OBSOLETE Car Features that were actually DANGEROUS - Life in America
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 май 2024
- Riding a car in the 1950s is about as safe as riding a bike downhill. They were accidents waiting to happen, but maybe, that’s what made them so fun! Here are the features that made cars from the 1950s dangerous yet thrilling!
Thank you for watching and consider subscribing to the channel if you wish to visit
the days of yesteryear more often!
Like my Facebook page: profile.php?...
recollection road, rhetty for history, you might be old if you remember these, you might be old, life in america, recollection road 1970s, recollection road 1980s, recollection road 1990s, recollection road 1960s, recollection road movies and tv, recollection road videos, rhetty for history 70s, rhetty for history 80s, rhetty for history 90s, rhetty for history 60s, nostalgia 
Развлечения
When my father died in 2015. We found his first car still covered up setting in the back stall of the barn. A 1955 Chevy Bel-Air. I don't believe it had ran since the late 70s. My younger brother wanted to sell it for scrap. My sister called it a reject for the yunkyard, so I took it. I worked on restoring it at nights and on weekends. Two and a half years later I was finished. Today it is my daily driver. ❤😊
I envy you…
Wow.Good on you.
Good on you Keep it running for as long as they will let you.
I`ve rode in a spotless one kept in a garage and barely driven. Cranked right up.
I wish my dad was that cool....my father was one of those guys where "IF it ain't new he didn't want it!"!!! When he died three years ago....he'd just bought a brand new Dodge Mini van.....and all I can say is "I'll pass on that!"!!!
In the 1950s they "relied heavily" on the fact that people knew how to drive
Driver safety is up to the driver!
assuming at the time , most of their customer base had just survived a world war, where they were pelted by artillery fire ,and flown planes daily , held together by DUCT TAPE . they were more concerned about making a vehicle that somebody actually ,WANTED TO BUY . MY HOW THINGS HAVE CHANGED .
Not really. There was just no traffic compared to today's road
Today's cars have an item that is totally unsafe, and you could say illegal in some states. I'm talking about the computer touch screen in the dash to control everything. Cars of the 1950s were much safer in this respect as they had buttons on the dash that the driver could operate by feel and never take their eyes off the road. The computer touch screen requires the driver to take their eyes off the road to control everything. Many states have laws against using cell phones (unless they are set up for hands-free operation) and I don't see any difference in looking at a cell phone or looking at a computer screen on the dash.
There was a report that the EU is going to require real control switches, instead of the touch screen, for that very reason.
AMEN, AMEN, AMEN. Touch screens should be outlawed, and too bad if the yuppies don't agree.
@@michaelbenardo5695 I think the yuppies would agree too
Having to perform simple actions like changing the volume on the sound system or turning on the defroster by navigating menus on a touch screen is dangerous! Anything control that requires the driver to take his eyes and attention off the road is a hazard.
At least my Buick Verano has a physical button or switch on the dash or steering wheel that duplicates every touch screen function.
If you're a pedestrian who gets hit by a car going fast enough to cause you injury, the hood ornament is probably the least of your worries.
We were taught how to cross a street back in the day. Dad told us right of way meant nothing a car hits you, you lose.
I'd rather slide across the bonnet than be disembowelled by a viciously sharp hood ornament
Fun fact. If you get hit by a vehicle going 30 mph or less you have a 95%chance of surviving. 40 or higher. The chance decreases
Untrue. The ornament on my ‘41 Packard was a large stylised bird (cormorant) whose upswept wings were both pointy at the top and had thin, sharp leading edges. You had no chance of rolling over onto the top of the hood, or spread-eagling yourself across it, without being cut to ribbons by the ornament, which both looked and acted like a palm-sized open jackknife.
@@FinlayMacintyre-ti9li If you slid across the hood of a 40's or 50's vehicle chances are it was just your top half. Rest of you would be fused to the grille and bumper.
We now have touch screens that are far more dangerous.
No truer words spoken, that and phones.
yep, mine flashes a 'driving without watching the road can be dangerous' notation on it's screen. i catch it out the corner of my eye, it's a distraction to say the least. then you really have to look at it to hit the 'ok button'. it stays on until you do.
100% I used it in a company Mitsubishi Triton, and scrolling the centre screen to make a call, was outright dangerous as it took your attention off the road entirely for 40 seconds or more. Needless to say that was the last time I'd ever used it, and simply reverted to using the phone normally while driving one handed.
@@jamesaustralian9829 doing that in the UK will land you with a massive fine
@@richardwarren7492 The "guy" who made this video sounds like he would be afraid of his own shadow on a wall....he needs to definitely "man-up" and get over it. The fact is that there is a risk in everything we do. I actually think that today's cars and their systemically messed up systems of operation are more likely to get us into accidents than any 1950 - 2000 vehicle. Ever tried to figure out how to run the touch screens without taking your eyes off the road for at least 3-5 seconds? YOU CAN'T.
I love all the colors. Today’s cars are all generic.
Today's cars have colors too. But customers are choosing the drab colors instead. It shows in fashion too.
In Phoenix the main colors are white, black and 2 shades of grey, yuck. I drive a red Colorado, how boring some of the new cars are. All this safety stuff just made it easier for bad drivers to cause traffic for the people that actually know how to drive and are trying to get some place. It's like Karen took over the design of cars with all the safety equipment. A salesman once was trying to tell me about all the safety equipment on the truck, I told him I didn't care, does the thing go fast when I need it to.
Kind of like the comic that said they ought to remove all the warning stickers on stuff to cull the herd
@@brienperkins6062 I agree with a lot of your comment. I had a silver Century. Most boring car I’ve ever owned. I happened to have a red vehicle also and a blue Colorado. My first blue vehicle. But I’ll drive a yellow vehicle before I own another silver.
