tight as possible in that van and have ever since. Grandaugter went through short phase of unbuckling whilst travelling. Aborted day out and no speak grandad stopped that after 2 times . Thank you again Volvo 💕 also my 144 was 1,400 kg of go cart driving fun ♥️🇬🇧💖👍

Seat belts do make sense, so good for you…. I’m glad you didn’t view that book as pornography and ‘use’ it.. If you did it’s highly unlikely you would be commenting.

@@johneeeemarry34 I'm not sure how a book on automobile accidents can be linked with pornography. There's no relationship between the two subjects whatsoever. Really scratching my head here...

​@@paparoysworkshop Yeah, fr.. 🤦‍♀️

I also heard about the rod for the rear view mirror and hatch for the glove compartment both in metal would function like a spear and a slicer like seen in 2:34

@@samuelattas3864 😳 yeah that pictures tells a thousand words, gawd damm that mustve hurt!! if they felt it at all!

@@jessebrown1400 -An accident like this one killed my cousin some 50 years ago. She wasn't impaled but the column knocked her in the chest and snapped her head back. We went to the junk yard to see for ourselves and like you said I noticed the blood splatters as well. Very sad. Definitely left an impression on my young self.

Do you remember Ernie Kovacs? He was a wonderful comic genius who died in 1962 when his Corvair slid on wet streets in Beverly Hills and wrapped around a telephone pole. It caved in his driver's side door.. He inspired comedians for decades after. He was married to Edie Adams. People said the design was unsafe, but it was deemed to be as safe as other cars at that time. That isn't saying a lot, considering how unsafe cars were back then. No headrests to keep from breaking your neck, no air bags, no crumple technology. It was pretty unsafe.

@velvetbees And seat belts. The automotive industry almost had a stroke when they were forced to finally put seat belts in as standard. I remember reading in a newspaper that Detroit said it was going to bankrupt the automotive industry. F****** asshats❗❗⚡

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-qOpgDCopWW0.html

Signal 30. I saw them in high school in Ohio as well, in 1976. It's here on YT.

@@StewieGriffin505 I saw it in 1981.

I think I saw it. Blood on the highway if I remember was the title 😂

70s. Too

Sorry for your tragic loss. Those were terrible times to be in a car wreck.

A Dauphine. I know the vehicles. Someone could get killed in one hitting a garbage can. At 25mph. They didn’t go much faster than that. 0-50mph in 24 hours.

@@AdamWaffen The French gave us a Machine Gun "the potato digger" that was more likely to injure its' operator (Okay...that was in the First World War.) Then, there was the "Impenetrable" Maginot Line, and the Citroen. It sounds like the Dauphine was at Least as Bad. What a Bunch of Inspector Clousseaus! (HE admittedly was Fictional, and Brilliantly played by the Late Great British Actor Peter Sellers.)

This brought tears to my eyes. Your mom and sister are at peace, but I am very sorry for what your family had to endure.

So sorry for you to lose your Mom that way, Peace of Christ.

The 1960 Impala is horrible in crashes with its really weak frame even compared to other cars of the era sadly

@@LittleRayOfSnshine69 I remember going to a wrecking yard when I was a kid kinda like that scene in ~ American Graffiti~ and some of those wreck HAD to b fatal there is just no way maybe the people " ejected" were better off but still bad odds

I have friends with early 50s pontiac chieftains… I wonder the same thing

Eh it's not that bad especially with minor accidents

as long as you're not stupid, everyone else should be more concerned about crashing into you. Modern cars are made of lesbian paper and environmentally friendly farts. The "safety features" are just compensating for everything they removed. No airbags or crumple zones are going to save you from crashing into a wall or wrapping around a pole at 100mph, but a heavy car will accelerate less when a lighter car hits it. And isn't acceleration the primary metric they use in crash tests?

I agree!

People today don't realize how easy it was to out run your headlights back then. Pre 60's cars has way more bounce on the front end and the lights bobbed into the trees, not what you want to have in foggy wet situations... Even back then people would park under trees, have nasty windshields and not be able to see once they hit the road and it started to rain.

I feel vindicated in having a 50 year old Volvo for a classic car. Decent damping, 8" Bosch headlamps, 3 point inertia reel seatbelts, collapsible steering column, safety cage with crumble zones, side impact bars in the doors, laminated screen/windshield. A small sacrific in style is worth it for even basic safety features.

