Is it unsafe to drive an 80s/90s car without an airbag? Of course it's less safe than a modern car...

Is it unsafe to drive an 80s/90s car without an airbag? Of course it's less safe than a modern car, it's not Miata tier though?

Right..?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=joMK1WZjP7g
youtube.com/watch?v=xauHCEVsEJU
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>wanting to live

safety really should be the last thing you worry about if you want an 80s/90s car. Im serious.

If you are genuinely concerned about safety, lease or finance a brand new or a certified used econo-cuckbox of your choice. Also a Miata had pretty damn good crash tests at the time and aren't as unsafe as you think. A friend of mine got rear ended by a tractor trailer on I-95 and while the car was totaled he didn't have a scratch on him.

i should add that, the friend I was talking about, had a Miat

They're terminal, if you are legitimately worried about safety in a car buy something made this year but what you should do is drive it and enjoy it, worrying about shit is a bad way to live.
>Unless you're transporting your kids on the dd

no.
every car is safe until you crash.

The bigger question is would an airbag at that age be safe if it did go off, or even deploy at all.
>Airbags are supposed to be serviced every so many years not that anyone actually does it. The cost would be prohibitive.

Also airbags that old are pretty shit. I would be more scared of 80's airbags going off than not having airbags at all

I've never had a DD made after 1983 (and my longest lived DD was a 63 with a metal dash, lap belts, and non collapsible column). I haven't died once. Coincidence? I think not.

How's your driving? Defensive, slow, combination, normal? How much over speed limits do you go?

Highway crash if fatal. Why would anyone on 4chin care though?

Airbags are a meme. No replacement for thick steel and full chassis desu

I prefer not having a small bomb in front of my face when driving. I DD a 92 Camry and week-end an AE86. I generally drive 5 over, but drive very carefully when other cars are around. I always assume my fellow drivers to be retards and to have overlooked me, so I drive defensively. Keeps me out of trouble.

Imo, driving style and leaving enough margin of error to yourself and others, as well as staying focused, is what keeps you alive. Technology is only the second level security for when you've already failed.

>they don't make em like they used to, sonny boi
youtube.com/watch?v=joMK1WZjP7g
youtube.com/watch?v=xauHCEVsEJU

just dont crash

this

I'm 25, cunt. Also you graph is meaningless without accounting for improved brakes, trac/stab control, less drink drivers ect

DRINK DRIVES
>HUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE LOOK MUMMY I MADE A POST ON THE IMPERIAL INTERNET. SAVE HUE QUHUEEEENNN

Depends on the car really. A friend of mine smashed his 1991 saab 900 against a modern ford focus, and he walked away without a scratch while the focus was totaled beyond recognition and its occupants flown to hospital.

Obviously it depends on what kind of accident you have, but some 80s cars are still very safe by today's standards, but bad pedestrian safety is what kills them. Just stay away from the litle shitboxes and you're good.

>crashed saab 900
probably id kill myself if i had such mememachine and crashed it

"to hospital"

why do britbongs say this shit

same reason they say anything, because their toothless flapjaws cant stay closed due to lacking teeth to keep it sealed

Well you could compare the fatalities per accidents but then you would go on about how it's not accounting for better road conditions and lighting and better signage and less severe crashes and broader range of what's considered an accident

or whatever garbage excuses you can come up with

slightly mad

Air bags are for faggots.

Enjoy your 0.9 L diesel and not being able to defend yourself with a firearm when Muhammad and his boys come for you in the night

>says Le 56%er

>I'm 25, cunt
So you're not old, you're just retarded.

You clearly failed to notice how cabin in the newer cars had significantly less deformation in those vids, particularly the .Bel Air vs Malibu

So imagine someone retrofitted those items into the 50s cars. Would it matter in the slightest if the cabin is still crushed by a force that didn't do the same to the newer car?

Without modern air bags, seat belts, and crumple zones, you are the crumple zone. The old car faring better in the crash transfers much more energy into the occupants, rather than dissipating it around and destroying itself, which leads to fewer injuries and deaths. You WANT the car to be unrecognizable after the crash, that means it did its job.

There is an element of truth to this, but it is sensationalised in recent times. The Fiat Punto recently underwent a full pitchfork press mob because ZERO STARS, but if you actually read the report it got that mark because it doesn't have automatic breaking and lane assist warnings, neither of which have any bearing on how safe the car is in a crash. Crash safety tests have moved away from actual protection to adding meaningless equipment as standard to cars.

>You WANT the car to be unrecognizable after the crash, that means it did its job.
It's amazing that this concept is so difficult for people to understand. Shit like pic related gets passed around on pleb shit like FB and the comments are all about how fragile and unsafe cars are now. Where did society fail? Physics education?

>lane assist warnings
The warnings should be to the traffic police to remove your license if you can't even drive within the lines.

It is safe to drive, but unsafe to crash.
Also safety cage is usually weak there...