Black silver white maroon gold
People buy what's available
We now have safer cars, but much more dangerous drivers who look at their phones instead of the road while driving.
if you watch any of the car crash videos online, it is amazing that people survive some of those accidents, let along get out on their own.
This narrator should design a car from soft cushy foam with a top speed of 12 mph.
@@buckshot6481 Nader, is that you?
Disrespect for laws!
Not safer just more gas mileage.
I would absolutely drive one of them. Beautiful pieces of art.
Maybe not as a daily driver, but as a collectable. That would be sweet!
I also like the burst-into-flames feature of the modern EV's.
About bursting into flames I live life on the edge by commuting to work in a 1980 Pinto.
Nothing to worry about... That's just the built-in use-by date starting the auto-recycle function.
So the Ford Pinto was OK?
@stephenwhited1833 By the late , had
@stephenwhited1833 By the late 70s, Ford had corrected that burst into flames problem, finally. So your 1980 Pinto is safer than you realize.
The guy doing the voiceover sounds exactly like someone who would say the riding a bicycle downhill is a disaster waiting to happen. XD
I like my old death traps, you can keep your modern debt traps! :3
He unnatural voice inflections nearly caused me to be suicidal.
Next a video on the horrendous unsafe prairie wagons!
His last name is probably Nader or somehow kin to one.
I would drive a 1950's car in a minute if it was in good shape, they were built to last.
I drive a 1955 dodge with every one of these issues, lol. BUT, I feel bad for ANY modern car that gets into an altercation with it, that thing is a literal tank. I feel the Royal would probably survive anything except a semi hit. They were built with actual metal back then, and lots of it.
@@Looneybob1that's probably true. And once they clean your remains out of it, your heirs get a practically undamaged car.
Yeah, they were built to last about 75,000 miles, a little more if you were lucky.
@@99Hudson pretty easy to repair and still around 70 years or more later for the win!
@@99Hudsonthat's where engine tech was at back then, that's hardly a flaw 🙄. and most cars didn't get driven 20 - 30K mi/yr like now
Even with all the safety features that modern cars have, if somebody's driving recklessly enough, they can still wind up dead.
With all the so-called "safety features" of modern vehicles. it still requires one thing, a driver with enough working brain cells to actually drive them properly. With all the built-in gadgets and distractions, a less than alert driver is far more dangerous than any of the 50's vehicles ever were!
@@richardcline1337 '50's cars obviously 'lacked' the troublesome cell phones.
Incorrect. I’ve seen modern cars pancaked under semi-trucks from which the driver walked away - after being extracted from the wreck with the Jaws of Life. That would never happen in any of my old cars; their mass and their safety-ignorant design prevents it.
BINGO!
Cars may have been less safe back then, but it also forced people to drive more cautiously and respectfully. There's so many crazy drivers nowadays that act like they're invincible!
BINGO. There are actually some people in these comments who have some real common sense.
Absolutely Correct.. I daily a 68 Dodge Dart...
Survival of the Fittest
Exactly ! Today people say; "I've got ABS, Traction Control, Stability Assist, Lane Minder ... >>>"
"Or, if anything does happen, 16 airbags !"
More like 17. Forgot the one between your ears !
@@wrotenwasp It was easier to get away with DUI. That was a real killer. Also we now do much more of our driving on beautifully-designed expressways in which deadly head-on and T-bone collisions are impossible.
@@keithlowe1982 Yeah. You can still get hurt.
This video makes me want a classic car more than ever
Hood ornaments also help prevent you from hitting the curb when parking if you know how to use them. Miss them.
My 1985 Ramcharger 4X4 truck had a Ram styled hood ornament. Wish I'd kept it when I sold it for junk.
I don't see those things being dangerous. Its the idiots that are dangerous
Yep no matter what era there are always idiots to spoil it for everyone else!
Look up the " 2009 Chevy Malibu vs 1959 Bel Air Crash Test " and think again.
@thegunsngloryshow Yep, or even look at an older car that has crashed in modern times, there are pics floating around. A modern Toyota or similar was in a parking lot and ran into the passenger door of a mid 60's Pontiac 2 door during a car show. The Pontiac door was pushed into the center console. . . . .
Right? Like why do we need a padded dash when we need to wear seat belts? The 50's and 60's cars are way better than plastic crap of today
@@markbroad119 Seat belts stretch and arms flail about, this is why padded dashes help reduce injury.
I disagree with almost everything you stated. Nothing wrong with old cars or trucks the problem is dumb people
I mean, who wouldn't feel better at 100 mph if surrounded by 5,000 lbs of steel.
Actually, dumb people are ok until they get in a drive.
AMEN BROTHER
But they do not know that they are dumb.
@@timhallas4275with no safety measures like crumple zones XD yeah. Yeah, no. Modern car in the regard thanks. I’d rather survive a crash, thank you. Old cars like that, you usually don’t.
I'm 72 so yeah, I've had several 1950's and 60's cars with no safety features. When I was growing up you could get your learners license at 14 1/2. Naturally I got mine! After lots of pleading and begging, my dad bought me a motorcycle. Back then helmets weren't required, motorcycles didn't have turn signals and the headlight didn't automatically come on when the motorcycle was started. In fact the only thing my state required was a rear view mirror that I had to purchase because the motorcycle didn't come with one. I learned to drive in my moms 1957 Chevrolet car and my dads 1956 Chevrolet pickup. When I turned 16 I was ready for my regular drivers license. By then mom had a 1963 Plymouth Valiant. That car had no safety features either! She picked me up after school on a Friday and took me to take the drivers test. I passed! That night I picked up my girlfriend and we went to the drive in movie. The bench seat was great because it allowed her to sit right next to me while I was driving! It was great for making out at the the drive in too! After school got out for summer I found a part time job and saved enough money to buy my own car. It was a 1957 Chevrolet Belair, 2 door hardtop, 3 on the tree like the one I learned to drive in. I paid $175 for it! Those kind of cars were plentiful and inexpensive back then.