@@idonotwantahandle2 Yes the venerable Volvo is pretty tough as are the old Saab’s, but I don’t recall them as very reliable. My wife, a Cal farm girl hippy had Volvo wagons that came into our marriage. I even overhauled one of the 4 cyl versions. Had carb issues always. I like the reliability of the new cars and they’re great handling. We’ve owned Toyota’s. Buyem, driveem never a mechanical issue. Run like sewing machines.

@@dustdevilz4771 I have driven Toyota Hilux utes in Australia for close to forty years and have never had a problem. It's the best decision i ever made. The things just keep going.

@@kramnull8962yeah I’ve done all that. Grew up poor so my cars have been 30-40 years older than me, just gotta know how to drive proper and what to do/not to do in dire situations.

Well said.

I'm thankful I live in a time where I can wear whatever I wish

The only thing with wearing layers is bad oder,all tho people dress with less layers and still smell bad.🤪

And not one purple haired weirdo to be seen or anybody staring at a dumb phone.

@@yeoldeseawitch Of course you are. How horrible it would be if you actually had to make an effort.

you mean wearing pajamas and slippers to Sprawlmart isnt classy? 😉🙃

Yeah, but it was all mild steel back then with no reinforcement anywhere. So with even a minor hit, the car would collapse at the A pillar and everything forward would move into the cabin.

Agreed. I know ill take a old car over any of these new cars today. I feel so much safer in the older cars

@@jimmcdonald7758 well you haven't looked at the old cars in crash tests. Mild steel with no reinforcement. You're not safer but exposed.

@@Mcfreddo i have seen the videos. i also been in bad accidents in older cars and ill still take a older car over any newer car everytime.

I mean they didn’t ban the imperial from destruction derby for nothing 😆

Yes - and the picture at 2:34 shows exactly what you're saying. The front of the car was crushed, and the steering column shot straight up to the ceiling of the car. Can't imagine what that would have been like for a driver with no seatbelt.

​@@TheHistoryLoungeGood point and one of the advances in safety drivers can't self defeat like, abs airbags or seat belts.

Other related accident scene films besides "Signal 30" are: "Wheels of Tragedy," "Mechanized Death," and "Red Asphalt." "Wheels of Tragedy" had some acting in it leading up to wrecks, but the accident scenes are real. Another one I saw was "Blood on the Windscreen," but that one had the blood dramatized.

And yet they keep producing dumber and dumber drivers…

@@TheHistoryLounge Yep. No real ambulances, no "Jaws of Life", Lifeflights, nothing. You were lucky if they could find a doctor to come out and amputate your leg in the field. Otherwise they might try to use two wrecker winches to pull it apart with you fully aware (no morphine either). Good times, huh?

Yeah they fold up like a paper bag!

Ya all dont know what yer talkin bout

These cars are tin cans. Even a modern VW Golf would rip them into pieces in a collision. Google classic car accidents. Always ends worse for the classic car driver.@@RoadkillXoutlaw

​@@RoadkillXoutlaware I think there talking about what they see in the videos of the crashed crushed cars

The cars from the 30s, 40s onwards have actually very thick sheet metal skin and the chassis also is very strong. Where those cars lack is force absorbtion and programmed deformation, although some cars from the video deformed in a nice, uniform way. There is a crash here on YT between an 60s Cadillac and a much newer Cadillac DTS. And both cars deformed similarly, although the old Caddy didn't protect the occupants very well.

Interesting!

Back in ‘57 there were a few foreign cars in my hometown (Southern California). However, back then, there were no Saab or MG or Volvo dealers nearby. Los Angeles was about 15 miles away from us, but not many of those dealers were around there either. True, the imports were quite safe and economical. But safety and economy were not paramount selling points then. For styling look at a 57 Volvo then a 57 Ford Fairlane or a 57 Buick Century. Like it or not, style and color were huge influences on the buyers then. History has proven that the imports were a better idea but looking at it from a 1957 perspective, the American car was still king, at least for a few more years.

@@TheHistoryLounge Certainly is interesting, Fords 1955-57 "lifeguard" safety package was prompted and introduced by Robert McNamara. Henry Ford II hated the idea and had it killed, because marketing safety was seen as suggesting that cars could be dangerous! Who knew? So in 1961 McNamara resigned from Ford and excepted the job offer of Secretary of Defence from JFK.

wmthe5th: That shows how far ahead the Scandinavians were in safety.! I remember looking at a 1967 Volvo & how the seat moulded to your body so much better than most of our t slide all over the place bench seats!

@@pommunist Henry Ford II also thought it was not a seller in terms of safety as most people chose not to buy the optional lap belts.

Absolutely.

