BMC Crash Test (1961-1965) | British Pathé
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 ส.ค. 2024
- This smashing archive footage from the 1960s shows multiple shots of crash test exercises on BMC cars that have some pretty horrendous effects.
For Archive Licensing Enquiries Visit: goo.gl/W4hZBv
Explore Our Online Channel For FULL Documentaries, Fascinating Interviews & Classic Movies: goo.gl/7dVe8r
#BritishPathé #Cars #BMC #CrashTest #Crash
Subscribe to the British Pathé YT Channel: goo.gl/hV1nkf
(FILM ID:3258.06)
BMC Crash Test.
Titles read: 'MINI'.
Several shots of Mini cars with two crash-test dummies inside it crashing head on into a large concrete block. Some shots in slow motion. The bonnet is completely smashed in in the later shots. Still shot showing the effects on the car crashing at 25, 30 and 38 miles an hour. Pretty horrendous.
Intertitle: '1100'.
Several shots of BMC 1100 car undergoing the same crash tests.
Intertitle: '1800'.
Several shots of BMC 1800 car undergoing crash tests. Still shot comparing the effects of the cars after crashing at 20, 30 and 35 miles an hour. Stills showing the interior of the car after crashing at the different speeds.
Intertitle: 'MGB'.
Brief shot of convertible MGB slamming into the block - there are no dummies in this car. Shots of engine and interior of car after crash. Slow motion shots at night of the car crashing into the block (area is floodlit). M/S of doors being opened and shut to show they are undamaged after crash. Unusual view from below the car as it crashes in slow motion and debris falls on top of the camera. Shots of the underneath of the car after crash. View from inside the car as we crash - camera is pointed at steering wheel and shot is seen in slow motion.
BRITISH PATHÉ'S STORY
Before television, people came to movie theatres to watch the news. British Pathé was at the forefront of cinematic journalism, blending information with entertainment to popular effect. Over the course of a century, it documented everything from major armed conflicts and seismic political crises to the curious hobbies and eccentric lives of ordinary people. If it happened, British Pathé filmed it.
Now considered to be the finest newsreel archive in the world, British Pathé is a treasure trove of 85,000 films unrivalled in their historical and cultural significance.
British Pathé also represents the Reuters historical collection, which includes more than 136,000 items from the news agencies Gaumont Graphic (1910-1932), Empire News Bulletin (1926-1930), British Paramount (1931-1957), and Gaumont British (1934-1959), as well as Visnews content from 1957 to the end of 1984. All footage can be viewed on the British Pathé website. www.britishpat...
![ว้าว!ลุงบีมแบกทองมารับขวัญหลานกันยกบ้าน [cc] แดนแพทตี้ SS2 | EP.49 |](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Osihq1OAs-4/mqdefault.jpg)
Who needs a collapsible steering column when you already have a collapsible spinal column
You know it's bad when even the crash test dummy slumps over like it's dead.
😂
Not many stars awarded on that day!
Gotta love the forehead-shaped dent in the steering wheel! lol
Surprisingly strong, especially considering some cars built 10 years later.
Yes the cars seem very strong compared to nowadays but look at the movement of the dummies. They are absorbing all of the impact energy. Some life changing injuries there....or worse.
And yet it was 20+ years after this car makers finally started fitting head restraints. Disgraceful really.
If they keep letting crash test dummies drive then innocent car's lives will continue to be ruined. This madness must end!!
Yup, nothing like a broken neck or impaled on the steering column
this was certainly a good showing for seatbelts, look at how the mini with a 3 point belt the dummy only looked like it got whiplashed instead of impaled.
I crashed a mini into a wall and the only undamaged parts were the boot lid and right indicator. Engine almost in the car and steering column faced the passenger door. I was fine though.
You were lucky.
That transversed engine, when pushed, had a nasty habit of pinning your toes to your shins...
Undercarriage shot is brilliant
And this is how the game of curling was invented, kids. True story.