Yep, you could buy cars from 50 to 500 dollars in those days. I bought many did a little work, put a drip job from Earl Schieb on them, some used chromes, sold them. Did well on them.
@@richardwarren7492 500 or even less than that.
my 1st car was a 1957 Chevy Belair, no seatbelts, but I put 100,000 miles on it , I am still alive
Same here. Mine was a '47 Ford.
Mine was a 50 ford. 3 on the tree.
@@swamprat69er glad you and I made it without airbags LOL!!!
But how many other people AREN’T ALIVE?
YES, I would drive a 1950's car.
I have a 1953 Hudson with aftermarket seat belts. Still, I feel much safer driving my Toyota RAV4 with seat/shoulder belts, padded dash, air bags all around, a front-end, engine crumple area, and telescoping steering column. Sometimes people will comment that my Hudson is a much safer car because it is built so strong especially with the uni-body frame. I then tell them this car is like a metal box with an egg in it. Throw it against the wall and the metal box is fine, but then look at the condition of the egg inside.
I remember watching crash test footage of some of these huge long American cars. The striking feature was the way the dash almost exited via the rear window because the intervening structure collapsed on impact.
But I would want modern safety features.
I still have a 50s car, and I love it and REFUSE to buy a rolling computer
@@WAL_DC-6B Speaking of the egg in the box, I remember a seat belt commercial in the 70s that used these to stress the importance of using seat belts.
Regarding hood ornaments; he neglected to mention the most important safety improvement of all - they became spring-loaded in the 1960s and beyond. They were designed to bend back and/or break off in an accident with a pedestrian.
Although the overall safety of today's vehicles is certainly much better than the 50's. I mean we have cars that will pull the car over to safety if you pass out. However, I would counter that in cars today we are over stimulated/saturated with electronic devices and screens. How many videos have we all seen here with distracted drivers. Back in the day when I had my first car, 62 Chevy II, there where only two distractions. The radio and my hand "accidentally" sliding off the shifter onto my girls knee.
"The radio and my hand "accidentally" sliding off the shifter onto my girls knee." OR vice-versa!
There were also cigarettes. People smoked like chimneys and the process of lighting and smoking cigarettes while driving was quite a common distraction that killed many people.
@@unconventionalideas5683 Nah it wasn't hard to light up while driving at all.
@@chrisb7198 That is why they put lighters in cars, to make it easier than fumbling with a match and driving, too.
@@swamprat69er Yes and ash tray so you didn't throw the lit butt out the window to litter or start a fire.
I rode of many cars from the 50s to 70s and never thought about any of this stuff; you just had fun driving around these beauties!
Preston Tucker tried to address some of these issues, and the oppressors-that-be ruined him for it, but he built himself back up with a full heart.
Preston Tucker refused to put seat belts into his 1948 Tucker as he figured their presence might scare people away from buying his car. He did, however, provide what was supposed to have been a "crash compartment" for the driver and right front passenger. It supposedly would work by the driver and front passenger quickly realizing (together!) there was going to be a head-on collision and then dive down into it and thus survive the crash. I have a Tucker brochure and it reads for new safety features of the '48 Tucker: "Under cowl (dash) is spacious safety chamber, protected by steel bulkheads, which driver and front seat occupants can drop into, in a split second, in case of impending collision." No mention of seat belts in the brochure.
@@WAL_DC-6B The movie 'Tucker: The Man and His Dream' made it out like he was pro seat belts. I don't recall if it addressed the crash compartment.
@@judsongaiden9878 I have an actual, vintage Tucker Motor Car sale brochure and it's stamped "Eggebeen Tucker Sales," 2102 Calumet Drive, Sheboygan, Wisconsin (I wonder how well that dealership did!). I purchased it at the annual, winter, auto swap meet near West Bend, WI a about a decade ago for a few bucks. Anyway, opening up the contents there's one area that lists "A Few of Many New Safety Features." One is, "Crash Board Cowl and Safety Chamber." Here's what it says about it: "Conventional instrument panel is replaced by attractive sponge rubber crash board cowl. Instruments in steering column. Under cowl is spacious safety chamber, protected by steel bulkheads, which driver and front seat occupants can drop into, in a split second, in case of impending collision." By the way, safety belts are not listed in the "many new safety features." There you have it!
Bench seats and seat belts are mutually exclusive, one has nothing to do with the other
My C20 chevy has a bench seat AND 3 belts...
Bench seats could lead to pregnancy........Seat belts resolved that problem if worn correctly..
Bench seats have the potential to negate some of the protection a seat belt offers. The issue is side to side motion, in which case your upper body can flail around inside the car during a crash, bludgeoning you with every hard surface in the car. A modern bucket helps to restrain the upper body because it wraps around you slightly. Bench seats often don't have headrests either, which can make a high-speed rear end accident fatal or debilitating due to a broken neck or spine.
@@drosera88
And buckets are just plain cool!
My parents dodge custom 880 had seat belts. Also seat belts
My opinion on this video and the car features mentioned.
An automobile from the era portrayed vs today had to have an attentive driver behind the wheel. They also involved a greater driver input to maintain control. This meant you actually had to PAY ATTENTION and not have the car tell you how to drive.
