GTA1990

iTrader: (1)

Not sure if its been posted

puma1552

iTrader: (1)

All I've got to say about that is thank god for airbags.

GTA1990

iTrader: (1)

hmmm... for me the concerning thing is the buckle in the roof; that is, a compromised cabin area. And this is @ 35mph

Say goodbye to your peck implants and legs at highway speeds.

On the flipside, that long collapsable frontal area probably acts as a good cushion, absorbing crash forces.

ibmtech

iTrader: (1)

I don't think that Steering wheel tasted to good either. The Roof buckled pretty bad and that was a full roof, not a T-Top..

Stauf

iTrader: (2)

I'm sure a little Bondo and hammer can fix that.

ibmtech

iTrader: (1)

Are you talking the person's teeth if they ate the steering wheel or the car.. LOL

GTA1990

iTrader: (1)

good observation. See how the roof folds at the b-pillar. On a t-top car, I can only imagine that being more pronounced.

The undercarriage of the cabin area seems to remain intact wrt proportions. I wonder if SFCs would actually serve to cause the roof of the car to buckle more as it is emphasised as the weak point of the cabin - i.e. crash energy further deflected from the floor.

or, conversely, would the additional floor bracing help prevent the roof from folding?

GTA1990

iTrader: (1)

side note wtf - check out the passenger getting choked by the seat belt and position of legs

FormerL69

iTrader: (2)

Definitely a far cry from the type of crash videos you see in more modern vehicles. The roof buckling at 35 MPH is spooky, but this is still probably an improvement from 2nd gen cars. All I can say is you have to hand it to the engineers who design current cars where the car crumples around the passenger compartment and the passenger compartment itself is virtually untouched.

thirdchance

Kinda makes you want to install a cage, real seats and real safety belts in your street car, doesn't it?

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

Check..

iroczVinnie

i don't know but i'm thinking that all that energy absorbed by the buckling is less that is transferred to the passenger. I'm sure there's an engineer on the board that can comment.

Was just thinking - I don't have a roof so where does that leave me :-( second thoughts... don't answer that....

LHernandezJr

Note to self: Avoid crashing into cement walls at 35 mph at all costs.


But seriously, I'd like to see the same crash test with a T-top TA.

ibmtech

iTrader: (1)

I was very surprised that it actually held as well as it did. The only B pillar damage was mainly on the passenger side which could have been a contributor from the 4000 lb doors that 3rd gens are famous for.
The K-Frame doesn't looked like it got bent even though it was pushed all the way to the firewall.

And I am not sure if Subframes would change the damage or not. They are to stiffen up the bottom side, but on a Head on Collosion, I am sure of the outcome. I am not convinced that a rollcage would have changed the outcome of the car either. It would provide a bit more protection to the driver, but better seatbelts would have been worth their weight in Gold and would done most of the work...

musicfreako

iTrader: (1)

It looked like to me that the whole firewall got shoved up and pushed the roof up. I'd say it's more than just a weak roof. Definitely a cage would be of benefit...

ibmtech

iTrader: (1)

It would have taken a 14 point or higher to make any help.. The way the front crumpled, everyone is right, my main concern would be with the T-Tops or Verts..

FormerL69

iTrader: (2)

I did a little searching and found the Camaro crash test from 1982. Similar results, as you'd expect.

GTA1990

iTrader: (1)

thanks for posting that FormerL69. Is it me or does the camaro fare slightly worse here? The driver door seems to move back a bit more than on the firebird. But, I know the frames are identical for these cars so chalk that up to testing variables.

Agree, strong case for better seat-belts for viable upgrades. 4th gen perhaps?

Yeah, really curious how a t-top holds up

DD9TransAmGTA

iTrader: (1)

I'm sure they were going faster than 35 in this impact, but heres a wrecked t top car in a front end collision http://www.copart.com/c2/homeSearch....SEARCH_RESULTS

StevenB L98/LS1

I know from experience that side impact or t bone collisons this cars hold up better than my mothers 02 saturn does. I was taken to the hospital in the saturn but because i was in the passenger seat in a 88 ta i actually walked away with just a few scratches. thank god for heavy doors on these cars

deadbird

Damm, @ 1:20 in the 'bird crash, the bellhousing just snaps, like watching a bone break, ouch !

FormerL69

iTrader: (2)

I noticed the Camaro impact looks worse. The front left tire on the Camaro video definitely comes back further. Again, who knows what the test variables were between the two two tests.

85 T/A WS6

Why are not the shoulder belts keeping me away from the steering wheel? This is messed up

ibmtech

iTrader: (1)

In either test, the windshield didn't break, Both passenger side B pillars crumpled, and the K-Frame was shoved to the firewall. With the amount of roof that is lifting, I am not very confident on what will happen in a T-Top or Vert 3rd Gen.

puma1552

iTrader: (1)

What crash rating did these have at the time?

FormerL69

iTrader: (2)

Believe it or not, the Camaro and Firebird both got a 5 star front impact rating in 1982 and 1983 for both driver and passenger. There were no side impact tests done in those days.