They'd be dead. No seatbelts in those days.

out of all the pictures 90-95% car accidents were fatal

I am not by any means a fainthearted person, but this type of crouch injuries where pieces went up and makes carange of what's bewtween ones legs and lower abdomen alwas made med shiver to the bones just by thinking about it. I remeber from my old books there was once an early seatbelt experiment with a strap for the upperbody alone, i can't remember which manufacturer did put it to use, the ideas was that to prevent the drivers head from smashing into the panel, but the thing was that it made the lowerbody to slide forward instead and they had to take it out of production because of the horrifying injuries that caused in a high speed collision. I think actualy Volvo was first to introduce the new 3 point belt for regular non race track cars and it was a massive sucess, easy to use and kept the whole body in place, they also did introduce the new padded instrument panel which had a foam layer to protect the drivers head, today basically all cars has that.

Took way longer for help to respond back then. Also the roads didn't have as many guardrails for low lying areas of the shoulders, so many ended up in gullies and deep ravines, perhaps the drink....

Driving cars isn't safer now than during the 1970's; while per passenger mile has dropped significantly, the per mile and the per capita has stayed about the same or increased slightly. For pedestrians and bicyclists, it's more dangerous now than ever (about 1/4 of vehicle deaths are pedestrians/bicyclists). We're just driving a lot more than ever, about 3 or 4 times more, as so many people commute daily from the suburbs. And with the introduction of megacars that hit other's around the window area instead of around the metal belt of the car, and run over pedestrians instead of scooping them above the hood, it's no surprise that pedestrian deaths have doubled over the past ten years.

That scene @ 2:34 was indeed a harrowing one. Just imagine the horror felt by the first responders who went to the wreck site and witnessed it live.

My late mother worked as a nurse from the 50s onwards. It was the car crash victims that ended up putting her off driving by the 60s 😞.

Takes little to wonder why there are so few of them around. I had an older friend that had shoe boxes of black and white pictures like these. It happened all across the US back then. Narrow to No roads and really trees falling everywhere. They were unprepared for the venture they took making roads, as fast as possible. To look back on how much this guy liked to drink and drive, and the number of people he killed, he was a serial killer.

"first responders" ambulance drivers, police, and tow truck drivers. What is it with that stupid phrase of fIRst rEspondErs. @@danielestrada1850

...as if it gracefully flew up to the guardrail like a white swan !

lmao you caught me there at the first half

Yes, she's still there. She's too stiff to move...

Me to 67 catatina 2 door ht massive car but I feel safe

@@raymondkunkel9615 Catalina , the sister to my "B"body Parisienne custom sport .

True. However you are twice as likely to be in a car crash today due to driver's inattentiveness.

Back in the day, you were more likely to die of heart disease then a car crash. We were so careless and reckless with a side of gravy and don't skimp on the gravy kind of generation. Now days you are twice as likely to die while dieing.

@@bigonaka8159 Don't be talking about how people ate, when 3 decades the government saturated the US in DDT from the farmlands to the cities, and blew powder in kids faces for lice and to kill mosquitoes....... Asbestos did less damage than our government.

Usualy at least where i live the avewrage speed where much lower compared to today, if one has been driving on the rural side on very old roads one quickly does understand why 50km/h /25/mph where concidered much, today 120-130 km/h or 60-70/mph (In Sweden 110km/h) is concidered pretty normal speed on larger roads, that is almost 3x the average road speed in the 1950s. It is amazing that people does survive at all from a crach in that speed even in a modern car to be honest, it says a lot of how incredible the human body actualy is and mother natures ability to heal as some people still will be capable of walk and get back to life. One shall really be thankful for that and not take anytihing in life for granted, those things does happen in fractions of a second.

These days you're more likely to die from a drunk driver or a person on their phone operating a motor vehicle less distractions back then than now

As I remember, this book is actually called "Car Crashes And Other Sad Stories", and the photos are from the 1940s and '50s. I own a copy of it. All the pictures were taken in California by one particular commercial photographer.

@@hebneh ?.Where can i find the book

@@hebneh People didn't realize how widespread the mahem was. Most only knew the wrecks were happening rapidly in their own area or state. Many people had many shoe boxes full of these crashes in their closets. So many new drivers and so little attention paid to safety and precautions.

@@kramnull8962 Actually, there was a lot of national and local publicity of vehicle crashes and deaths. One of my strong memories as a kid in the 1960s was news about the number of national traffic deaths every long holiday weekend, with the worst single incident with the most fatalities being singled out, wherever it had happened.