The 'A' pillars were narrow enough where you could actually SEE instead of having a huge 'blind spot' as in modern vehicles.
It has been my opinion for years to have all of the 'safety' features removed from vehicles and let the thinning begin.
Yep. Imagine that, a driver actually paying attention to driving! What a concept! The driver is the biggest problem here, not the car.
I agree, get rid of all of the "safety" nonsense and force drivers to actually drive. What an idea! Either get better and be more careful and attentive. Or, become a statistic. Your choice!
@@Robbie-sk6vc .....take them out of YOUR car, not mine, ditship....
And then get hit by an idiot driver and STILL end up in casts and bandages or 6 feet under.
@@aaronwilliams6989 ....so i may be injured or killed, but likely alive.....you'll just be DADE for sure....
I survived riding and driving a 1950s car. My family had a 57 Chevy and by the time I graduated high school in the early seventies I got, first one, and then another 50s car because they were cheap then. Fortunately none of us had a wreck in these cars.
Go ahead and cry some more. These car are beautiful.
My 56 Ford had a padded dash and deep dish wheel....it was the start of safety.
I think the 1952 Chrysler also had a padded dash
Somehow, I lived through all of this nightmare.
And no cars seats or seat belts,only moms lap.we are lucky,it's a privilege to age that's a fact.
Yep.
And I remember standing in the back of the pickup leaning against the cab. It's like it was a different world. Kids died every year from Polio too.
So you have survivorship bias!
So did I. And loved every minute of driving classics. Modern cars are not desirable.
In the '50s, the condition of the roads usually mandated driving at 35 to 45 miles per hour. Going above 55, one was considered a dare-devil.
Here in Iowa, the open road limit was "Reasonable and Proper" until the mid fifties. Towns and cities had limits.
You are thinking of the 20s. There were plenty of roads that allowed much higher speeds than that
@@michaelbenardo5695 Where I grew up, rural, dairy New Jersey, we did not have many roads that were straight for a long time. One State highway, and the rest local farm access roads.
I grew up near a gas station that had a towing company behind it where cars that had been in fatal accidents where the steering wheel had pushed into the seat
I have drove a 1957, 1960 Chevy and a 1958, 59, 60,, 63, 64, 65 Fords and never had any problems with them.
I'm glad for all the safety features of modern cars but those cars from the 50s were beautiful.
Goodness me! However did I survive my childhood? And all my friends too.
So if the car gets hit in the rear and there is a fuel spill, the gas is somehow going to touch hot engine components, ALL THE WAY AT THE OTHER END OF THE CAR, and the car is going to catch fire?? The irony of all of the safety features we now have is that drivers feel they are invincible and they take chances on the highway, speeding WAY above the speed limit, cutting in and out of the lanes, tailgating people, etc which is what REALLY leads to serious accidents and injuries. Before, people definitely drove more carefully and did not do stupid things on the road that they now do. And yes I would still drive a car from this time period, and I have done so. I just wouldn't drive it to and from work on the highways during rush hour where I have to deal with idiots.
The problem with that was the same as what plagued the poor Pinto....leaking fuel hitting the hot exhaust pipes. I had a Pinto that was actually rear ended. Outside of having to have a lot of repairs, the car held up very well. Like Nader's hatred of the Corvair, it all depended on the accident and any accident could be fatal under the right circumstances.
Fuel at the rear of your car could touch the hot engine of the car that hit you.
@@ajkleipass Plus the 🔥 spreads very fast.
@@richardcline1337 It seems to me that there was some steel projection on the frame of the Pinto that would tend to pierce the fuel tank. I've heard too that rather than recall the Pintos to fix them, Ford thought it cheaper to just pay the lawsuits.
@@user-hq4jz6lc9d Actually it was the pumpkin on the rear end that would rip into the tank. Part of the so-called "fix" was a thick plastic or rubber shield that went over that part of the rear axle plus a modified fuel filler pipe. At least that's what they did to mine.
Since I was born in 1951 I remember those 1950s cars and 1960s cars. In those years there were no safety regulations, however cars were very stylish. It seems that safety awareness started to increase in the early 1960s when Ralph Nader came out with his book Unsafe At Any Speed. This book had one whole chapter devoted to the Chevrolet Corvair.
And - - - he was later proven incorrect.
@@richardwarren7492 About the Corvair, maybe. He was absolutely correct in his overall criticism of the safety of cars of that era, and even automotive magazines were critical back then of handling, brakes, tires, build quality, etc.
@@99Hudson The Corvair was just fine handling wise. Try driving an early Porsche 356. Also you could buy a camber compensator from EMPI for 29.95 back in the day, problem solved. When the 65 came out with independent rear suspension it was truly fine.
As to quality? I started in the auto business in 1964, want poor body fits? the 70's, poor paint quality? The 70's, tires? 60's 2 ply, go 4 ply you were just fine. Brakes? The brakes were fine, of course once disc became de-facto in the 70's it got better. I worked as a tech from 1964 until 1974, then became service manger, service and parts director for 11 stores, then the CEO of those stores until sold to Penske. I've seen tons of stuff and worked on it. What do I drive left over from those years? 1973 Porsche 911T Targa, As to handling, you could make any of them handle if you'd taken the Bob Bondurant high performance driver course back in the late 60's Nader was wrong, from start to finish.
The biggest problem? The drivers.
@@richardwarren7492 The problem was always "the loose nut behind the wheel".
@@jbau4985 Yep
I restored a 55 Ford Customliner and enjoyed doing it. Even all safety features will be lacking, as mentioned. I installed seatbelts per state requirements at that time.
Re: steering wheel hubs: Now we have air bags that do the same thing. If you wear a seat belt you don't have to worry about the dashboard.
