Daedalus

I don't think so. Data through 2006. But that's beside my point, which was merely that the size to mass correlation in cars has changed drastically in the past 60 years. I have 3 modern cars that weigh in around 4000 lbs each, but they're much smaller than the old cars I saw in the museum. A quick search indicates that the Bel Air has less than a 200 lb advantage over the Malibu in the video, despite carrying a larger footprint and appearing "heftier".

Jeffbx

It's an interesting video - probably somewhat unfair since (like Mike pointed out) all of the rust & dust that came flying out of that car upon impact. I wonder how different it would be with a fresh new one that just rolled off the assembly line.

But there's no doubt that cars today are way WAY safer than they were 50 years ago. There is, however also way more mass per sq.in. in modern cars because of all of the safety & convenience items. Strip out the air conditioner, all of the airbags, power brakes, tire pressure monitors, power window motors, all (but one!) of the speakers, traction control, ABS, stability control, power seats, etc etc. and you'd have a much lighter car.

(Also much more fuel efficient one, btw)

guiseppewv

Thanks for the link! Very interesting. I fully expect 2007, 2008, and 2009 to be trending downwards again once the data is released.

I wonder if they selected the Bel Air b/c it was way below the average weight for a 1959 car?

Jeffbx

More likey because it had pretty poor crash performance (even for 1950's standards) & they had a point to prove.