@@hebneh Well of course, when they are looking for tax money.

My first vehicle was a '71 chevy truck with lap belts and a thin padded dash. That's what passed for safety standards then. everything else was metal and the gas tank was behind the seat lol.

@@anthonyrowland9072 Oh yeah, I remember those trucks. 👍

I have a 72 Corvette with lap belts and the same kind of deadly steering wheel. I drive it as if I were on a motorcycle.

@@1972Ray 😂😂

But they were nice new cars then.

It would make you sick to see the numbers that were trashed that looked perfectly fine. I would figure, if any were sitting around in 42-45 they were scrapped, or it seems like those cars would have been, recycled for the war effort.

@@kramnull8962 Scrap metal drives were a big thing during the war, and most non-running vehicles fell to that fate. Cars which seriously broke down were scrapped if parts couldn't be found to fix them as no new parts were being made. With gas rationing, even perfectly good cars that weren't efficient got scrapped. The main reason so many "Model T's" exist now is that they sipped gas compared to later cars, could run on many burnable liquids other than gas, and could be patched together without necessarily needing specific new parts by the average owner or local handyman' thus surviving where many "better" cars did not.

I was waiting for a real Homer Simpson to appear in a picture listening to that smooth track.

Hey, @ManBoo55 - Thanks for your kind words, I'm glad you liked the video. Some of the commenters are hating on the music, but I agree with you - I think it fits well with the video.

Then and now, equivalent to a head on.

cars back then are less safer though without the crumple zone of newer cars all the impact is on you and considering that these cars are built like tanks, im sure to achieve the same kinda damages as new average car crashes would have taken a lot of speed to do so

When I was a kid back in the early '60s my buddies and I would race to the local towing yard whenever they hauled in a new wreck, always hoping to see some blood, tissue or other evidence left behind. I remember a '63 split window corvette which had hit a pole sideways at over 100 mph and literally cut in half. They used plastic in the windshields back then and we saw one where you could make out the image of a guy's face in the plastic sheet when he went face-first into the windshield. We were morbid little squirts.

What size were the shoes? Can you get your hands on them still?

driving, n roads aren't any safer today. same amount of fatalities n crashes today, as there was back then, even with "safer" cars. no changes. remains constant.

The colorization of these vids are horrendous

nonsense , in a modern car , you have a greater chance of walking away from a crash at those speeds . Older cars were death traps . No fault of their own though , it just wasn't their time and safety wasn't much of a concern back then.

agree. in a modern "safe" car, n get nailed by a supersize truck, and/ or oversize suv - sav - suburban assault vehicle, it's over, no matter how "safe" it is.

it sure can, i crashed a BMW E39 in late 1998, was with 65 mph. Not a scratch.

E39 is not an average car, though. Try that same wreck in some kid's ten year old mazda3...

@@onlythefarmer current kids can buy them for cheap.

Pretty sure it is. A lot of these crashes look… impossible.

Very similar type of accident happened to a close family friends father and it's very sadm

And they are ALL Americans ....

I love Tuckers, and the entire Tucker story, but one of the most crazy ideas ever was that they built them with a "hole" for the front passenger to pounce into just before an inevitable crash. If the passenger was lucky enough to figure that out and act on it in time, then they'd just be squished or broken up under there anyway. I can't believe they thought that was a good idea. It would probably have worked well in impacts under 1.5 mph, lol.

@@smartysmarty1714 I remember reading magazine articles and road tests by Tom McCahill back in the 59s-60s and he was always talking about "diving for the basement" in the event of a crash or roll-over. The idea was that you would jump down on the floor and tuck yourself up under the dashboard where you'd be safe. Seatbelts were a safety hazard because they would prevent you from doing that. I recall that he once rolled a Renault while road testing it and attributed his survival to that trick. I tend to think that he was just thrown into that area because as usual he wasn't wearing the seat belt in the car. But, hey, feel free to believe whatever silly nonsense you want to believe. I guess maybe if you had the reflexes and reaction time of a mongoose it might work? He also had a fetish about parking brake levers being accessible to the passengers, and would refuse to ride in any car where it wasn't. Apparently drivers dying behind the wheel while driving was a big problem back then and the idea was that the passenger could use the parking brake to stop the car.

