HackerTubewatch
Surprise me
Frame from 2009 Chevy Malibu vs 1959 Bel Air Crash Test | Consumer Reports Plays via YouTube's privacy-enhanced embed

2009 Chevy Malibu vs 1959 Bel Air Crash Test | Consumer Reports

Consumer Reports
Demos
YouTube
1 HN user recommended this demo1 month2014–2023 score 1
Years with an HN recommendation, 2007–2026

HN uses it as shorthand for how compounding engineering improvements, crumple zones especially, made things safer, applied to analogies well beyond cars.

A Consumer Reports and IIHS crash test pitting a 2009 Chevy Malibu against a 1959 Bel Air. It shows how much better modern cars protect occupants.

“Have a look at the excellent 2009 vs 1959 car crash test video” (HN, 2014)

1 recommendations · 10 citations · Demos

11 Hacker News comments

From the HN archive; up to 20 kept per video, favoring different commenters. Recommendations first.

@pugz Mar 2014 Recommends
on HN thread Why Cars Will Kill 30,000 Americans This Year
Modern car design saves lives. Cars in the 1950's had stiff, thick plates and it didn't do them much good. Have a look at the excellent 2009 vs 1959 car crash test video: [this video]
Crash test showing how modern cars protect occupants far better than 1950s cars

