# Cameo, meet pole!

**URL:** <https://forums.speedlife.net/t/cameo-meet-pole/250098>\
**Category:** Shift518 Automotive\
**Created:** [February 2, 2010, 1:20pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/cameo-meet-pole/250098 "2010-02-02T13:20:32Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 25

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![RocketPunch](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/rocketpunch/32/6429_2.png) [@RocketPunch](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/RocketPunch)\
**Post date:** [February 3, 2010, 9:25am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/cameo-meet-pole/250098/25 "2010-02-03T09:25:30Z")

</div>

> [@Bar Tabs](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bar-tabs/28986/9):
>
> This is very simple… Where older cars were built to be beefy, to withstand impacts completely intact, today they are built to absorb the force of the impact and direct it to certain parts of the chassis which will break therefore allowing the cabin of the car to maintain intact without breaking.
> 
> Where the older cars win and the newer cars fail is when they are hit by a smaller object. The parts of the modern car which are made to absorb the impact (think of the crumple zones on the hood and frame) simply aren’t anywhere near the impact zone and cannot do their job. The smaller impact area from the pole would put all the force focused on that one small area which will always tear right through the car especially when its directly between the frame rails.

That was my impression too, until I saw this video…🤣rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

[![](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/uploads/speedlife/original/3X/c/3/c36c2ac13ee43ba128913c97424e56be91adc721.jpeg "Head-On Crash Test: 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air vs 2009 Chevy Malibu") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1Asb3Ad-tg)

---

_[View the full topic](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/cameo-meet-pole/250098)._