@@barryervin8536 I followed Uncle Tom in Mechanix Illustrated all through the '50s and into the '60s. Love him or hate him, he was a character! And thousands loved him. I always read him first of all when the magazine arrived. I recall one car which had no drain in the trunk, which was unacceptable to Uncle Tom. What if your jug of ice tea turned over in the trunk and emptied? So he pulled out a .45, shot a hole in the trunk floor and stuck a cork in it. Problem solved! Also he liked to test the trunk capacity on every car by having his large assistant lie in it, or he would get in himself, and he was no lightweight, either. They'd better fit, too, or the car was woefully lacking in the storage category. He hated wrap-around windshields as a frivolous expense, or even dangerous. The list goes on and on. Thanks for reviving long-forgotten memories.

@@MrTruckerf Oh, he was a charismatic folk hero for sure, but when it came down to being an "expert" in anything he was a legend in his own mind. I was about 10-12 years old when reading his stories and I could tell that he was a stranger to logic and physics.

@@barryervin8536 It was mostly hype and BS, but it was entertaining hype and BS.

I Bet that Reeeally ssmtwtF ,n HURT,"john"@?¿

@@ronnymatthews4133 - 🙄

Hopefully he still had one good testicle to rely on.

Yeah right weirdo, his ONE testicle come on now

I have 66 GT and the only safety feature is a thin pad at the top of the dash. 77 B's would have collapsible steering columns and the famous rubber bumpers😂

​@@paulwayman4579I do feel a bit safer in general with the '77. It has three-point harnesses, headrests and the fully-padded dash along with the raised ride height and rubber bumpers. The '64 has a lap belt and literally nothing else.

@@ericcriteser4001 Well, the MG B was engineered to withstand a 30mph head on crash which was really something for its time, but it is a very outdated minimum nowadays...

A 1977 MGB?? We had one. It needed hourly maintenance. Worst piece of crap ever.

I drive a 1937 Plymouth and agree with you. It's your job to keep your distance and be ever watchful. BTW I have NO seatbelts!

maybe they watch Suzy The Blue Coupe?

Remember laying on the ledge in the rear window in the 60's and 70's cars?

@@johnstudd4245 Definitely! haha

Darwin at work. Good drivers durvived, bad ones didn't

Ah, yes, steel dashboards. The joke was that after an accident you could just hose them off and they’d be good as new!

A/C wasn't a thing for us until we got a '70 Pontiac Catalina. I remember cruising in our '54 Chevy with 3-on-the-tree on a hot summer day with the windows down and us kids halfway out the windows.

Nice fan fiction. Wanna tell us more?

Dad had a 70 Dodge charger I was flying out onto the pavement twice😅

​@@Calc_Ulatoryou obviously know Jack about automotive history 🤡

I saw in an interview with Burt Ward (Robin from the original Batman series) stating that he'd nearly been ejected while filming the opening scene where the Batmobile sped out of the bat cave. He was barely able to hold on. Just goes to show that even the venerable Batmobile was not immune to such malfunctions back in those days.

Nowadays, I think most light poles are designed to be break-away, but I bet those rural telephone poles are still pretty solid!

Metal poles are breakaway, any wooden ones are still buried six feet into the ground.

No, not even close. Deaths per passenger distance are much lower than they used to be.

Most 1970 model year cars have comparable crash safety to 1969 model years.

I've driven some old trucks without power steering, but never without power brakes. I can't imagine dealing with the scenarios you mentioned - parallel parking or evasive driving without both of those modern features.

According to U.S. Federal highway statistics, you were twice as likely to die in an automobile accident in 1946 than in one today.

There's a saying here in Mexico that translates into something like "you can get used to pretty much anything except no to eat". I say it because I learned to drive about 26 years ago on a '67 Valiant with drum non-power brakes, stick shift, waist-only seat belts and manual steering and even though I've had several new cars through the years, I still have and frequently drive that car both in town and out on the highway too and it's really not that frightening at all. It all depends on how safely one drives. Never had a wreck and still not planning on having one.

@@danielestrada1850 Yes, you take care of it and it will take care of you. I own and drive a 65 Ford Thunderbird. That was the first year for power brakes on a Thunderbird. The 67 Valiant sold relatively well. It was good, basic transportation. The size of the car was what a lot of people wanted and you could buy a few options to make it even better.

Not near as deadly as when an idiot face-fing their phone, encounters another idiot face-fing theirs in a crosswalk…

I thought he looked like Earl Scruggs.

No. Exactly the bloody opposite. Rigid.

