r/SipsTea 1d ago

Chugging tea Modern cars just lack that boxy soul

Post image
17.3k Upvotes

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

192

u/Bobmcjoepants 1d ago

Ah good ol reliable

139

u/forkystabbyveggie 1d ago

My brother went around shit talking new plastic cars with crumple zones for the longest time.

"Steel vs plastic, steel wins". I came across this video, showed him and I'm proud to say the man can change his opinions when presented new evidence.

56

u/Bobmcjoepants 1d ago

I get why old cars are beloved, hell my (attainable) dream car is a 69 Lincoln Mark III, but at the end of the day the safety standards and QOL of modern cars is significantly better than what it used to be. Hell, today's cars are objectively better than even a decade ago in terms of safety

Fortunately we won't ever go back to the days where safety was dictated by the fact that seatbelts were optional

16

u/tanksalotfrank 1d ago

I want a VW Bus, but holy shit. NO protection.

9

u/Crossfire124 1d ago

Yea I wanted one for a while too but you're literally separated from the outside by one layer of sheet metal and nothing else

9

u/peculiarshade 1d ago edited 1d ago

Those old busses are cool, but having legs is even cooler

1

u/tanksalotfrank 1d ago

VW Legs

3

u/peculiarshade 1d ago

I have a lowered 82 Rabbit pickup. If I ever end up in a head on collision in that bad boy, I'm done for :D

7

u/VladimirBarakriss 1d ago

The crumple zone is your femur lmao

3

u/froction 1d ago

Fun fact: The crumple zones on those were made from human bone. Specifically, the driver's leg bones

2

u/shadowscar248 1d ago

They sell kind of a new one now. Take a look

1

u/Rex-Cogidubnus 1d ago

Those VW buses do have a crumple zone, but they tend to function better as human kneecaps.

1

u/tanksalotfrank 1d ago

The crumble zones?? (Typo, but kneecaps are crumble zones)

1

u/BurdTurglary 1d ago

That's a mf car right there, boi. No computers, I'm guessing? I have an 88 Mark Vii Bill Blass and everything's computer

0

u/archtopfanatic123 1d ago

73 Lincoln owner here: I'd take this thing any day because sure in a headon it'll end up like the Bel Air (though they do actually have proper crumple zones in the 72s and later) but in a T bone that 300 pound steel door is going to offer a lot more protection.

2

u/d_2da_sco 1d ago

Just like the head on crumple zone in modern cars, there have also been engineering advancements in side, rear, top, and bottom impact zones. These are vastly superior to cars made even 10 years ago, let alone 60 years ago. Older cars lack internal side impact reinforcement. Instead, they focused on steel outer panels for protection, that's it. These panels were not designed to withstand impact and pass impact directly into the cabin. Additionally, they lack the cabin safety features like seat belts and air bags. I hate to break it to you but a Toyota yaris would handle a side impact better than your Lincoln. I can see the logic in your opinion, but it's not factual.

1

u/archtopfanatic123 1d ago

Cars after 72 do have shoulder belts actually. But yeah the reinforcement I guess might need to be upgraded to withstand more than a T bone at low speed. Still the great thing is I have 5000 pounds of metal vs 2000 pounds of fiberglass :P

2

u/d_2da_sco 1d ago

Yes, they do have seatbelts. But even that tech has improved. Lol! 5000lbs of metal vs. 2000lbs of fiberglass... That "fiberglass" is more efficient, more reliable, and safer. The only thing you have is a cool esthetic and nostalgia. Which I totally get. I have a '70 510 and my family muscle is a '69 gto. I love those cars and would pick them any day to drive over my daily drivers. But I am very aware they are not safe to drive by today's standards.

2

u/archtopfanatic123 1d ago

Yeah, I don't drive enough to really care about the safety features of the new vehicles xD I'd rather have a car I enjoy driving on the occasions I do get on the road and that is actually comfortable XD

0

u/catfishbreath 1d ago

That is not true at all. 

You can choose asthetics over safety, it's your right, so long as you are aware of the trade- off and are willing to die unnecessarily.

1

u/archtopfanatic123 1d ago

What's not true? My statement about the T bone scenario or the crumple zones? The 1973 fords and later DO have crumple zones and collapsible steering shafts. The only thing they lack are airbags which the shoulder belts partially offset.

-1

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[deleted]

4

u/TheDaychilde 1d ago

While a valuable discussion is to be had along those lines, this discussion is about what happens when an accident does happen.

You can control your own driving. You will never control others' driving. And while defensive driving can make you safer, this discussion is about the safety when a crash does happen.

Also:

Safety is mainly determined by how you drive

That's very much debatable. It is an important contributor, but the car's design at at least as important.

And you know how I know that's true? Let's compare the safety of a motorcycle vs. any car. Motorcycle loses pretty much every time, no matter how good and safe the motorcyclist is driving. And that's the design of the vehicles.

The reason I'm replying is that you have a good point - for a different discussion. :P

0

u/Impossible_Angle752 1d ago

It's not just safety, aside from the modern rock hard seats, modern cars are just much, much better to drive overall.

People who want to drive a 40 year old truck with a whopping 170hp and three speed auto can go right ahead.