I love my classic cars!
Desenbergs and 1920s-30s Packards?
@@WAL_DC-6B import and domestics all makes and model classics.
Cell Phones cause more accidents than ever.
My grandfather and his presumably third wife were going to wait until after got back from their vacation to install the seat belts in thier 1950s car. Unfortunately, they were both killed in a head-on collision during their vacation and never came back home. RIP Grandpa.
MERCY!
Sorry to read this!
I've been driving for 40 years and never had need of rolling my car over yet. A good driver can operate any vehicle safely. A bad driver can't even operate a modern wonder safely. Really the only feature that makes a car safe or fatal is the temperament and skill of the driver.
With all of the distracted drivers on the road today, we are actually more likely to die in a modern car due to them than in a car of that era back then.
You forget the highways -- Interstates instead of the old Blood Alley intercity highways.
@@richardcline1337 ......statistics show your opinion is total BS.....
Yeah.
that's only valid if you're the only person on the road.
I would still be driving my 1959 Mercedes-Benz 180D if it hadn't rusted out.
Then - what appeared to be a minor collision often resulted in serious injury or death.
Now - the vehicle can be totally demolished but the driver/occupants only suffer minor injuries or even walk away unhurt.
BUT - I would drive a 50s vehicle in a heartbeat - 1956 is my very favorite year !
My favorites: 55-56 Plymouths, 56 Dodge Royal Lancer 1st. Loved that old Dodge.
Yep, that's what happened when they let the occupants absorb the energy of the crash instead of the vehicle absorbing it.
Funny, the things they didn't mention are drum brakes and nylon belted tires. The anti lock disc brakes with today's tires with all wheel drive are truly fantastic for safety. If cars then had those safety items, the 50's cars would have been dramatically safer even with no seat belts and steel dashboards.
'59 Ford, Chevy, or Caddy convertible. '65 & '67 would be second choice. (But I always wanted a 65-'67Jaguar XKE. I couldn't afford one then, and sure can't now either. Mechanically junk, but so damn beautiful !!!)
The reasons to not drive a car from the fifties today are (1) fuel expense and (2) scarcity of parts for most models.
Probably true. Some models however have a great aftermarket parts supply. I think you could pretty much build a new 55-57 Chevy from scratch.
Pretty much all Bullsh!t. I just turned 65, and have had a lifelong love affair with 1950s cars and trucks, especially 1955-1957 Chevys. I have owned many of them, and currently own three. I have restored them, hot rodded them, daily driven them, and drag raced them. I have never been injured by one, other than minor injuries while working on them. As long as everything is working properly, like brakes, steering, lights, etc., safety is the responsibility of the driver. Remember, back in the '50s, roads were not combat zones like they are today, and we didn't have idiots using "smartphones" and touch screens back then. People actually paid attention to driving, which is ALL the driver should be doing.
And yet, even with today's "combat zones" and phones, etc, the fatalities per vehicle mile are 5 times LOWER today than in the 50s. Why? Because cars back then were absolute death traps, your survivorship bias notwithstanding.
@@briansomething5987 If you are so worried about safety, then I suggest you live (or rather "exist") in a sterile padded room, and never leave it. To me life is about a whole lot more than just how long you live, but what you get out of your life. There is no way to be 100% safe, and I personally have no idea why anyone would want to be.
@@briansomething5987 B/S
It wasn't just 1950s cars with features considered dangerous to occupants during a collision. Automatic seat belts, commonly found in many late 80s and early 90s cars, have resulted in some horrific injuries when not used correctly. My older cousin, who was an EMT in late 2001, arrived at the scene of a crash involving a 1990 honda civic, automatic seat belts, the driver was not wearing the lap belt and her neck was snapped like a twig, when the shoulder part snagged her chin as she slid underneath, pronounced dead at the scene. The driver and passenger of the other car involved were seriously injured, but survived.
Some GM models from this era had the front belts attached to the door, in these cars a crash that caused the door to pop open can eject the occupant wearing the seat belt; my first car was a 1992 Pontiac Sunbird convertible, door mounted seat belts.
The placement of the fuel filler doors were a headache for the gas station workers who might not be aware of the different types on different cars.
Funny, when I worked in a service station (my first job) I never had an issue finding the fuel filler. And - the lube manuals supplied by the major oil companies back the showed where the fillers were.
I remember someone putting gas in the radiator of a foreign car. It was outside just below the center of the rear window and looked like a gas cap.
Must have been a Renault.
Ah, but we found a solution: do away with gas station attendants!
@@randykelso4079 And - - made yourself a free surrogate employee.
We were skipping class and my buddy rear ended a car. The door popped open and he fell out. Luckily he was not seriously injured but my first thought was how I was going to explain to the Dean how and why my buddy was dead, lol
Gen. Patton died from injuries sustained when the car door flew open and he fell out---It's speculated that the lock was tampered with to assassinate him. It worked.
Of course! It's nostalgia! I grew up with these cars, crashed in one and still here.
Real cars, real people. (they could take it) Today's people are p******! I'm taking delivery of a 1955 Chrysler Windsor Newport Deluxe 2-door coupe this summer.
I have a "real car" 1953 Hudson Super Wasp sedan with aftermarket seat belts added. But to be honest, I still feel much safer driving down the road in my Toyota RAV4 than in the Hudson.
No wonder Japanese & German cars got popular by the 60's. 😅
They didn't take it. 50,000 died every year.
@@stevenlitvintchouk3131 Again, no seat belts. Sure didn't help.
Be sure to add some seat belts. They will
enhance your classic ride even a little bit more with the added safety.
