The Good Old Days? New Versus Classic Cars

When we get together with the older folks (we will be smart and not place an age on them), there often tends to be more than a wisp of nostalgia. They seem to recall with great sincerity the bittersweet feelings of days long ago.

At times yearning for the things and the situations they experienced in the days of their youth, their notion is that the good old days are behind us. And when it comes to building reliable machinery, well, we simply do not build them “like we used to.”

Automotive Accidents

Of course, in some ways, nothing could be further from the truth. While we have every right to get frustrated when an item fails, it is important to realize just how far we have come.

Such evidence is on clear display when one examines the recent results from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety tests of car safety. To get a sense of the improvements, the Institute filmed a head-on collision between a 1959 Chevy Bel Air and a 2009 Chevy Malibu.

The collision was an example of a “frontal offset” collision, driver to driver, at a speed of 40 m.p.h. Crash test dummies recorded the carnage that would have been wrought on each driver.

Of course, the 1959 Bel Air lacked seat belts and a neck restraint. In addition, the passenger cabin was unable to withstand the impact, crumpling inward.

The data revealed that a real driver in the Bel Air would have suffered severe injuries in the neck, chest, and both legs.

The Malibu, complete with air bag offered a dramatically different final appearance. In addition, the crash test dummy escaped unscathed.

“It was night and day, the difference in occupant protection,” stated Institute president Adrian Lund. “What this test shows is that automakers don’t build cars like they used to. They build them better.”

Not So Fast

When it comes to safety, it seems that it is a good thing that they do not build them like they used to. But the same agency gives cars much lower marks (pdf) on the cost of repair after they experience a collision.

In fact, when it comes to the 2009 Chevy Malibu, the IIHS ranks the vehicle very poorly when it comes to the assessment of how well bumpers resist damage in everyday fender-benders. Using four different types of collisions, front and rear full-width impacts at 6 mph and front and rear corner impacts at 3 mph, cars are given a rating of acceptable to poor.

For those interested, the Mazda 6, Ford Focus, Scion xB, and Smart Fortwo obtained vehicle ratings of acceptable. The average repair costs for the Mazda 6 were a shade less than $900 after the 4 tests at 3 and 6 mph.

On the flip side, the Malibu’s rear test resulted in almost $3,500 in damage, the highest among the midsize cars evaluated. Such a shocking repair bill came as a result of a 6 mph strike in the rear, the typical speed of a common parking mishap such as backing into another vehicle.

As for the front, avoid the Ford Fusion. In the full front test, the Fusion had $2,529 in damage, topping even that of the Malibu ($2,092).

Other ratings were marginal for the Mitsubishi Galant and Toyota Camry and poor for Chrysler Sebring, Nissan Altima, Pontiac G6, Saturn AURA, Subaru Legacy, Volkswagen Jetta, Volkswagen Passat, and Volvo S40 earn poor ratings (the Volvo S40’s poor rating comes more from the high prices on parts and labor).

So when it comes to this question of nostalgia and the question of the good old days, well, it seems that they were.

And they weren’t.