Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
CSpec

GM Crash Test Video from 1968

30 posts in this topic

With all those opening doors and flopping bodies, all it needs is the "Yakkety Sax" music in the background (music used in Benny Hill fast-motion hilarity).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how most of the cars were older than '68 and from Chrysler and Ford rather than GM.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But I thought that because they were old, RWD, BOF, and weighed 5 tons that they were safer than everything made today? :P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW, That made me crack up laughing with all the flaying dummies falling out of the auto's. yea I know it is not funny, but those cars sure sucked for protecting the people inside.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, I couldn't help but laugh at the footage either.

Maybe "Let the bodies hit the floor" should play during the clip. :P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But I thought that because they were old, RWD, BOF, and weighed 5 tons that they were safer than everything made today? :P

Actually, most of those cars were not BOF.

They were unibody.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, most of those cars were not BOF.

They were unibody.

I don't think it would t make a difference either way, since regardless of how they were built, I'm willing to bet money they didn't do a good job absorbing the energy and controlling passenger movement.

Of course they did do a good job at keeping themselves intact. :lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think it would t make a difference either way, since regardless of how they were built, I'm willing to bet money they didn't do a good job absorbing the energy and controlling passenger movement.

Of course they do do a good job at keeping themselves intact. :lol:

Well, they weren't even too good at that - those early unibodies were pretty weak structurally. When the floorboards would rot out, some literally folded in half.

But we are talking about cars built when seatbelts were an option, and steel dashboards were the norm.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being 43 years old and actually having spent time in Junkyards when I was a kid and wrecked examples of these cars were everywhere...

Yes, even though they may suck in other ways...cars of the era were not that safe.

Chris

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WTF, were the doors designed to open and throw passengers out onto the street during a collision?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How do we know for sure this is a GM research video? I see no GM cars atall anywhere. Wouldn't it behoove them to use their own stuff for relevancy to their mission?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How do we know for sure this is a GM research video? I see no GM cars atall anywhere. Wouldn't it behoove them to use their own stuff for relevancy to their mission?

yeah, isn't this more likely to be a Chrysler vid?

but I know that GM participated in the development of early crash test dummies....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah, isn't this more likely to be a Chrysler vid?

but I know that GM participated in the development of early crash test dummies....

I saw one Pontiac, the rest were Chryco and Ford.

But maybe that was part of the plan, to make the competition look bad?

Also all of the cars are pre '68, some of them quite a bit earlier.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've heard GM researchers were credited with inventing crash test dummies... can anyone confirm or deny? Also, if this was made in 1968... why use obsolete cars? It would seem to me the research would not be current, sort of a waste, really, NOT to have the newest cars in the tests. Edited by ocnblu
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seemed to be videos of '60 Plymouths, '64 Plymouths, and '67 Fords..didn't notice '68 GM products.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did it occur to anyone that cutting 90% of the roof and removing all 4 doors might have played a BIT of a part in how the cars crumpled and how easily the doors popped open on those with doors ???

We also don't know the speeds- the one toward the end looks like that Ford is doing 80 when it rear end the other & the flames pour out. Duh.

This is one of the most loaded 'crash test' vids I've seen- not sure at all of the purpose.

And as Camino said- the MoPars were all unibody- Except for Imperial, ChryCo went Unibody for '60.

Chrysler used to build some beefy frames, but the Unibody, as evidenced by the production cars-- seemingly was moved to in order to save steel costs... :wink:

Edited by balthazar
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did it occur to anyone that cutting 90% of the roof and removing all 4 doors might have played a BIT of a part in how the cars crumpled and how easily the doors popped open on those with doors ???

We also don't know the speeds- the one toward the end looks like that Ford is doing 80 when it rear end the other & the flames pour out. Duh.

This is one of the most loaded 'crash test' vids I've seen- not sure at all of the purpose.

And as Camino said- the MoPars were all unibody- Except for Imperial, ChryCo went Unibody for '60.

Chrysler used to build some beefy frames, but the Unibody, as evidenced by the production cars-- seemingly was moved to in order to save steel costs... :wink:

I was wondering about the roof and door thing too - then it occured to me that a film camera of the time was as big as a Hemi V8!

They couldn't have taken many of those shots if the roof and doors were in their proper places.

I also remember that some of the Chryco cars of that era actually would bend due to the power of the monster hemis - early unibodies had some definite drawbacks.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if this is footage of the development of the dummies themselves and not actual testing of the cars? You don't really need the newest car available to test the dummy, just something cheap you don't mind cutting up and crashing. That might explain the date and model discrepancy..... also, some of the cars have the initials UCLA stenciled on the side.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What if this is footage of the development of the dummies themselves and not actual testing of the cars? ....

Now THIS makes sense. Structurally compromising cars & then attempting to judge crash-worthiness is something nutty enough to have come from NBC news. :wink:

>>"I also remember that some of the Chryco cars of that era actually would bend due to the power of the monster hemis - early unibodies had some definite drawbacks."<<

This would have to be the '64 426s - the 'early' Hemi's ended after the '58MY.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Who's Chatting

    There are no users currently in the chat room