Back then cars were not designed for safety as they are today. The manufactures wanted to make them stylish
They were plenty safe for the time and speed limits at the time. People driving them inappropriately got them selves killed . exactly like today
According to Federal Highway statistics you were twice as likely to die in an automobile accident in 1946 than you are today despite there being way more vehicles on the road now.
This is only half the truth. How likely was a wreck in the first place with fewer cars running?
@@paddlingrubberduckie8766 Its going by per capita. In other words, for every thousand accidents as an example, so many people were killed in auto accidents in 1946 versus, say, 2016.
A lot of factors go into those numbers
@@fcaughli Indeed, like on a per capita basis.
@@WAL_DC-6B Thanks clueless
There is a video floating around that shows a 1950's Impala doing a head-on, off set crash into a modern one. The idea of being in a 1950's steel tank didn't hold up well. I remember the "A" pillar coming into the 1950's car which would have speared the driver for sure. Recently a friend of mine was in a head on collision with his 2015 Suburban. They are ok but going though some issues but they are alive. Amazingly the Suburban with it's crush zones saved them. All the doors still opened and the driver compartment was intact.
Good video to make people remember why cars are designed they way they are today.
2009 Chevy Malibu vs 1959 Bel Air Crash Test
@@bobroberts2371 That's the one! Pretty stunning really.
@@jrmason Yep, some falsely claim that the 59 Chev was doctored to crumple by removing the engine and transmission. Well, engines don't absorb impact so having an engine or not would not make a difference.
@@bobroberts2371 Well, except for the fact that engine might possibly be bolted to the frame and also backed up by the transmission with is also bolted down? Granted, they won't stop the damage but they do tend to hold it down than in a vehicle rigged to fail. However, NONE of today's features ware really worth much if the driver is distracted or has very few actual working brain cells.
@@richardcline1337 Cars from the 50's to 70's had rubber pad motor / transmission mounts that would shear off in a crash. Engine or not, the passenger compartment should never crumple as the 59 did when hit by the 09. How about looking at modern on the road crashes of older cars for proof that the 59 was not " fixed " ?
Today's cars have all of the electronics that are a major distraction which increases the probability of a wreck. Those big touch screens are a major disaster.
BTW: Part of the 1950's cars did have a padded dash. They also had a frame under them with a real bumper, not just a piece of plastic. My first car was a 1957 Oldsmobile to give an example.
I would love a 57 Chevy , we used to have one when I was a kid
Yes, I would definitely drive a 1950s car, I love classic cars, much better than the cars they make today.
One thing nobody seem to mention is that nearly ALL of today's cars are dull, drab, no styling, no class Toyota wannabe's. Unless you can see the name plate you really don't know what you are looking at in many cases.
FACTS.
Hard metal dashboard and no seatbelts. What could go wrong with that? Sarcasm off.
Most of the "features" mentioned are not features at all, it's just the way cars were designed and built back then.
The problem with the A pillar wasn't that it was an A pillar, it was that it was weak. Same could probably said for the other pillars on the car. Volvo, as I recall, was the first to integrate a roll cage construction into their cars, solving that problem.
And, I'd just like to mention, by its nature, a steering column already protrudes into the passenger compartment. That's kind of how the driver controls it. The collapsible aspect was so that when an unrestrained driver hit the column during an accident, the column would collapse absorbing that impact, rather than the driver's chest absorbing it.
I actually find it hard to classify any of this as "obsolete". We still have dashboards, they're just padded now. Most of this falls under the category of "improved now" as opposed to "obsolete".
is the narrator an hoa member?
😂 or a condo commando? I couldn't watch all of this he's really annoying
i just turned tha volume ALL tha way down an loved lookin @ tha cars we grew up in 😎
Certainly sounds like one
Add to this: Undersized, bias-ply tires that commonly blew out; Too narrow wheel rims; Inadequate, overheating 4-wheel drum brakes; Single-reservoir brake master cylinders (brake fluid low - lose all brakes); Buggy spring suspensions with no torsion bars (poor handling); Over-laminated safety glass windshields that closed around the neck when the head went through the windshield; Rearview mirror on a fixed, metal spike….
Still, I’d love to own a ‘57 Oldsmobile today…
The occupants weren't 'ejected from the vehicle', they were 'thrown free from the accident'.
After passing through the laminated glass windshield, of course. 🤯
And their bodies landed in such contorted impossible positions
Worst thing possible.
@@paulbrower I'm old. At our school they used to teach us if we saw an accident about to happen to tuck into a ball. Kind of like how the flight attendant tells you to tuck if they are expecting to crash. Except we didn't have seatbelts. Padded dashes, a quarter inch of foam covered with vinyl, gave us a feeling of safety. Not to mention 'break-away rear view mirors'. Ah, I think I will go fire up my 1955 Thunderbird (actually has seatbelts but nobody used them back then so Ford stopped installing them for a while), my 1958 Edsel or the old 1958 Ford Ranchero. Ah, would you rather die in style, or cramped up in a Toyota Camry, a Honda Accord or a Hyundai Sonata (Yikes!)?
@@Colorado_Native interesting thoughts.
I drive one daily in the summer
The problem would be to find a 1950s car, and if you found one, you won't want to drive it because they are so rare.
I still drive mine. I don't like today's cars. They are too small, ride to hard, don't have to enough room inside, and are too ugly. Plus, I refuse to buy a Japanese car. They attacked us and refuse to truly apologize.
@@michaelbenardo5695 I'm with you about size.
@@michaelbenardo5695 And looks.
That's true 👍. I wouldn't want to mess it up driving it too much, either.
How many were trying to recognize car manufacturer based on the dashboard or hood ornament?? And would I drive a 1950's car today? Absolutely.