Confirming how deadly cars were then. Marc Bolan died in a mini 😢
they still are?
Considering the year of the tests those Cars took those crashes extremely well by todays standards but probably not so with an offset test I would think.
It's not all about how the car looks after the crash, in fact less deformation of the car often translates to worse injuries for the occupants. Obviously you want the passenger compartment to not be intruded upon, but in these cars the stiff body, solid steering columns and dashes, and lack of proper crumple zones and of course airbags, would result in pretty major injuries, even at 25mph.
The part Leyland never told you about the oh so cute mini, is that it was a death trap...petrol tank is in the boot right next to the rear quarter panel skin and just to add a little extra they put the rear light right next to the petrol tank....honestly other than keeping a pilot light lit in the boot then I don't see how they could have made it more dangerous.
My uncle was a fireman in the 1970s and he flatly refused to let either of his children have Minis as he saw far too many fatalities involving that terrible car.
@@HowardLeVert yes....I was speaking with experience of that very fact.
Wasn't the battery kept in the boot of the mini as well?
@tafnamtaf8909 Yes it was, that's what I was saying...madness by today's standards.
The mini appears do to better than the metro that replaced it. Saying that, it's not difficult to do better than a metro.
Good point. Metros fall apart on impact. You'd be safer in a biscuit tin.
Finally! I've found some Metro UN-enthusiasts! 😂I passed my test in '88 in one and vowed I'd never own, dreadful little cars.
The metro is still safer than an early mini if you get into a crash. Don't forget the metro crash test was offset which concentrates all the force onto one side, plus the early minis had other hazards such as external filler cap which ripped off in a roll over. They are both still awful but modern standards, and the later minis were better than early ones, but all things considered the metro was a small step forward safety wise.
The old Land Crab didn't fare well - so they were lethal as well as being hideously ugly!
Makes you appreciate the invention of the air bag
I always feel a bit sorry for the dummies. They get such a hard life.
I remember seeing an allegro after an accident, there was a tooth stuck in the steering wheel 😬 They were all death traps back then and people still die in cars.
Isigonis was against the idea of seatbelts being fitted. His rationale was, the car handled well and had good brakes, so you won't crash. The handling was excellent due to the very stiff monocoque. By the standards of the day, the Mini was quite crash worthy.
Up until MGB crashes filmed at TRRL Crowthorne
Honestly that wasn't nearly as bad as I expected. It looked like you could walk away from the 25. Probably would have some bruises and your neck would hurt really bad for a few days but you would live.
I doubt it.
You would think, but no. A modern car would crumple, but channel the force of the impact around the passenger compartment. Here, the force goes right through it. And the occupants.
@@Tourist1967 Idk it seems the seatbelts really did their job. They stretched enough to slow the dummy down in a timely manner. Also that car doesn't seem to have to bad of a crumple zone. Notice how much of the front is gone in the 38 mph crash. Im pretty sure old cars acrually crumple more but the problem is that occupant compartment in those old cars also crumple and they crumple into your body.
@@A_youtube_channel_ The mini engine also had a tendency to end up in the laps of the front seat occupants. Cars were not very safe then - but there was no excuse for selling a barely-improved car right up to the start of the next century.
@@Tourist1967 : No excuse at all. BMC did the tests, their cars failed, but they made no changes in their production cars.
Why dont you put a rubber spare tyre on the back like the old days or even a rubber frame front and back over the metal ? So you could bounce of stuff and a body being hit had more chance ? Engines in the back with a spare rubber wheel on back ?
4:31 - Watch the bonnet badge ping off and fly straight up in the air.
4:40 - Watch the bonnet badge land on the roof just above the windscreen.
I noticed that as well...pretty cool so you don't lose it in a crash 😂
what is the rear car? ford galaxie? Where can I get photos of this car in this recording?
Why does the camera pan past the crash on first one lol
Sturdy little cars the old minis considering the year.
