Video: Director’s cut - 2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs 1959 Bel Air crash test

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) commemorated its 50th anniversary and impact on automotive safety with car-nage. Highlighting the progress made in occupant production over the past five decades, IIHS faced off a 2009 Chevrolet Malibu against a 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air in a frontal offset crash test. While this battle of the ages has made the YouTube rounds, and even appeared in the Consumer Reports Cars blog, we are revisiting the classic versus modern clash in a special “director’s cut.”
 
This video expands on the original footage with more angles, and we added a voice-over commentary highlighting the performance of the sedans.
 
If this whets your appetite for crumpled sheetmetal, view more than 300 crash tests performed by the IIHS in our crash test video player. To aid with vehicle research, you’ll also find crash tests within our model overview pages, within the Photos/Videos tab.

Learn more about the IIHS 50th anniversary.

—Jeff Bartlett

Comments

[Robert]

That's incredibly scary. The driver in the Bel Air would be, well, dead. The entire cabin seems to have caved in. The driver of the Malibu seems very well protected by comparison.

[John Publik]

Actually they picked a very bad representation of 1959 technology by using a 59 Belair which has an X style frame used only for a few years and was proven to be a bad design in the 60's. Now I would like to see the same test performed with a 59 Cadillac or 59 Imperial both of which have massive frames not of the X style. I think the outcome would be much different. Interesting test though and it does demonstrate the integrity of the 2009 chevy.

[David Brodbeck]

I think you're going to see similar results with any car that has a non-collapsible steering column. Look at the way the '59's steering wheel comes up and clocks the dummy in the head.

[marc]

It' looks like there is no engine or transmission in the Bel Air. If this is correct it is an unfare test. The crumple zone and momentum would be very different

[AG Systems]

As I rebuild these old cars and have done so for fifty years, and attend many car shows where I mostly concentrate on the owner built cars, I find most old style frames have been reinforced, or replaced, and the steering columns have been replaced with modern style crash resistant columns. Then there is the factor of the ever present rust in those cars, particularly in the window columns, which I doubt has been repaired in this car. There is undoubtedly rust in the windshield column and other structural components of thid particular '59. Since most 50 year old cars on the road today are owned and driven by enthusiasts, in my experience they have been modified to be stronger and to handle better than the originals. I feel that test was strongly manipulated to favor the '09 car and make it look better than it really is. There's no doubt that there have been improvements, but let's see that same '09 car in 2059, after 50 years of use/abuse, salty winter roads, and no mods or updates, in that same test? If that car is even around and running, which I would doubt. It also looks like there is no motor and trans in that '59, the results would be less dramatic had it been intact (motor and trans) and if there was no rust.

I'm currently working on a '55 Chevy Bel Air, the frame has been modified, strengthened, the suspension modified, moderized, the steering is a tilt style collapsible unit, and side crash bars were installed in the doors. The front glass is now the glue in style, just like that '09 car. I would bet my '55, and all the old classics that my buddies run, would hold up as well or better than that '09!

[Bruce Stevens]

If you look closley, you can see the air cleaner fly out of the engine compartment opon impact, soo i believe the engine/trans. we're installed in the 59, also the ft. of the car would be sitting MUCH higher if the 500lbs. of engine we're missing.
I own 2 1967 Gm cars & this video woke me up.I did not expect these results.

[Alan Paul]

A big congratulations and thankyou to the The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety for running these tests for the last 50 years and consequently saving the unknown number of lives they have by conducting the tests.

Well done Ladies and Gentlemen!!

[Paul Bunce]

I don't think a '59 Cadillac would have done much, if any, better. We had a '59 Olds and the '59-'60 GM cars were some of the biggest junks ever produced. Most Ford and GM products produced before the mid '70s would put the front bumper under the windshield if run into a solid object (brick wall) at no more than 20mph. Many Chrysler products produced after 1960 (unit bodies) would nearly destroy that brick wall, but would transmit the force of the crash to the passengers because the front ends were too strong and stiff.

Take your pick - either way you die. And if you thought those cars were bad, look at the crashworthyness of many of the foreign cars built then. A VW Beetle would fold up and split the gas tank all over your feet at under 15mph.