DUNDUNDUNDUN dundundun-DUMDUMDUM

The filmmakers were essentially begging everyday people to restrain their children, Since it wasn’t really expected of them during that time, Nobody did.

@@ebbonemint Well yeah. Seatbelts were a new thing and people weren't legally obligated to use them, and they weren't mandatory on cars yet.

LincolnTek So many idiots behind the wheels of cars today...

True that! LOLOL

I dont even know how they got a drivers license...

@@yako0006 Just goes to show how easy it is in 'murrica

@@ProfessorKalkyluss not even in 'murica.. All around

I saw that too, and was afraid they were going to crash it! >Sigh of relief

That's an interesting tidbit of information!

And next one footage was make with ancient GoPro eyefish lens. 😂

They should bring that shit back.

That’s hilarious!!! Thanks for the laugh!

I wasn't expecting that with a such a serious film... I am glad someone's got some humor.

I noticed too LOL

+Donald Thompson And in collisions the fuel pumps kept going instead of shutting off, while they used flammable gasoline and motor oil that's more flammable than some other oils around today (E.G. synthetics and biosynthetics which have higher flash points.)

Also the engines in todays cars are designed to fall out in a head on collision, instead of coming through the firewall. I forgot about the fuel pumps and they were under the hood as well, which was more dangerous, thats why they are in the fuel tank now.

Even the shoulder belts in the 1970's were'nt much in the way of protection. They didnt lock-up upon impact like modern ones do and could often times be unlatched from the lap belt and not used entirely

I owned a 1959 Olds 98, the top of the Olds line and just a couple of steps below the Cadillac. It had no seat belts at all!

Donald Thompson Or collapsible steering columns until the early 70s

No way in hell

Yeah cars back then we’re more tougher, but cars crumple up on impact to regard safety

I was coming to ask the same question! They look slick.

mark jones but she thicc

Yeah saw a documentary a couple years back still using them.

That's incorrect Garrett Smith I owned several 1960s Pontiacs and I own to this day a 1969 Firebird they all had both lap and shoulder belts they were separate of each other meaning you can wear one with out the other

insulman100 you’re exactly right because my dad had a 1969 Delta 88 Oldsmobile. The shoulder belts were for the front seat occupants and they were folded neatly above both doors to be stowed out of the way.

Actually, you and @insulman100 are both right. In the early 1960s, most cars didn't have any type of seat belts. Starting about 1963, most cars had lap belts, and by the late 1960s most had lap and shoulder belts. Cars from the late 1960s were much safer than cars from the early 1960s, due in large part to the first federal safety standards that went into effect from 1966 on. September 27, 2019 4:03 pm

@@whattheheck1000 do you time stamp all of your comments?

thatallredheadude 1 Yup. October 2, 2019 2:46 am

Nah, I prefer to drive it daily lol

@@logantyler3741 Same

Lol no? People drive the way they drive no matter how the cars are designed. The reason cars became more safe today is because the same amount of accidents happened back then--but they were way, way deadlier. Didn't change the fact that they kept on happening. commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_traffic_deaths_per_VMT,_VMT,_per_capita,_and_total_annual_deaths.png

@@BarnacleButtock Not true. People drove way more carefully back then. And people would be much more careful if they knew an accident would be almost fatal every time. Cars got safer after the muscle car era happend and people started driving fast and recklessly and so cars were engineered to be safer since speed was the newest trend. Back then, people drove slower and more carefully to avoid accidents. Now people drive like maniacs because they know it wont kill them most likely. Especially if u live in a city

@@logantyler3741 commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_traffic_deaths_per_VMT,_VMT,_per_capita,_and_total_annual_deaths.png do your research, moron. See the huge bump in total deaths around the late 60's?

@@BarnacleButtock People didn't use to think about crashes, most probably have never even seen one or what it could do. When I'm driving my 2700lb 90's era honda I am constantly assuming everyone will cut in front of me and kill me. People are also driving 10-20k miles a year, in the 50's people drove 2-3k.

@@xq39 yeah, because there was no interstate highway system, jackass.

How's the reliability?

@@carlthefriendlyllama2126 better than my modern car

It looks like a skull.

Back before the Liberals took control of the Golden State.

@O.P. Yates Whenever you hear "leveraged buyout" or that a hedge fund is running a company you know the end is near.

Man, how did we come to this?

@O.P. Yates How long have the Democrats been in control of California? If they're so much better, why is it so much worse here? It's basically a one-party state. A sanctuary for the illegals and a hellhole nightmare for the working class.. I'm typing this from downtown LA on Washington Street and it is a disgusting dystopian example of failed politics, corruption and greed.

@@themanguy2110 Jesus Christ said to avoid *all* kinds of greed, for one. I don't think everyone's listening to that word.

2019 for you 😎

V.Vega They were just too heavy for their own good.

@@nah6430 Yeah, until the passenger space. Exactly as designed.

Lsd Bread It's called crumple zones, the car is designed to crumple to absorb the forces of the crash throughout the entire body and to reduce the maximum deceleration value, but the passenger cell is made to remain intacted. Go watch an 80's Volvo V70 vs a 2005 Renault Modus crash on youtube and you'll see it yourself

@@nah6430 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ecWiaLh7197Hk58.html 2009 Malibu in an offset head-on with a '59 Malibu. The 2009 driver would probably have survived with a broken leg. The '59 driver would be buried in a 5 gallon bucket.