So with the new 20 mph in Wales our cars should all now survive with just minor scratches. That Mini did fairly well at 25mph so the new 20mph we should all be winners here in Wales and our insurance should drastically go down in 2024.
yeah right insurance only goes down when you die.......preferably of old age and in your sleep when you are 110.
I know lol we are scammed daily from birth to death @@babaganoush6106
@@babaganoush6106Or shot dead by a woman's jealous husband when you're 90.
@@thepub245 life insurance goes up then
Glad I never crashed my 1800 . The motor blew up instead at 112,000 miles
@davido5064 - Unfortunately, I did crash an 1800 Mk2 in 1984 - I was travelling in the 1800 at approx 50mph, I had an offset head-on with a Metro, after impact, the 1800 rebounded off onto the verge nearby. 1800 wing was buckled behind beside front wheel which remained in the correct position, and leading edge of bonnet was buckled. I only had a minor knuckle strain. As for the Metro, the front on one side was gone, the door frame was buckled and, unfortunately, the passenger had to be stretchered away with back injury. Although the combined impact was approx 80mph, it is quite clear that the effect of impacting a moveable car, which also absorbs impact, and also rebounding off, is much less dramatic than coming to an instant stop against a solid concrete barrier. However, I was glad to be in the 1800 which were renowned for being very rigid, and it was quite clear to me at the time that these relatively new and much acclaimed Metros were not safe, and ultimately they were killed off in Dec 1997 (in the form of the Rover 100) due to a terrible one-star EuroNCAP frontal impact rating.
“Cars back in my day could take a hit better than the disposable plastic cars from nowadays!”
the cars back in the day:
Looks like some crash test dummies were definitely hurt in the making of this film.
Looks like the front drive Mini and 1800, failed the test. Above 35 mph, which is WELL below typical road speeds, the driver would be crippled due to footwell crumpling and suffer extreme whiplash due to insufficient seat back height.
There is no sound track with this film, which indicates it never was released for public viewing. Not surprising as BMC never addressed the defects revealed in these low speed tests.
The MGB did rather better. That doesn't surprise me. In 1974 a drunk crashed his MGB into my parked brand new Ford Falcon. The police estimated the impact speed to be about 45 MPH. Due to the MGB's strong ladder chassis, it demolished my Falcon, but the MGB didn't look so bad and the drunk walked away with only minor scratches and possibly lost a couple of teeth.
This film shows that BMC cars were not safe. Ralph Nader famously rubbished the safety of US cars, much to the pleasure of the British. Nader didn't know how good US cars were compared to BMC.
The interesting thing about the B is it was one of the first cars designed with crumple zones. Note after hitting the barrier the passenger compartment is not deformed and the doors open. With a three point seat belt and the 1974 and later collapsing steering column, and the N.A. Spec door guard beams. This is a safe car for the era. I am surprised the 1800 didn’t fare better the unibody was as strong as the Mercedes S class of the era.
@@briandawkins984 The passenger compartment did not appear to be deformed - from the A-pillar back, but if your feet got mangled you wouldn't be happy, you would be a cripple. British seat belts did not meet Australian standards (which were copied from US standards). A company I worked for in the 1970's had a few staff seriously injured because the seat belts failed - in circumstances where a non-British car seatbelts would not have failed.
Collapsible steering columns came in here in 1968 in most brands and were mandatory from 1971.
These cars did not have door beams.
The crash tests shown in this video were only low speed tests. Even at 35 MPH the front seat occupants would have been seriously injured. These were NOT safe cars for the era at all. They basically failed the test.
Mercedes began crash testing in 1959, verifying no serious injury up to 75 km/hr (47 m/hr) in head-ons - considerably better than these BMC tests at 35 m/hr. Energy rises as to the square of speed, so a head on into concrete in a BMC car could be expected to kill you.
I once owned a fintail Mercedes. They were heavy strong cars that tended to demolish cars they hit anyway. The crumple zone was the other car. You are completely fantasizing if you think an 1800 was as good as a Merc.
