91 zeee

Just curious....anyone ever found a crash test video for our 3rd gens? I can find 4th and 5th gen videos (and other cars all they way back to the 50's), but I could not find any 3rd gens. Maybe someone else out there can locate one...it'd be interesting to see it.

//<86TA>\\

iTrader: (14)

i havent seen one, but from the pics i have seen over the years of totally wrecked 3rd gens that people walked away from, i feel pretty safe in mine.

Birdstheword

thy didnt make videos back then .

xcalibur

Not only are they safe, they are the most likely drive-aways from a minor front-end collision, speaking from experiance. The radiator's well protected, being set back far from the bumper.

Pontiac_Pete

I confirm this!

lonestar7

iTrader: (1)

How about this one?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgUxFb3lGUY

luvofjah

iTrader: (2)

& if I'm correct, that guy lived

Raf

89rs454

Yeah he did, i seen him on TV talking about it, I think it was on national geographic the guy looked Gothic and suicidal.

Guy In A 90 RS

That kid was VERY lucky- he hit bridge support on the passenger side. . .It'd be adios if he hit on his side or head-on.

backgammon7

my camaro, when it was my aunts, came $300 from being totaled when she rear ended someone seventeen years ago. she drove it home.

camarosrock1989

iTrader: (1)

That video was really crazy, like stuff you would see in a movie that isn't real. But it was. The kid is so lucky to be alive. Someone was watching over him forsure. I bet he believes in angels now

Third Gen Dave

i found two youtube videos of crash tests for the third gens
THE FIRST IS A CRASH TEST FOR AN '82 Camaro: THE SECOND IS FOR A '90 FIREBIRD:

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

Yeah, there are a quite a few out there, surprising more aren't on youtube.

89CamaroAndrew

the camaro crash test doesnt look to safe lol

91 zeee

wow...very cool. thanks for posting them.

I actaully thought the cars held up very well. Looked like the passenger compartment stayed completley intact just like they are supposed to.

I wonder why at the end of the last video they had the car turned upside down?

FirebirdUSX

abit of necro this thread but I found a real life crash test ...in Russia


dont know the speed but it did fine especially for a offset crash ...GM not doing that types of tests back in the 80.

okfoz

Not sure if GM did not do them of the NHTSA was not doing them... GM was even doing crash tests back in the 1960's when they were testing seatbelts... My dad was an engineer for Buick and he watched a crash test and when he noticed how much better off you would be with seatbelts, he had them special ordered on his new 1963 Riviera..

Factoids that will drive you crazy.
1) Glove boxes were changed in the 1950's or 1960's when someone observed that in a crash if a glove box was open it would cut off a child's head in a front end crash. (apparently it happened)

2) The 3 point seatbelt was developed by Volvo, then shared with the entire industry at no charge.

3) The Airbag was put into use in 1973 as an option on a Chevrolet Caprice.

4) When GM, Ford & Chrysler were mandated by the federal govt to make cars more eco-friendly in the 1970's, they were forbidden by the government to share notes. In turn Toyota outright stole the design for the catalytic convertor from GM.

I looked at a 1976 Cadillac Eldorado Convertible with a factory Airbag AND port fuel injection... talk about a rare car...

John

FirebirdUSX

Still they never did offset crash tests like IIHS has today.The car held pretty well for that type of crash ,it hit both the car and the fence and the passenger area seems fine.

91 zeee

Very cool facts. I was at the GM Nationals a few years back and GM had a concept car (from the late 50's or so...I can't remember the exact year) there. It had a glass bubble top and a black and white TV screen on the dash. We couldn't figure the TV screen out...turns out it was a back up camera. It was a Buick I think. The sign said GM was not marketing it because it was ahead of its time.

okfoz

Was the car Red & White? Red Interior, It is the Buick Centurion concept car... It is often parked at Sloan Museum about 1/2 mile from where I sit right now.

It

John

DynoDave43

iTrader: (11)

Beautiful! I've never been through that museum. I may have to drive over and check it out sometime.

okfoz

Most of it is Flint History... Sometimes they put the cars on display, it comes and goes... There is a Buick Gallery Annex that is not attached but about 1/8 mile from the main Sloan Museum... Last time I was in there they had a genuine GNX and some other neat Buick cars...

http://sloanlongway.org/sloan-museum...ive-collection

not sure what is on display but this is a short list of over 100 cars they have.

Serious thread hijack I have done...

John

91 zeee

yes...exactly. I just googled it and you are right. It was very cool to see it in person and the technology and foresight they had.

91 zeee

on that note...... at the same show GM also brought either Buick GNX #1 or Buick Grand National #1 (I can't remember which, but it had no miles on it...very cool.)

Don't worry about the thread hijack...I'm the one that started the thread...if your ok with it, so am I

okfoz

Did you know that it is still illegal in the US to have a rear view camera as your rear view mirror. You can have backup cameras, but not a video display as your rear view mirror.