@@nah6430 OK... Imagine trying to hit a brick wall with your hand, then at the same force, trying to hit it with a pillow screwed down on the wall as a shield. The same thing applies with crumple zones - it'll hurt less with more of a cushion.

+Harry Mouzon The main reason Cadillacs tailfins got smaller after 1959 was that people actually got impaled on them in rear end crashes. The last year for the tailfins on Cadillac was 1964, they were only 2 inches high and they were the last automaker to have them, Chrysler was 1963 and Ford was 1963 also.

pimp cars.

Sorry, placed side by side, there was an Imperial with taller fins.

Harry Mouzon fans were cool looking, but they have killed people.😒

Ugh - the rumor that tailfins killed people persists into the 21st century. There were no recorded fatalities caused by tailfins. The Ralph Naders of the day proclaimed they were a "pedestrian hazard" but no reports of anyone falling and landing smack-dab into a 1961 Caddy fin. Women didn't like them because men did and so they tried to make the argument that cars got poor gas mileage due to hauling those big fins around (ridiculous!). This film shows 1960 Plymouth (crash cars), 1960 Chrysler (long graceful fin car towing), 1960 Dodge (bowtie bumper) and towards the end a 1960 Ford. '59 Cadillac fins were 13" high while '59 and '60 full-sized Plymouth had 12" fins. ChryCo used style instead of workmanship to build cars. Mopars were built like crap with whisper-thin sheet metal, zero sound deadening, shockingly thin frames & sub-frames and rock-hard suspension. So I'm not surprised to see them falling apart here. A 1959 Mercury or 1963 Cadillac would have fared better in the crash - at least the bench wouldn't have come flying out!

"Hi! I'm Bitchy Betsy, and you _killed_ me!"

It is...Dick Tufeld

Shake hands with danger, Will Robinson.

I noticed that too. :-)

Danger! Danger! You Dummy!😂 good catch. Thankz for pointing that out.

Whydo Uask well they did say it was the university of California.

This all looks like it was filmed in LA. I recognize the Hollywood freeway which is where I think you are referring to, the Griffith Park exit off of what is now Interstate 5. The residential shots look like West LA.

Joe Morgan. You just don't want to get hit by one of those 5,000 lb barges.

@@kennethsouthard6042 based on crash tests I might come out in better shape than the other guy.

@@johnmorgan4368 Compact modern cars still don't score too great on crash tests, that paired with a 5000 lb boat, sure they won't be too great, but you might be quite hurt as well.

@@TheFuzzyCreeper kzfaq.info/get/bejne/rtqol5Voz9K-j5s.html

@@johnmorgan4368 I've seen that video hundreds of times. It would be scary if 1. That 1959 Bel Air didn't have the awful "new" X frame that was extremely weak and dangerous. 2. Didn't have it's engine removed, which would have helped extremely in not smashing the car as bad. 3. It wasn't completely eat up with rust. When the car is hit, you can see tons of rust spewing out from every single crevice on that car, and not just small bits, but some serious chunks. It had lots of structural degradation from all the rust. But all of that is present in the video, missing engine, tons of structural rust, and the awful frame design, which shows that any other 50's car would've fared better than that poor Bel Air. During the late 50's, that exact car was labeled as being unsafe, and with the 50's lack of car safety that sounds pretty bad. Don't you say?

InsertFlashyName The black one looks like a 1960-1961ish Plymouth Savoy sedan. Not sure of the other one.

Maximus Minimus that's what I was thinking, but the added grille lights intrigued me haha

InsertFlashyName Just a guess, but those may or may not be "lights". Perhaps they were mounted by the engineers as part of some photo-electric instrumentation for the purpose of the crash test?

Maximus Minimus true... I like the look of the octo-lights though lol

InsertFlashyName You can never have too many lights! c1.staticflickr.com/9/8021/7567774798_4d4efbf0bc_b.jpg

Monroville skid marks...😜

Wouldn’t your clean underwear be soiled after a collision like that?

As for those roofs being cut off I don't think they cut the whole roof I think they just cut a sheet metal panel but left the structural beams intact. Most of these cars were probably body-on-frame anyhow so it would not have made as much difference even if they did.

Laminate safety glass was first offered in the model A Ford as an option

These are old cars though, everyone would be fine nowadays

@@supertrinigamer no.

@@antonioederlopezlopez7341 what?

People discovered they weren't so super after all, and undeserving of a superlative label in contemporary society.. Expressway became a more common label.

Depending on where you live, they're called expressways or freeways

The America where many more motorists died in crashes??

The America when men worked together to make society better, instead of women tearing it down.

An America that was worse in any regard you can measure. Also, to take a video like this as a true mirror of reality is absolutely stupid. Sorry to say so. What you miss never existed. The US was far more violent, superstitious, sexist and uneducated than today. Hard to believe? Numbers are out there. I suggest you read "Better angels of our nature" by Steven Pinker.