Citations, criticism and jokes

@tokenadult Mar 2014 Cites it
on HN thread Why Cars Will Kill 30,000 Americans This Year
Read more
The death rate per miles driven in the United States has fallen dramatically in my lifetime, and I can remember when the annual number of deaths was much higher.[1] That said, the article makes a very interesting claim about attitudes that we should all follow to the end of the article for further discussion here: "There’s an open secret in America: If you want to kill someone, do it with a car. As long as you’re sober, chances are you’ll never be charged with any crime, much less manslaughter." My wife bike-commutes year-round (yes, even in Minnesota), and as I mention this among Facebook friends, other friends who are also bike commuters point out that car drivers can basically kill bicyclists in the United States with no legal penalty at all. That's not a good social environment for getting more people out for exercise and energy conservation by substituting bicycling for driving cars. The history reported in this article is very interesting. There are a lot of contemporary photographs of changing American cities. The quotations from experts provide perspective on the visuals: "'If a kid is hit in a street in 2014, I think our first reaction would be to ask, "What parent is so neglectful that they let their child play in the street?,"' says Norton. "'In 1914, it was pretty much the opposite. It was more like, "What evil bastard would drive their speeding car where a kid might be playing?" That tells us how much our outlook on the public street has changed." Indeed. Are we
Crash test comparing 2009 and 1959 cars
@saulrh Jun 2017 Cites it
on HN thread Coal plants emit more radioactive waste than nuclear plants (2007)
Estimates of excess deaths due to nuclear, counting chernobyl , are the lowest of any energy technology. This isn't even counting the part where no new nuclear reactor could possibly be as unsafe as Chernobyl or Fukushima in the same way that no modern car could be as unsafe as as a car from the 1960s: [this video]
Crash test as analogy for modern designs being safer than old ones
@oblio Oct 2017 Cites it
on HN thread Uncle Bob and Silver Bullets
Somebody should show Uncle Bob this: [this video] My point being: yes, if we'd be perfect drivers at all times and in all weather conditions there would be no more accidents. Luckily for us auto designers haven't adopted this perspective :)
Crash test showing designers do not rely on perfect drivers
@oblio Aug 2019 Cites it
on HN thread Why is modern web development so complicated?
And that's actually rational behavior. It's also a very simple and very materialistic explanation of why humankind evolves, bit by bit. It works the same way even for discovering new medicine or any kind of technology. The new thing must be at least a bit better than the old thing. Over time those improvements compound and you end up with this: [this video]
Example of compounding improvements over time
@oblio Jul 2020 Cites it
on HN thread How popular media portrays the employability of older software developers
I think it easy to lose sight of the big picture. Things are constantly improving, even if the road is winding. People just forget some of the horrors of the past. We used to have VB/VBA, now we have Javascript. We used to have Ada, now we have Rust. C++ has evolved. Even C has evolved, in a kind of meta way: C itself hasn't evolved much, but the ecosystem around it has evolved a lot. How common was something like Valgrind back in 1990? Whenever you forget how much we've moved forward, despite occasional setbacks, look at this: [this video] :-)
Reminder of how far safety has improved
@yissp Nov 2021 Cites it
on HN thread Unsafe at Any Speed
This video of a crash test between a 2009 Chevy Malibu and 1959 Bel Air is a good illustration of the improvements that have been made in car safety [this video]
Illustrates car safety improvements between 1959 and 2009
@KennyBlanken Feb 2022 Cites it
on HN thread New engine could save internal combustion from the scrap heap
Read more
You being seriously injured or dying in an offset ~30mph collision, versus getting out of the car dazed and confused is the difference. And yes, passenger safety didn't change much for American cars between the 50's and early 80's. [this video] You causing more pollution (particulate, NOx, etc) than a hundred luxury SUVs or more, is the difference. Driving down the highway at 75mph able to hear the back seat passenger whisper versus having to talk loudly so the person in the front seat next to you can understand you. A climate control system that keeps the car comfortable whether it is -20 degrees or 100 degrees. Handling, brakes, and acceleration that is astronomically better than whatever your Chevette has. There's no such thing as a "200mpg engine" - most modern car engines are very efficient, with the Prius's Atkinson cycle engine being the most efficient among worldwide-available, mass-production, affordable cars. It's a function of aerodynamics, parasitic electrical and mechanical losses, and weight. > It's not all one thing or the other, and it never should be, but we've been milking the old internal combustion cash cow for so long we've virtually guaranteed her death, even though evolution of the internal combustion engine would be a net benefit. Making an engine that would last 750,000 miles is certainly possible - just look at engines in big rigs - but people don't care about that in a personal vehicle, and the capex and opex for such an engine is incredible compared to
Shows the survival difference in a collision between old and new cars
@jackhack May 2023 Cites it
on HN thread Squad Solar City Car
Read more
Not just modified vehicles or hummers, but a road filled with SUVs, minivans, delivery trucks, crossovers. Even a "standard" Ford F150 is goliath, and an indestructable frame won't save you. To the contrary, a super-rigid frame translates into occupant injury. Crumple zones, energy absorbing materials, deformation of structures = survivability. A 20 mph head-on collision in a 1950s auto with a full frame design is often far more serious than a 40 mph collision in a modern auto. Head-to-head comparison: [this video] (likely death vs possible foot injury) Now contemplate a 6' long vehicle with 1' or less of "crumple zone".
Head-to-head crash showing crumple zones beat rigid frames
@KennyBlanken Jun 2023 Cites it
on HN thread Trapped Under Trucks
Read more
Most modern passenger car passenger cells don't need roll cages because their passenger safety cells are properly engineered, and because crash safety is much more comprehensive, with wheels and suspension components designed to intentionally fail and crumple in a crash so they aren't pushed into the passenger cell. A ton of cars pass Euro-NCAP and IIHS crash and rollover tests with flying colors. Roll cages were a Thing because, well, this: [this video] Obviously not every car is up to snuff, especially at the bottom end of the market. You couldn't pay me to drive a current production GM, Ford, Suzuki, Mitsubishi, etc compact sedan. 5-point harnesses aren't really that necessary at 0-60mph speeds in a vehicle with modern airbags; the fifth strap is mostly for anti-submarining but a number of manufacturers have produced seats that are anti-submarining and anti-submarining dashboard design (both material and shape) is a thing as well. All of it's possible, it's just a lot of car companies are cheap and consumers don't really shop based on stuff like "is there an anti-submarining design to the dash."
Shows why old cars needed roll cages

Video list and Hacker News comment labels from HackerTube (prompted by @karpathy), released under ODC-By 1.0, built on the open-index/hacker-news archive. Hacker News data is provided by Y Combinator; comments remain the work of their authors. Video titles, channel names and thumbnails belong to their creators and are shown via YouTube. HackerTube Watch is an unofficial edition. Data export of 2026-10-31.

Keyboard shortcuts

/
Search
j k
Next / previous video
r
Surprise me
l
Like (video page)
w
Watch later (video page)
?
This help
Esc
Close