We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
What did Consumer Reports do to compensate for the difference in weight. The Bel-Aire is a good 900lbs heavier yet the cars impacted as if they were the same weight. The Bel-Aire did not drive the Malibu backwards which would have happened because of weight differences. Seriously, was this a real life test or what?
What a complete waste of a classic car. This is government trying to justify its own existence. The 1959 Chevrolet used an x-shaped frame, which was particularly bad for this type of driver side to driver side impact. And one can see from the brown dust that the 1959 car had a lot of rust. This is just not probative of anything, other than that government agencies can waste money justifying what they do.
Man, I hate to see a '59 Bel Aire wasted like that.
I know, new cars are safer, more fuel efficient, and the drivetrains last much longer.
But they don't look half so cool.
That's why, on clear sunny days, I still enjoy driving my '67 Cutlass convertible. I know it isn't as safe, fuel efficient, or, well, anything as my newer ride, but folks don't come up to talk when I park when I drive the new one, either.