Thats cause you can go to any Chevy dealer and buy the Malibu. Bel Airs ( see i called it a Bel Air and not an Impala :p:p ) are getting harder to find in that condition.

 

Oh, you mean like me?

Cause that's a point I've relayed for years. Infact I did an article in college on the very subject.



I'd rather see a 2009 Malibu get crashed all day long versus a 1959 Chevy. (Impala, BelAir, Biscayne)

Crash all you want Chevy. Just leave anything older then 1990 alone.
Okay the 1995-2007 Montes too.

 

That makes me sick. I would of loved to have that '59 Bel-Air. My dad had
a '59 Emerald Green Biscayne 4-doh when I was little!

I bet the Crash Dummy in th '09 Malibu has no legs ???
umm...ummm...umm..... umm... umm...um. ?
(music from Dumb & Dumber)

I showed my Dad this Video & he had the '59 & he just now got a
loaded '09 Malibu LTZ 3.6. All he said was he missed the '59!

I wouldn't want to get hit by a '59!

 

and people wonder why we are overpopulated? the damn cars are TOO safe, and require not enough brain power to run them.... ok, i cannot talk too much, after all, i DO like the occational "new car" (montes, challenger) but i do beleive that the '59 was plenty safe for the time frame it would have been in daily use... about 1/4 of todays traffic to contend with, better road conditions, but most of all the damn car didint make decitions for you, and people KNEW it, and in turn compensated for it... 4 wheel drums = brake fade, so keep a safe following distance... no ABS = brakes possibly locking up, so you learned to "pump" the brakes to prevent this as well as brake fade under hard stopping conditions... no seatbelts? i dont think a '59 chevy was ever really intended to break a land speed record, most of them were typical "put- put" cars, only opened up on the family roadtrip vacation ( or once a gearhead got one, lol). also, most people maintained their cars quite faithfully, & every time you got gas your attendent checked all of your fluids, farther insuring a safer running vehicle....

nowadays people are used to the car doing most of the work, which is a GREAT luxury we are lucky for, but i beleive it has reduced the aleartness of many drivers, and many more just dont give a damn...

IMO, it makes me sick that chevy would compare their prouducts in a situation that the modern chevy is CLEARLY more developed for... its about as unfair as racing a yugo against a chevelle.

PLUS THEY F'ED UP YET ANOTHER CLASSIC!!!!!!!

 

You make very good points Ryan.

But it wasn't Chevy that did that crash test. It was the IIHS. And they chose a 59 simply because it's their 50th anniversary.

Good thing it wasn't their 100th anniversary. We'd be watching a crash test of a 2009 Malibu crashing into a 1909.

 

With this being our 100th anniversary, we thought it would be great to commemorate this with a test between a 1909 Model T and a 2009 Malibu.

You will notice that in our crash test that the Model T has no airbags or seat belts. For that matter, no safety equipment whatsoever.

The Malibu on the other hand has multiple airbags, crumple zones and a steel re-enforced cage to protect its passengers.

The conclusion of our findings?

Drive a GM and live. Drive a Furd and, well, you already know the alternative.

o_0

 

What was the top speed of a 1909 Model T anyway? 35 MPH??? 45 MPH???

 

45 mph

 

on a downhill straightaway with a tailwind lol

 

How fast could you push?