They don't build them like they used to

[predfan2001]

Here's a couple of pics of an auto accident that occured here in my town. A classic 1959 Corvette hit a Jeep Wrangler head on. The driver of the Jeep had her seat belt on and walked away with no injuries. The Corvette had no seat belts and the driver received major trauma to his lower body. He lived but is in pretty bad shape I hear. The pics speak for themselves:

[piratedzeus]

No seatbelts = DEATH

[Pugwash]

Why would anyone not wear a seat belt?

[gioarmani]

Why would anyone not wear a seat belt?

There were no seat-belts in a '59.

I'm not sure about German/UK automobiles, but my father was an avid collector of 60's classics & I believe American cars didn't start standard stocking seat belts until '65, and trucks until '68.

Plus, people love to tout the older cars as being "tanks"; thicker steel, stronger body, etc. Which is true; but that's not want you want. You want the care to break apart easier; let the crumple zones & the unitized body absorb the inertia from the impact, not your body.

Edited July 21, 2007 by gioarmani

[ryyannon]

Damned shame for the 'vette

[Pugwash]

There were no seat-belts in a '59.

Then they shouldn't be driven. I wonder if that kind of behaviour affects your insurance premiums.

Actually, I've thought for a while that the best method for stopping car crashes would be to put an 18" spike in the centre of the steering wheel facing the driver. We'd see a lot less minor accidents that way.

ps. My actual view is a lot less extreme than that, but a lot less amusing. As a motorcyclist, I think not wearing a helmet is seriously stupid as is not wearing a seat belt, but if you love classic cars, then you should be able to sign a waiver (and an organ donor card) that shows you're making an informed choice.

[predfan2001]

There were no seat-belts in a '59.

I'm not sure about German/UK automobiles, but my father was an avid collector of 60's classics & I believe American cars didn't start standard stocking seat belts until '65, and trucks until '68.

Plus, people love to tout the older cars as being "tanks"; thicker steel, stronger body, etc. Which is true; but that's not want you want. You want the care to break apart easier; let the crumple zones & the unitized body absorb the inertia from the impact, not your body.

Yeah, you're right. Seat belts were optional then. I guess the real reason this hits home for me is we just sold my mom's 56 Vette. After seeing this I'd be scared to death to drive it.

[piratedzeus]

Many old Mercedes don't have seatbelts. They were available of course but optional...

[cornerstone]

Seatbelt or no seatbelt, I think the cause of the lower body trauma was smashing into an SUV in a classic car with next-to-no crumple zone, etc.

On the seatbelt front, I'm always incredulous that the contestants on The Amazing Race rarely seem to wear them

[OiRogers]

Look at the second photo again Pugs... the steering column in older cars IS essentially that 18" spike you mentioned... they didn't "break away" like the modern designs do.... essentially act as a spear with a wheel on em for the driver.

Also an issue with the older design... in a headon crash the engine doesn't drop to the pavement like in modern cars... it lands in the lap of the driver.... I'd be willing to bet that the engine and transmission caused a good portion of the drivers injuries in that wreck.... notice that the "drivers compartment" (area around the pedals mainly) collapsed.... another thing that modern cars have going for em... they break apart into many many pieces... but the area where the driver/passengers sit usually remains fairly intact.

As someone who appreciates older cars for their designs... (beauty vette there Predfan.. the hardtop is a wonderful thing)... I know that for oldercars that are intended to be driven there are retrofit seatbelt kits that attach to the seat mounting brackets.