1989 Hyundai Excel Into 1989 Hyundai Excel Moderate Overlap Frontal Crash Test (63.5% Overlap)

[@05Forenza]

I'm fortunate we never got in an accident when I was little. We had a 1988 Excel hatchback. 35mph was not typical living in the middle of nowhere, we were certainly doing 60mph+.

[@ouch1011]

In case people are wondering why cars weigh so much more than they used to in the 1970s and 80s, this is why. The featherweight cars of the 70s and 80s were death traps made of paper thin metal and no safety reinforcement. This crash was at 35mph and would have likely been critically injuring, if not fatal for the driver of both vehicles.

[@martinsv9183]

Both Mercedes and Volvo were nice exceptions though. Could still open the doors normally.

[@desertmodern7638]

Such a difference. I suspect one car was before structural improvements, and one after. And what's with the low resolution footage - this was 1993 not 1893.

[@gabesmath105]

and only at 35 , jeez!

[@grabasandwich]

Unless there was some mid-year changes done, they're both the same year, so I'm not sure any improvements were made.

[@compu85]

Wow such bad performance - and such a difference between the 2 cars!

[@KevinM23]

"They don't make them like they used to." No, they don't because eating a steering column in a low-speed crash isn't everyone's idea of a good car. If you want to, by all means, ride in one of those. It's your funeral 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@AnItalianGuyOnYT]

when will we get the rest of the office auite from hyundai?

[@akj2387]

Why do both the cars look so different after the crash? Red one looks so much worse, but it’s identical cars and the angle is the same.

[@Vex-zz7br]

My only possible assumption is the weight distribution. The red excel had more weight on the passenger side than the other excel, plus there was no driver to prevent the a-pillar and dashboard from completely caving in.

[@joec1774]

@@Vex-zz7br That feels entirely reasonable. Also, I'm not sure why the test was conducted in this way - no vehicle would ever not have a driver (at least not in 1989).

[@шпикачька]

​@@Vex-zz7br I do not think that the presence of a driver would lead to less crumpling of the interior, most likely it is a matter of a variation in the quality of the welds in general, it looks as if the red Excel did not have a reinforcing beam in the door, the door did not even try to provide the destruction of the interior

[@шпикачька]

(If something is incorrectly written, I apologize - English is not my native language, I am still learning it)

[@Gfrank232]

Personally, I think there were some structural changes. Notice how much more the engine bay crumples on the silver car compared to the red one.

[@justsumguy2u]

I can't explain the difference between two identical models. Maybe there was a flaw in the testing, and one car was travelling slightly faster than the other? Production inconsistencies between the two? Very strange

[@DarrenMartin-x9v]

It's no wonder they crashed. The dark colored car didn't have a driver. Only a passenger!

[@thecaseyrae]

Driver was confused, thought this test was in England.

[@aloysiusbelisarius9992]

I'm not really noticing a difference between the two wrecks. But, if there was a difference, it could be revelation of inconsistent build practices in South Korea...which explains why Hy-'N'-Dri had a consistently-awful record according to Consumer Reports for at least its first 20 years of marketing in America. Notice how you no longer see Hy-'N'-Dris from the 1980s or 1990s on American roads...? There's a reason. I'm thinking the only reason Hyundai did not meet the same destiny as Yugo was because their parent country still exists. It makes sense, being that Britain still exists...as do two of *its* worst products: Jaguar and Range Rover.