Don’t know where you get your information. The old cars had full thick metal frames and the bodies were thick sheet metal. I owned many of them, any if I would have had a head on with one or today’s cracker boxes, the cracker box would be destroyed. My 57 ford might have a bent bumper

@@steveperry3538 Your 57 Ford also could have hit Another Lead Sled, or a phone pole, a tree, or a bridge abutment. In ALL of those cases, the lack of three point belts, along with the lack of an airbag or crumple zone, would put you at Great Risk. And, Also...without Ziebart, (or, maybe even WITH) that thick metal would rust through sooner or later. Hot Dip Galvanizing was known in the Eighteenth Century, and the automakers should have Used it! Cars DO also have more aluminum and polymer components, these days. Barring wrecks, the body and chassis lasts longer. The drivetrains are usually more reliable as well. And, most models these days get significantly better gas mileage.

Yeah - that picture is a scary one, and shows all too clearly what would've happened.

Good, go buy a new car and shut up.

The ends are designed to crush to absorb the impact energy while the passenger compartment stays intact with the passengers restrained inside. Or at least, that's the idea, and it works pretty well in most accidents. The car might be destroyed but the occupants are safer. Cars can be replaced

@@barryervin8536 The problem now is that cars are not economically repairable after lower impact crashes which would have not badly damaged older cars. Many cars are written off after air-bag deployment because of replacement expense. The end effect of this is that it is becoming so expensive to own and insure a car that the average person can barely afford it. Nobody wants unsafe cars, but I'd rather have an older car which will last that is relatively safe if I drive carefully than a car which only drives me broke.

@@P_RO_ True, but no matter how carefully you drive you can always be hit by another driver who's playing with their phone or just not paying attention or just a bad driver. Should that happen I'd rather have my car written off than have my body written off.

I saw Signal 30, in fact all the guys were looking forward to it. Afterwards YUK!

Wow sounds like he made errily prophetic remark in reverse about his own demise ! He should have seen the video of the 1959 Chevy vs 2009 Chevy Malibu, it's here on RU-vid. Same midsize Chevys 50 years apart. They crash test them, frontal partial offset @ 45 mph (60?) Anyhow, crash test dummy shows both front occupants killed in 1959 Chevy, vs both survive with light to moderate injuries in 2009 Chevy ! There's 20 ways newer cars are safer. Your neighbor, RIP, had missed that reality.

@psalm2forliberty577 Yeah he was a cool guy but to be honest that car had some really questionable modifications like big rims and from what I was told about 700 plus horsepower.

@@gmac8852 Right there ! The bigger wheels throws off the handling & 700hp, to hot for street use. Back in the day, I'd race my Datsun 510 at Stadium parking lot "autocross" racing (Cones & Clock). We'd bump the HP up from stock 95 HP to about 180 HP, and man that was double & you had to exercise extreme caution to not crash. But 700 HP ? Unless modern AWD + Traction Control - absent that, death wish on wheels.

On top of lack of safety features the outlander is also a good sized SUV so even in a modern impala your chances wouldn't be that good

Yeah got me to click, I have a 59 lesabre 2dr hardtop that I 've owned for over 20 years, love that car, 1 of the coolest looking cars ever built imo

see how it didn't fold in half like that one crash test video putting a 59 bel air against a modern looks like every other car.

@@krazi77 I think they just unbolted everything on the bel air where it could fall apart when it got hit to be honest

I've had 2 old pick-up trucks which had the gas tank directly behind the seat inside the cab. Neither had seat belts and in a hard crash from the side you WERE better off getting ejected unless burning to death is your 'thang'. But generally yeah. Seat belts do ~75% of the safety, shoulder belts do another ~10%, padding/headrests do ~5%, and airbags do ~10%. Note that as a passenger I've survived a few severe crashes and attribute my survival to the seat belts and a bit of luck.

@@P_RO_ My 1966 Ford has a fuel tank like that, from my understanding the frame mounted tanks on the outside of the frame are much more prone to leaking in a crash than the ones in the cab. Especially the Chevy trucks.

As a builder for 46 years, I can say the same applies to houses. Those old Victorian money pits were garbage from day one, all of them. They may have nicer woodwork, but it ends there. The woodwork is the lipstick on the pig. I've worked on so many of them over the years, that I've seen it all. I wouldn't take one for free...

​@@smartysmarty1714most of the older house's were built by the owner, nothing done on standard! One stud maybe 10 inches away from the other maybe two feet apart!

And the one good thing about the older cars was when they broke down at least you could fix them, and not have to sell a vital organ to have it fixed by a shop!

Rubbish. Nothing today is made to last and/or made to be fixed. Everything is cheap and nasty. Cars might be an exception as they’re far safer now.

As long as your grill doesn't become the grill.