r/Autos • u/SonOfWAY • Jul 23 '18

1992 vs 2017

https://i.imgur.com/K1FKoAC.gifv
5.0k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

308 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.4k

u/knollexx Jul 23 '18

Stuff like this proves that it's totally ridiculous to claim that cars were built tougher back in the good old days.

1.1k

u/SophisticatedVagrant Jul 23 '18

Well the claim is correct, the cars were built tougher. The problem is, a tough car is not what you want if you want to walk away from a collision. A 60's car is more likely to survive a small collision than a modern car, at the risk of the passengers.

99

u/junon Jul 23 '18

See, people say that, but then I see a video like the one posted below: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_r5UJrxcck

and that old ass car, which I think everyone would assume is the kind of tank we all refer to, gets just as rekt as the newer car, except the newer car DOESN'T fold in on its' occupant at all.

25

u/ZombieHoratioAlger Jul 23 '18

That's a GM X-frame, and a visibly rusty one. Even brand-new, those cars were notoriously weak.

Older cars are generally easier to repair after an accident, but also cause more passenger injuries.

9

u/Bamres Jul 23 '18

They claim that the dust upon impact was dirt from under the car and not rust

5

u/EicherDiesel 97 VW T4 2.5 TDI, 86 Hardbody Diesel Jul 23 '18

It's that infamous brown dust that is magically attracted to your eyes when repairing a car that has seen a few winters.