Both cars only got a 4 star in 1987. I'm guessing the impact standards went up but the design of the car hadn't changed, so the rating went down.

In 1991, the driver got a 5 star front impact but the passenger only got a 4 star, probably due to the lack of a passenger side airbag.

Scott, sorry to cross-link this info, but it is relevant.

http://www.safecarguide.com/exp/archive/archive.htm

Amazing how times have changed. I've been searching for a t-top impact test but can't seem to find one.

Veaceonee

iTrader: (1)

Iv seen these cars get racked up pretty bad, and the drivers open the door, and walk away (myself included)

luvofjah

iTrader: (2)

The view from under the car is cool to watch...
doors stayed very straight on both cars...
I think SFC's (the ones that go along the body / below the doors would have some effect... You can see the back end basically folding up into the front part of the car, buckling just in front of the rear wheels... Someone dig up a T top video

Rafael

xcalibur

It looks to me, like the ratchets on the 'comfort zone' of the shoulder strap are not latching up fast enough, or too much slack was left on the dummies straps prior to the crash. Check the owner's manuals, I think you should only be able to get about 2 fingers under the strap. It's a little tighter than you think. If you can touch the radio or HVAC controls without it tugging on your shoulder, your strap probably isn't tight enough. Many people find that uncomfortable. That why airbags really help.

OrangeBird

iTrader: (1)

.

jpearcy1

iTrader: (1)

I call dibs on camaro part out haha. I think its time for some 4th gen seats and upgrade on seat belts.

Johnny Blaze

iTrader: (15)

To those saying 'put a cage in a street car'

Just think how your head would feel after bouncing off those bars.

Roll bars are great if you are wearing a 5 point harness and a helmet.

Jason E

It amazes me how far crash tests have come. If my IROC got wrecked, I would be heartbroken.

Apparently, also, my teeth would be stuck in the steering wheel

W.E.G.

I think the most interesting Fox-body crash-test video is this one:

Car completely grenades.

Driver ejected after collision with bridge, and can be seen as a blackish-blob skidding across highway starting on left shoulder, and coming to rest in front of braking car on on right shoulder from 0:04 to 0:09 in the vid.

He survived.

Johnny Blaze

iTrader: (15)

I remember that seeing that vid on tv.

Thirdgen89GTA

iTrader: (5)

Fox body?

Check again. Thats a Thirdgen.

There have been GIFS all over for that one!

sloick

that moron lives a stone throw away from me.

Johnny Blaze

iTrader: (15)

He seemed like a winner on the interview I saw.

kentuckyKITT

iTrader: (4)

Wow, cool vids. I've never seen those before. Even though that looks catastrophic, I have to keep in mind that the car is hitting an immovable object. All of the deceleration force is transferred to the car, so of course it will do a LOT of damage. I'd like to see these same tests with the cars hitting other vehicles at the same speed. Most of the time, people just don't do perfect headers into concrete walls. I know I wouldn't want to in ANY car. Even that guy in Ohio didn't do a perfect header into the concrete bridge column. The car turned and hit sideways, which is why it tore apart so badly. If he had hit that perfectly head on, I'm positive he would have been killed instantly at that speed.

Seeing these videos of the cars damaged this badly is a worse case scenario. Most of the time you are more likely to hit another vehicle or run off the road into a ditch than you are to hit a concrete barrier perfectly straight. I'll bet if the car was going 100mph into the wall...we'd all cringe at the sight of the damage as it would far worse. I'll bet the passanger cabin and the hatch/cargo area would combine.

Thirdgen89GTA

iTrader: (5)

At least they are safer than the Chinese cars. Look up some of those crash tests.

Here's the worst of them though.

Johnny Blaze

iTrader: (15)

wow

dem74

Wow, great videos!!!

FirebirdUSX

That buckle in the roof is caused by the floor getting U shaped.Probably at a higher speeds the entire car would close in iteself turning into a wheel .Seen a 89 camaro after it hit a wall at 40Mph and thou the damage was less (no idea why it bent less ) and no one was hurt (everyone kept their teeth) the floor bent up leaving the impression the firewall was pushed back.

The weak points in these cars are the long doors.Pretty sure some people on these forums are able to "fix" the problem with no need for roll cage or visible things that ruin the look.

NCC-2569

iTrader: (1)

That chinese thing looks like a copied 80s Volkswagen van.

gearheadotaku

iTrader: (1)

Now imagine the same crash test with a very rusty example...

FirebirdUSX

http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbc...NEWS/110419876

theres a small collection of photos with the car from that crash.That car looks rusty and Im pretty sure if the car would have been in a normal condition that guy would be alive today.

NCC-2569

iTrader: (1)

Let's rebuild it!

StevenB L98/LS1

Same person from youtube just posted a crash test for the first year of the airbags installed in our cars. 1990 firebird

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

Windshield didn't even break. Not bad for a 30mph hit.

On a side note, I wonder what they did with the car? I want the seats. lol

FirebirdUSX

Seems they improved the body structure so theres no horrible buckle in the roof.That means everyone with a firebird from the 90s is safe .

now a small overlap crash