Sorry, you are right. The 1800 had 3x more torsional rigidity than other cars of the era. The only other car being stronger was the Mercedes S class of the era. The design allowed for lighter gage metal, and less passeng safety. The unibody was so strong that the engine required no subframe. As to seat back height and headrests in the day not even a 1964 Mercedes had them. Seat belts were lapbelts, and padded dash boards good luck. In the 1960’s probably the safest cars we’re Rover P6, Mercedes, Volvo, and Citroen as recommended by Charles De Gaulle.
@@briandawkins984 : The point is: Mercedes and others did crash tests and used the information gained from the tests to correct design flaws and improve safety. BMC however appears to have done a crash test because the opposition did, but made no changes to their production. If memory serves me right, you are correct, nobody had head-restraints back in the 1960's, but the seat back in the east-west BMC cars were lower than most, making whiplash worse, as this old film shows.
The Mercedes of that era was the fintail (W111 series), S-Class (W116 series) came in 1972. The fintails had a front sub-chassis - this wasn't because Mercedes didn't know how to make a good unibody, it was because it let them make a 4-cylinder car that was as vibration free as a six, and it lessened the impact of road roughness without making the suspension unduly soft. The engine rubber mounts bolted to the sub-chassis and the body also rubber isolated from the subchassis.
I loved my fintail - it rode as quiet and smooth as a big American car but without the body roll and wallowing. Cornered on rails by comparison. Heating and ventilation better than any other car. Like an American car you could cruise all day at freeway speeds without getting tired. It was however gutless. The vertical speedo was a bit silly.
@@keithammleter3824 yes, Mercedes has had a long standing agreement with their local state to have M-B cars in accidents towed to the factory for post accident analysis. BMC was rather much like GM safety doesn’t sell. As to my comment about the MGB I was referencing my 1980 Federalised North American model. Rubber Bumpers for impact, door guard beams, which I can confirm are there. I saw them whilst doing the restoration. The gas tank is not the trunk floor, so unlike a 64 Ford Mustang won’t wind up in the passenger compartment. The steering column is collapsible. There are 3 point reel belts, which I replaced - firmly anchored to the car body mounting points. These all meet U.S. specs of 1976 as do the lousy head head rests. My point is the cars you compare to Mercedes are considerably cheaper. The 1800 compared to vehicles of its class and price was pretty average, with some unusual engineering features, of which BMC left their unwitting customers to sort out. My Dad owned an Austin 1800 in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. We learned as a family of the best of the advances in Issigonnis’s design, and the foibles as well. Honestly, it was no worse or better than an unmemorable VW411 saloon that came a bit later. So I return to my original comment for safety in the era, your best picks were Volvo, Citroen, Mercedes, and Rover. But note that none of these were in the price class of the Austin/Morris line. Just as I wouldn’t pick Holden, Datsun, Toyota of the era for safety. Incidentally if you want to know more about the unibody strength of the Austin 1800 type that as a search term in google. It will bring up information from original engineering research papers. It’s been interesting to discuss with you.
Car is fine, pity about the dummy who was driving it.
1:30: A human wouldn't survive that.
Ohhh, the poor dummy. It is no wonder so many owners of these cars died during a crash. Ironically, the car that offered the most protection, was also the least favored by the buying public. 1800s.
Why no collapsible steering column? 😬
While the collapsible steering column was invented in the 30's, most manufacturers didn't start installing them as standard until the late 60's and early 70's. Cars like the mini were designed in the late 50's.
I had a fed Vauxhall victor,which had a collapsable steering column
These cars were ugly as as a syn. I remember one american movie when one 1800 got crushed between two full size american cars. Guy in 1800 were rescued, but they laugted to his car like there is no tomorrow.
Issigonis did tend to prioritise function over form, I'll give you that.
@@imbethondion4572 but his placement of the transverse engine has saved so many lives