I frequently hear from various wingers--I heard it from my neighbor the other day--that if the government would not have mandated smaller, lighter cars, cars would be cheaper, the industry would prosper, and we'd all be better off.
We've all heard people say it, and maybe we even believe it: that older, heavier vehicles, made of real steel instead of plastic, are more crash-worthy than today's lighter, smaller autos. We're told that Grandpa's old Chevy would survive a hard crash with little or no damage, and protect it's occupants just as well or better than newfangled small cars with their thin sheet metal and plastic bumpers.
Well, guess what? It just ain't so!
A recent crash test done by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety pitted a 1959 Chevy Bel Air against a 2009 Chevy Malibu, literally head to head. The video below shows the results, and it's not pretty. This is called an offset frontal collision:
Notice how the door is ripped off the Bel Air, as the side of the car disintegrates. Especially hair-raising is the view from the backseat of the Bel Air, showing how the driver's compartment is destroyed. Compare that with the new Malibu, in which the driver's area remains relatively intact, with the airbag holding the test dummy firmly in place. From the NYT car blog:
"The Bel Air collapsed," said David Zuby, the senior vice president for the institute’s vehicle research center in Virginia. "The area in which the driver was sitting collapsed completely around him."
The test was to mark the 50th anniversary of the I.I.H.S., a group funded by the insurance industry. The idea was to show how much automotive safety has progressed in five decades.
I was surprised not only by the Malibu's crash-worthiness, which is impressive, but by the massive damage to the boat-like old Chevy. Sophisticated engineering such as crush zones, airbags, and high-strength steel give modern vehicles a huge advantage. This is one reason why highway deaths have dropped in recent years. People now walk away from accidents that would have killed them fifty years ago.
Government safety requirements are what has driven these advances, not market demand.
"This car had no seat belts or air bags. Dummy movement wasn’t well controlled, and there was far too much upward and rearward movement of the steering wheel. The dummy’s head struck the steering wheel rim and hub and then the roof and unpadded metal instrument panel to the left of the steering wheel.
"During rebound, the dummy’s head remained in contact with the roof and slid rearward and somewhat inward. The windshield was completely dislodged from the car and the driver door opened during the crash, both presenting a risk of ejection. In addition, the front bench seat was torn away from the floor on the driver side."
The I.I.H.S. has crash-tested hundreds of vehicles, and Mr. Zuby said he doesn’t know of any that performed worse than the Bel Air.
Don't believe anyone who claims safety requirements are nothing but a burden on industry. Lives are saved every day because of government regulations, which Republicans claim only stifle innovation and impose unnecessary costs on consumers.
Once again, facts are proven to have a liberal bias.