Another danger in those days is that 0.15% blood alcohol content was the DUI threshold. It has since been lowered.
I heard that there was a problem when the manufacturers moved the Headlight dimmer switches from the floor to the steering column.
Some people kept getting their feet stuck in the steering wheel.....😂
I would own and drive a 1955 - 1957 Chevy any day.
Shaking a memory loose "bouncing around like a pinball". I remember a film shown in school to promote seatbelts called "Dice in a box"
Well if its so bad why did so many people make it back in those bad days. Like riding your bike with no helmet or jumping off the house with a sheet thinking you would parachute down lol.
"Like riding your bike with no helmet or jumping off the house with a sheet thinking you would parachute down lol."
Been there, done that, the jumping off the roof thing was pretty cool - also "walking backyard fences all the way down the block.
Did plenty of both as a kid!
@@richardwarren7492 My! You must have plenty of aches and pains from getting pretty banged up back in the day. LOL!
@@aaronwilliams6989 Not for 75, just a bit of ankle pain in cold weather.
Wait? I was supposed to use a sheet to help slow my fall? NOW YA TELL ME!
If it ain't got chrome I'm walking home!
Hood ornaments being a danger to pedestrians is a bit of a stretch. Being hit by all that metal, pretty sure the hood ornament was the least of a pedestrian's worries.
One thing I do agree on is that these old cars could have used seat belts. My father slid into a telephone pole in his 1956 Mercury. His face planted into the steel dash. He carried that scar on his chin for the next 60 years.
I'd rather die in style than die from distraction from staring at a screen 😁
We didn't think they were fun, they were the only cars available. No seat belts; some folks did not even bother locking their doors; air conditioning was a luxury feature, so most kept windows rolled down to breath in that lead-infused air. Tunnels were noisy and smelly, and back then the PA turnpike had seven tunnels. As a kid, I was too naive to be afraid while traversing the tunnels, but looking back, yeah they were scary. On the plus side, drivers seemed a little less distracted than in recent times.
I daily drive a vehicle that was built in 1957. It's manual transmission , steering and brakes keep me involved in the act of actually driving. That metal dash, amongst other things, constantly reminds me that I could actually die if I crashed.... On the other hand, big windows allow me to actually see all around me, and there are ZERO electronic distractions. It's a tradeoff, but I feel that I am safer driving something that I'm afraid of, vs driving a hollow promise that I will walk away from a crash in something that is safer to crash in........
......your '57 does not steer, handle or brake nearly as well as a modern car....and even if you feel you are a safer driver, the drunk/speeding/distracted driver that crashes into you will be the one walking away from the crash...
@@chrisgermo1956 I choose not to cower in fear of that.... I grew up on two wheels and refuse to be transported in a government mandated "safety capsule" that you will still die in a head on collision at interstate speeds. My life, My choice.
Having seen first hand modern high end cars ripped apart and dead bodies, I am not fooled by the propaganda machine.....They are safer than my old cars, but still shockingly unsafe. That's the unfortunate reality of driving. It's a privilege, take it seriously.....
@@timmcooper294 .....anecdotal evidence, opinion, and just "made-up s--t", is not a very compelling argument....your life, your choice, absolutely, but you are not convincing anyone but flat earthers....
@@chrisgermo1956 Duuuude Chill, No need for insults to a guy who is just stating the way HE chooses to live, the tradeoffs, and why...... , NOT trying to convince anyone else HaHa!!
Wow....... 🤣
@@timmcooper294 .....Duuuude Wipe, if you like to offer free Oscar Mayer BALONEY SANDWICHES from the WEINERMOBILE, that's fine....sorry you and your friend Bud Hertz are so touchy about detractors.....
Bench seats caused lots of back injuries in rear enders because all there was no back support, just a metal bar or hoop in some, with the rest just on springs like a sofa.
As i recall headrests did not become a requirement until the 1969 model year, so broken necks and related fatalities were not uncommon.
All the safety standards is why so many people walk away from the kinds of wrecks that were once almost inevitably fatal.
The old cars were made of steel; they could take a lot f abuse, but the occupants were almost disposable. Today, cars have crumple zones and are safer for passengers but are more frequently written off because of the higher cost of repairs, so insurance rates are higher.
Almost every item you mentioned is no safety issue at all if only there weren't so many incompetent drivers on the roads. (I.E. - Hood ornaments could cause injuries to a pedestrian! I submit to you that if you were just hit by a car, you have far bigger concerns than a flippin hood ornament!) Somewhere along the line, a drivers license became a "Right" instead of a "Privilege".
Being born in 1959 I have been a passenger and driver in many of these cars. We didn't think about safety too much. No seatbelt and definitely no air bag technology. You just drive carefully 😅. It was easier driving around town back then. Less traffic. People were nice and courteous and there were no road ragers and jerks like now. 😊
.....in the 70's there were PLENTY of jerks in GTO's,Chevelles, Novas, Road Runners, etc. who drove fast and dangerously....AND 3.2 beer for 18 year olds that minors could readily get....compare traffic fatalities today to the 50's, 60's, and 70's....no comparison....
@@chrisgermo1956 That, I will agree on! Thinned out the herd! Most of us did drive carefully because we knew what would happen if we didn't!
Hell yes. I drive my 57 bel air almost every weekend. No power steering, no power brakes no seat belt. When you drive a vehicle with no safety features, you pay a little more attention to the people around you.
People often brag how they survived pre-seat belt era. Sadly, those who did not survive an accident due to these dangerous 'features' aren't here to brag.
