Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-06-2010, 05:06 AM
 
Location: Earth
4,237 posts, read 24,780,703 times
Reputation: 2274

Advertisements

The 1969 ZL1 Camaro, while really a pony car, ran something like a 12.8 stock with the aluminum 427. But they only made 69 models of the ZL1 Camaro.

The 1964 Thunderbolt ran 11's in the 1/4 but was set up specifically for drag racing from the factory, although you probably could have used it as a daily driver if you could live without creature comforts and a high winding 427.

1965 Dodge released a version of the Coronet that had a 426 hemi and was built similar to the Thunderbolt except they didn't use lexan windows and fiberglass front pieces; instead they acid dipped their fenders and used a thinner glass side window. But like the Tunderbolt, the SS Coronet came rear seat delete, radio and heater delete....and of course no warranty. Not sure what it ran but wouldn't surprise me if the numbers were close to what the Thunderbolt ran.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-06-2010, 07:09 AM
 
Location: South Jersey
7,780 posts, read 21,880,174 times
Reputation: 2355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deez Nuttz View Post
The 1969 ZL1 Camaro, while really a pony car, ran something like a 12.8 stock with the aluminum 427. But they only made 69 models of the ZL1 Camaro.

The 1964 Thunderbolt ran 11's in the 1/4 but was set up specifically for drag racing from the factory, although you probably could have used it as a daily driver if you could live without creature comforts and a high winding 427.

1965 Dodge released a version of the Coronet that had a 426 hemi and was built similar to the Thunderbolt except they didn't use lexan windows and fiberglass front pieces; instead they acid dipped their fenders and used a thinner glass side window. But like the Tunderbolt, the SS Coronet came rear seat delete, radio and heater delete....and of course no warranty. Not sure what it ran but wouldn't surprise me if the numbers were close to what the Thunderbolt ran.
maybe with slicks guys but not with the tires they came with..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2010, 07:11 AM
 
Location: South Jersey
7,780 posts, read 21,880,174 times
Reputation: 2355
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkf747 View Post
I, for sure, will not be getting into a 'Smart'* car.

*Dumb
thats for sure!! Thats what goes thru a smart car drivers mind just before they hit something. "hmm, maybe it was not so smart buying this car"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2010, 07:12 AM
 
Location: South Jersey
7,780 posts, read 21,880,174 times
Reputation: 2355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deez Nuttz View Post
Probably because in the video, the dash, steering wheel and front seat all become crumpled together. Then again as pointed out, the 59's structural integrity was questionable in that vid PLUS they used an X frame full sized car; clearly the X frames were not the best thing out there at the time. How about trying the same stunt with a 60's Imperial? The driver might have suffered some shock but the car probably wouldn't have folded up. Anyone who disagrees with that should ask anyone who's ran in a demolition derby why they don't allow Chrysler Imperials as derby cars.
As I pointed out before. The new malibu has NO frame..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2010, 07:15 AM
 
Location: South Jersey
7,780 posts, read 21,880,174 times
Reputation: 2355
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilson1010 View Post
There is a 1959 MB test, but I can't find it right now.


YouTube - Mercedes-Benz S-Class crash test ( vs opel corsa vs smart )
thats technology.. Great job MB..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2010, 11:50 AM
 
10,135 posts, read 27,475,197 times
Reputation: 8400
I think this is a photo of the 59 MB test:

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2010, 11:52 AM
 
10,135 posts, read 27,475,197 times
Reputation: 8400
September 1959: First crash test at Mercedes-Benz

21.08.2009: * The first Mercedes-Benz crash test was a head-on collision involving a test car and a stationary obstacle *

automobilsport.com - September 1959: First crash test at Mercedes-Benz

Its an interesting link. I am posting this in support of my comment above to the effect that there really was only one company concerned with auto safety in 1959. When I am driving my W126 cars (S Class late 80's early 90's) I know that the best engineering and materials have gone into making me as safe as can be. Not just scoring well on the new safety rating system which a lot of manufacturers have figured out how to game. MB was making cars safer, much safer, before Volvo ever thought of safety and before there were rating criteria to be gamed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2010, 12:23 PM
 
Location: South Jersey
7,780 posts, read 21,880,174 times
Reputation: 2355
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilson1010 View Post
September 1959: First crash test at Mercedes-Benz

21.08.2009: * The first Mercedes-Benz crash test was a head-on collision involving a test car and a stationary obstacle *

automobilsport.com - September 1959: First crash test at Mercedes-Benz

Its an interesting link. I am posting this in support of my comment above to the effect that there really was only one company concerned with auto safety in 1959. When I am driving my W126 cars (S Class late 80's early 90's) I know that the best engineering and materials have gone into making me as safe as can be. Not just scoring well on the new safety rating system which a lot of manufacturers have figured out how to game. MB was making cars safer, much safer, before Volvo ever thought of safety and before there were rating criteria to be gamed.
sure looks like MB was way ahead of the curve!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2010, 01:46 PM
 
Location: Hialeah
809 posts, read 2,316,336 times
Reputation: 359
I would say that the metal fatigue and rust is a factor in making the older Chevrolet seem like more of a death trap compared to the new one. In this video, they are crashing an obviously larger, heavier car into a smaller, lighter one. Therefore, the '59's is compensated for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2010, 01:52 PM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
24,511 posts, read 33,312,803 times
Reputation: 7623
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankgn87 View Post
maybe with slicks guys but not with the tires they came with..
I was looking through some of my '60s car magazines. Some of the tests of those cars mentioned above have wide tires with tread. Not slicks and definitely street legal tires.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:10 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top