Remembering Japanese cars from the past

Tag: crash test

Shocking 1985 Honda City crash test – WTF?!

The crash video of the 1985 Honda City below is only 3 seconds long and it must be one of the shortest videos you can find on Youtube! Regardless of this, the three seconds (and video description) contain a lot of information. So let’s dissect that information!

First of all, the title is “1985 Honda Jazz (City) crash test” and that gives us the information that either the car is a 1985-model, or the crash test was performed in 1985. I think the former may be true as there is a timestamp in the video that reads 21-12-1999, which indicates the test might have been performed on the 21st of December 1999.

Continue reading

Cutaway drawing of the 1973 Nissan ESV – Picture of the Week

I had never heard of the 1973 Nissan ESV before, but I accidentally bumped into a couple of photos on the Nissan Newsroom website. In the early 1970s, the Japanese government forced automakers to invest money and time into vehicle safety and Nissan announced in 1971 it would create the ESV. Apparently not only Volvo was doing experimental safety vehicles, but the whole of Japan. The result of that push can be seen in the two ESVs Nissan created.

The E2 was aimed more towards absorbing impact energy:

1973 Nissan ESV cutaway drawing
1973 Nissan ESV cutaway drawing

This cutaway drawing gives me more questions than answers. What is the deal with that Pedestrian Safety Device? Is that a bull bar to ensure pedestrians are flipped into the air over the car to ensure they don’t hit the windshield?

Continue reading

Friday video: junkyard car crashes

Where do stuntmen come from? Well apparently in the Netherlands they first work on a local junkyard for a couple of years!
Krimson37 taped a bunch of the crashes he made in 1992 and I picked out two involving destruction of J-tin.
Small warning in case you understand Dutch: be prepared for some foul language…

First of all a bright yellow Cherry F10 gets vandalized:

Also at 3:25 you can see a crushed first generation Honda Accord while the camera zooms in… When the guy enters the Cherry he is surprised that it even features a rev-counter.

The second video features a first generation Toyota Carina TA14 seeing some Seibu Keisatsu action:

Such a shame…

Direct links to videos:
Yellow Cherry F10
Carina TA14

Video: Heartbreaking Nissan Skyline C110 crash tests

I found an early 70s short documentary about the development of the Nissan Skyline C110! It starts with the the C110 development, then moves to manufacturing of a C110 and then comparing a C110 to previous generations around 2:00 with a four-split screen.

Skyline C110 development and manufacturing

The only touges we saw in the past were nicely paved mountain passes with screaming twin cams drifting in a downhill battle. Nice to see there were actually rough touges in the 70s!

Skyline crash test

The end of the first and second video continue on the design and crash testing of the Skyline C110:

The test track is, of course, the Oppama Grandrive. Funny to see they already covered the looks of the testcars/prototypes with black cloth as well back then! And just when you think everything is going well they show the C110 Skyline crash test! What’s even more heartbreaking are all those crashed C110s piled up with foliage growing through them.

I must say this is one of the nicest vintage videos I’ve seen in ages!

Video: 1960s Nissan Bluebird crashtests

I found these two vintage 1960s crash test videos of the Nissan Bluebird on Youtube. The first video shows the crash tests of a dummy sitting on the rear seat of a Nissan Bluebird 410 crashing at 50 km/h and 100 km/h:
Nissan Bluebird 410 crash test
Nissan Bluebird 410 crash test

Most probably these tests were done to see the impact of wearing seat belts at the rear seat at 50 and 100 km/h. As you can see the 410 two point seatbelt is pretty useless at 100 km/h: the seat belt fails due to the force of the impact and the dummy is launched and beheaded by the dashboard. Lovely slow-motion replays at the end of the video!

But believe me: even though the carnage looks bad, for that time these tiny 410s were quite safe! Compare that with these GM crash tests! But I still wouldn’t want to be beheaded by my own dashboard…

The second video shows the Nissan Bluebird 510 crash test at 40 km/h, creating a chain crash a few other 410s and a (new?) 510:

This test is actually very ingeniously done: no remote operated brakes, just a plain and simple wirecutter activating the brake system! It is like watching the Mythbusters from 1968! ;)

This test shows the advantages of using both a headrest and a seat belt. In the slow-motion footage at the end you can see that the dummy in the front car stays in place even after this car gets hit three times! The headrest saves the dummy from breaking its neck, while clearly the dummy of the second car wasn’t that fortunate: it hits both the windscreen and breaks its neck due to the front seat lacking a headrest.

Another thing becomes clear with this test: the 510 is a lot safer than the 410! Even though 410s receives a lot of damage on both front and rear ends while the 510 (third in row) crumples a lot more than the 410 to reduce the force of the impact.

I’m glad I’m driving a bit more modern car than these two! However, I seriously doubt a 27 year old car is considered safe according to nowadays standards…

AE86 Crash test

Cannabolic (user on AEU86) found this video on Youtube showing a sideways impact on a Toyota AE86:

It is a bit hard to see, but the car is a LHD zenki Trueno 2 door coupe. I assume that it is a USDM Corolla SR5 since it has black bumpers. Not much is left of the position the driver is supposed to be in, so side impact on this speed is not recommendable! What did I drive up to two years ago? A silver 4AGE converted US SR5 2 door coupe! Damn! That’s exactly the same car!

What about its source? Maybe it was a promotion video for OMP roll cages? More likely it is an original 80s US crash test before the car is allowed to be sold on the market? That leave us the question why a sideways impact on high speed is part of this test?

Of course: they could also have wanted to find out if the car was safe enough for its main purpose 20 years later: going sideways! Clearly going that way leaves a lot less crushable area than going in a straight line. ;)

© 2024

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