A few things: Those were 5 MPH bumpers in the 70s allegedly to control costs of parking lot accidents. Later found to cause a higher cost in repairs, not lower. Well documented in the magazines of the day. There was no 15 MPH crash standard.
The Pinto, statistically, was no more prone to exploding in rear end collisions than Vegas, Dodge Colts, Gremlins or other sub compact cars of the period. Also well documented. And entered into evidence in some of the Pinto trials.
The 09 Malibu/59 Impala crash "test" was sheer show business. One can look at that and say, "Well, DUH !"Funny that Impala went 50 years without ever getting into an accident of that sort and millions of other cars drove billions of miles with their passengers unbelted, airbagged, ABSed etc etc etc. An entire generation was raised in cars just such as that 59 Impala and the public did survive.
But that's not the point: we can't compare our standards today with those of 50 years ago because an 09 Malibu is not the same thing as a 59 Impala. The world has changed.
Why didn't they crash a 59 Impala into a 1909 model ? Well the result would be obvious. That would be stupid we already know the result. Yes. Like we did before these fools did the carnival stunt with the Chevrolets.
Fatalities were going down every year from the 1920s on, cars were evolving on the safety front for decades, because of improvements to tires, brakes, construction, etc. The cars of the 60s were considered light years away from products even 25 years prior. It is taking them out of the context of their time and place in automotive history and blasting them as "death traps" today. That's what makes the comparisons dubious. Not apples and oranges.
They were the best that was available in their time [notwithstanding the European makes, but 8-10% of the market in 1959 was not significant enough to prompt manufacturers to change their designs because of consumer demands.]
I have never felt unsafe in my 63 Valiant. I have seat belts in it and know the limitations of it's non power [and slow] steering and it's drum brakes. It takes a concious effort to engage in the driving of it. I also know it wouldn't do well in an accident with a later model car. It's a hardtop and structurally as willowy as a convertible. It wasn't built with door guard beams, crush zones, air bags or padded surfaces.
Given the AAA stat that claims that nearly 60% of driving fatalities can be attributed to the driver and passengers being too stupid to put their seat belts on, it also makes clear that even the most "idiot proof" of modern vehicles can't protect the ignorant.
And also: please, lets call stop calling it distracted driving when someone is texting talking or eating while trying to drive. Driving IS multitasking. Being "distracted" is a sneeze or looking in your mirror at the wrong time. Preoccupied is engaging in another activity totally unrelated to the piloting of a motor vehicle.
I am not suggesting we go back to the beltless days of the 50s and sixties and single belted bias ply tires, but would like to suggest that it's still the "nut behind the wheel" that will never engineered out of the passive safety question.
For instance: I went from my Valiant to an 84 Citation, then an 86 Olds Calais which had all the safety equipment available at the time. Then I went to a new 99 Cavalier [with poor crash tests in the lab I later found out] with ABS, air bags, traction control, disc brakes, power steering etc. By what factor was I "safer" than in the X and N Body products ?By what percentage ?
It was totalled in a rear end accident where I was in a left hand turn lane, at a red arrow fully stopped when some fool in a BMW rear ended me.
Replacement was an 05 Saturn ION without ABS and traction control mediocre side crash ratings and 5 star front. How much less safe am I now ? NHTSA changed it's testing rules last year. Now how much "less safe am I simply because they changed their testing parameters? By a factor of what ? Am I less "safe" in the ION than I was in the Cavalier ? Or more safe ?
What if I travel outside the weight class under which these crash tests are conducted ? Ot in inclement weather with bigger and smaller cars on the road and an ever changing split second by split second combination of speed, weather, road surfaces, mix of vehicles in the traffic and x factor by x factor by x factor ?
Point being: life is a crap shoot and one cannot live it playing "what if" all the time.
I do know that my life would be less full, provide less enjoyment and be far less interesting without being able to own and drive my 63 Valiant. It's worth the risk to me.
It's been worth it to make room in my budget to keep and maintain it for the past 30 years. It provides me with pleasure and happiness and great memories everytime I drive it.
And it's never been involved in a side show stunt like the IIHS performed with that 59 Impala. The majority of cars of that era weren't and never were.
Just my 2c. Life is way to short to stand on the sidelines and wring your hands worrying about something that may or may not happen. Sorry to have gone on like that but you can't protect yourself from every unfortunate thing that might happen and trying to do anything but make your best call short of confining yourself to a padded cell is all you can really do.
Best of the holidays to everyone.