Would I drive a 1950's car ? In terms of reliability and serviceability, yes. Today's cars are safer but insanely complex and when they develop issues, good luck getting them fixed. Also, the primary function yesterday's cars were to get people from A to B with reliability, and relative comfort and safety. Today's cars are just cash-cows for the manufacturers. Also, when talking about safety, today's cars are full of distractions, gone are the days when all you needed to do was turn a knob to turn up the radio or the heat.
Now you have to search for those functions on the BS touchscreen.
As for the '50s A pillars, the A pillar is so damn thick with a big side mirror it's really hard to see the road in certain circumstances.
I've driven 60's, 70's, '80s and 90's cars and honestly, if drivers drive these cars sensibly and properly and maintained properly, they were okay. I will agree totally though that seat belts, front disc brakes, radial tires were the best of the basic safety features introduced.
Yes due to being easy to work on and built to last.
In the fifties, and for a few decades later, the driver could still enjoy driving his car. Today, and more and more, the driver can enjoy being driven by his car ... Is this an enjoyment ? For commuting maybe but for pleasant journeys certainly not for those who enjoy and know how to drive.
Needless to add the smiles and thumbs up popular classic cars generate along the road, which make driving them a rewarding pleasure.
Boomer here, my God, how did we ever survive this backward era! I need water, where's the garden hose!!
"I need water, where's the garden hose!!" Yep another Boomer here, 75 and in good health, even after eating all those "dangerous" foods too.
LATE GEN-X, Here...Grew up riding in Model T's and 40's / 50's / 60's Cars....pass the hose when you are done.... I remember as a kid in the 80's when Bottled Water just started taking off in the Midwest....I was thinking 'WHY" would someone PAY for WATER that we get out of the ground nearly free...(There is even an Artesian well near my house) My well at my house has minerals...And I have filters...I still don't get the bottled water thing.
Yes own 6 55 -61 cars great cars better than new cars now days
I drive a 1952 Cadillac Convertible on a very regular basis. Yes in a wreck I will die! The car will survive but I won't. That helps to make you a better driver. You leave far more space around if possible. The one savings grace is it is very noticed. It doesn't blend in the background. It is actually more dangerous for other drivers because I have actually seen people run off the road trying to get a photo of it. The one terrible most horrible thing about the car is there are no cup holders!!! I have to carry my beer in my lap.
I've got my grandparents old '50 DeSoto. It's a nice car but there's not much that's safe about it by modern standards. The windows are tempered glass so there's that. But it ticks off every one of these features. But yeah, I've driven the car and I'm not too concerned about it. There's a big difference between an occasional relatively slow speed drive around quiet residential streets and using it as a daily driver though.
Your DeSoto does indeed have a safety glass windshield. It was required by law. HOWEVER, that windshield was flat glass, which means that ordinary glass can be installed there as a replacement by a cheap skate.
@@michaelbenardo5695 I'm pretty sure I'm good. Both pieces of the glass have the little Dodge/Plymouth/Chrysler/Desoto logo on them. The side windows I'm thinking aren't tempered glass as they've had the typical stress cracks in the lower front corner for decades. Tempered glass would have just crumbled instead of cracking. They may be plastic laminated glass, it's been many years since I've really taken a close look.
They need to throw out these obsolete functions no one uses anymore like the brake pedal.
Yeah, what do you need brakes for anyway? All they do is slow you down. 🙂
@@user-hq4jz6lc9d My point exactly
Warning:... A minor collision in todays automobiles is a serious threat. Those deadly hood ornaments vs pedestrians is laughable 😂
Laughable indeed, when one considers how everyone is using full-size pickup trucks and SUVs for daily passenger service, with their big, tall front ends. Pedestrians that got hit used to go over the hoods; now they go under the vehicles.
OMG the sky is falling!!! I better hide under the bed!!! . .... Wait, maybe the bed might fall down on me....
Bullshit. My 1947 GMC truck has a shear pin that allows the steering column to collapse and telescope in on itself. GMC and Oldsmobile were kind of test beds for new features for GM.
I knew GMC and Olds, sometimes Pontiac, were indeed GM's experimental divisions, but never heard of that safety steering column.
I was born in the 1950s, I rode in most of the shown cars. The vehicles were safe, I have known people killed by seatbelts, Rare but it happens.
Kinda' like I've heard of people who had a skydiving accident whereby they had their necks broken or were strangled by the shroud lines of their parachutes after landing in something like a tree. "Rare but it happens."
I'm afraid of being killed by the air bags. I'm short and too close to it, but you can't turn off the driver side bag.
@@elultimo102 I know the feeling my airbag would deploy right at my sternum. It could damage my pacemaker or cause injury to my heart. I am too tall, for the airbag in my car.
I saw a crash test vid 1959 vs 2019 Chevy.
The difference was astonishing!
We referred to steering wheels as the ring of death in ER in the early 90s..
I had a 61 Buick with Bench Seats and No Seat Belts. Several times taking it to 100 mph.
I had a '55 Desoto that did 130 several times.
I liked driving my 60 Buick in Nevada back in those days - what a cruiser at 100 mph!
The only time I got it over 130 was in a green 72 Satellite with a 318.
I had one of those! 4 barrel, dual exhaust, and originally 10.5 : 1 compression, but when they eliminated high-octane fuel, I had to replace the head with a "standard" head, as with high compression, it hammered under load with low-octane fuel .
Got it up to 110 several times.
You obviously don't know what you're talking about. I've cut through many A Pillars in both modern and fifties cars there's not a lot of difference. Today's cars are much safer because of the use of finite element analysis in their design. But the facts remain that the most dangerous thing in the nineteen fifties was alcohol in the driver. Today the most dangerous things are alcohol
Drugs and Cell phones. Cars from the 50s are perfectly safe as long as you don't get an accident.
The same is true of modern cars. Modern cars just cost more.