Also it is illegal in the US to have seats that are too light (yes they weigh them) and the seats have to be over a particular weight... Thus why cars in the US do not have carbon fiber seats from the factory like you can get in Europe.

oldtimer

Both cars did well, with the passenger compartments holding up well. The Camaro shows more crush than the Firebird, but the Camaro may have been crashed at a higher speed. The Firebird was a 30mph hit, but the Camaro speed is not shown, that I could determine. If you look at the Camaro vid, you can clearly see more deformation of the structure, as even the bellhousing on the trans collapses, and the rear end housing is deformed by the powertrain being driven rearward. Lots of those tests were at 35mph, and that would explain the differing amounts of damage on more or less the same car.

FirebirdUSX

yes but its cool to compare them with todays cars which have to pass the small overlap crash test in US (in europe ncap is 20 years behind US and they dont do that test) .Also you can see in those tests that the floor didnt caved in .Ive seen few people on these forums who were saying that in crashes the first thing that fails in these cars is the floor which leads to leg injuries.These cars have lots of leg room in front and the frame goes right under the floor so in case if a offset crash it should hold pretty good.

there is something that can make people say these cars are not safe and thats the pics from internent.Most people crash these cars at speeds that not even the safest car on the planet would resist.

Thirdgen89GTA

iTrader: (5)

The floor may not have caved, however the firewall and B-pillars certainly did. Which is still an intrusion into your space. I guarantee there were significant leg injuries.

Fact is, much as I love my car. Its certainly nowhere near as safe as a modern day car is in a collision.

The Safest thirdgen is a fully caged thirdgen and you wearing all appropriate safety equipment like helmet and such. The cage will keep the cabin in much better shape while the front or rear of the car crumples like a tin can.

FirebirdUSX

But the floor was intact.I never been in a accident where the car is totaled like that to know how it works but in those vids and other pics around the internet the foot area remains intact.

Most new cars have that "cage" inside the structure through the A pillars around the door /roof and so on.Pretty sure you can hide the cage inside the structure in these cars and make them equally safe as newer cars without the ugly maze of tubes inside...it may cost a fortune but it can be done.

okfoz

Have you ever seen the video of the 70mph barrier crash with the Smart car? Interestingly enough the cage did not collapse in on the passenger compartment as much as you would think. BUT the occupants would still bel dead, not because of the car crushing them but the sudden acceleration of 70-0.

Cars are designed to crush, they learned after the 1960's with the full frame cars that when they design cars to slow down rather than instantly stop it was better for the passengers.

Thirdgen89GTA

iTrader: (5)

The cabin DID deform. Which means the firewall moved towards your feet, the trans tunnel was pushed outwards due to the engine block, and the dash went towards the passenger and down. The B-pillars moved towards the occupants and the doors bowed outwards

The floor may not have come UP at your feet, but it certainly bent where the firewall met the floor and folded.

Thirdgens are not safe cars by even 20 year old standards. The chassis design is almost 35 years old at this point.

That is also a full frontal impact which is probably one of the least common impacts you ever see. Most impacts are offset impacts, in which case the cabin will fold.

The most comment full front impact you see will likely be against another cars rear end, and with our low noses we tend to dive under the cars which transfers most of the energy to the upper frame of the engine bay instead of the front sub-frames.

They are also weak against side impacts as well.

Thats what I meant with my Caged thirdgen comment. A full cage to keep the cabin from deforming, while the rest of the car crumples like a tin can and absorbs the energy of the crash.

The smart car's main problem is there really isn't any crumple zone to it, its so small that the frame can't absorb much energy to decrease the deceleration forces. Its designed well for what it is in an impact, but it really has limited options.

okfoz

I was agreeing with you

FirebirdUSX

yea but at that speed you'd die even in a tank .If you search Richard Hammond's interview(the guy from Top Gear) after his 300mph crash he said after the crash he was very alive asking to be left alone and after a hour or so he enter in coma due to brain injuries .After a certain speed your internal organs will hit your rib cage and your brain will hit your skull ....thats why is not good to crash at Autobahn speeds.If you search Autobahn wrecks you will see people dying in the safest cars on the planet.

In our case /example was at the 35 mph speeds and i said these cars are very safe at these speeds.At over 70mph it wouldnt matter you are in a ball of wrecked metal .Like i said i was never been in a horrible wreck like that so I dont know how you can hurt your legs without much deformation in the foot area.

FireForm

T-boned at 55mph. 4 occupants,. All 4 walked away with only bumps and bruises!!

dmccain

iTrader: (2)

Ive had three friends I can think of right off who died in thirdgens and another couple disabled but they were absolutely driving dangerously.

FireForm

Wow! That is awful. I guess though if you drive dangerously, fearlessly it could happen in anything. I'm sorry about your friends. Sad. I can say my son is a good driver. I do remember when I had my 89 Camaro it was hard not to speed and be confident. You have to respect a vehicle in more ways than 1.