# Older cars are safer than newer cars for rear seated passengers **URL:** \ **Category:** Safety\ **Created:** [August 18, 2025, 5:27pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527 "2025-08-18T17:27:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![TheWonderful90s](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/thewonderful90s/32/29584_2.png) [@TheWonderful90s](https://community.cartalk.com/u/TheWonderful90s)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 5:27pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/1 "2025-08-18T17:27:47Z")
I’m talking mostly about frontal head on crashes here, like on those 2 lane 65 MPH speed limit Colorado roads. Older cars are softer and smash up more in a crash which reduces the forces on the people sitting in the back, while sacrificing the front seats. It’s simple physics. The industry doesn’t want to admit it, but making cars safer for the front has had a significant negative effect on the rear, and the front passenger as well if just the driver side gets hit. The trend toward more compact vehicles with less trunk space behind hasn’t helped either. Rear impacts are the most common. They may try to make statistics that take in to account side airbags and compare over all deaths of newer cars to older cars, or not take in to consideration that rear passengers are less likely to wear seat belts. But it is basic physics that the rear seats are no longer much safer in head on collisions in modern cars. Sure they can say that the better side crash protection makes up for it, but if you primarily drive on rural roads that doesn’t matter to you. ---
**Author:** ![texases](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/texases/32/862_2.png) [@texases](https://community.cartalk.com/u/texases)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 5:43pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/2 "2025-08-18T17:43:57Z")
Please provide actual facts to support your claims/opinions. “…it is basic physics…” is just a claim. ---
**Author:** ![MikeInNH](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a587f6/32.png) [@MikeInNH](https://community.cartalk.com/u/MikeInNH)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 6:06pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/3 "2025-08-18T18:06:53Z")
State your source ---
**Author:** ![Purebred](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/purebred/32/46796_2.png) [@Purebred](https://community.cartalk.com/u/Purebred)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 7:18pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/4 "2025-08-18T19:18:21Z")
Hmm, sacrifice front seat passengers to protect the rear, got it! ---
**Author:** ![asemaster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5f9b8f/32.png) [@asemaster](https://community.cartalk.com/u/asemaster)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 11:18pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/5 "2025-08-18T23:18:04Z")
> [@TheWonderful90s](#): > > Rear impacts are the most common. Seems to me every rear impact involves a front impact as well. Or are people backing into trees at a high rate of speed or reversing into one another? ---
**Author:** ![Nevada\_545](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/nevada_545/32/41232_2.png) [@Nevada\_545](https://community.cartalk.com/u/Nevada_545)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 11:54pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/6 "2025-08-18T23:54:30Z")
Continue driving your old truck: everything modern is no good. ---
**Author:** ![TheWonderful90s](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/thewonderful90s/32/29584_2.png) [@TheWonderful90s](https://community.cartalk.com/u/TheWonderful90s)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 11:58pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/7 "2025-08-18T23:58:09Z")
> [@asemaster](#): > > Seems to me every rear impact involves a front impact as well. If it involves the rear of at least one vehicle it’s a rear end collision. ---
**Author:** ![oldnotdeadyet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/a6a055/32.png) [@oldnotdeadyet](https://community.cartalk.com/u/oldnotdeadyet)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 1:00am UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/8 "2025-08-19T01:00:28Z")
The IIHS added a rear passenger to their testing this year. The top ratings are only given to the vehicles that protect these occupants (small woman or 12 year-old positioned behind the driver.) Of course, when testing 100’s of cars, the relative damage to test dummies will be quite variable. Conversely, a similar problem exists when attempting to use accident-reconstruction data to explain the cause of death. And, we also know that for years, the best place for someone younger than 13 is the back seat. My 10 year old granddaughter reminded me of that this last week.) ---
**Author:** ![TheWonderful90s](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/thewonderful90s/32/29584_2.png) [@TheWonderful90s](https://community.cartalk.com/u/TheWonderful90s)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 2:37pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/9 "2025-08-19T14:37:31Z")
> [@oldnotdeadyet](#): > > And, we also know that for years, the best place for someone younger than 13 is the back seat. Only because of airbags. In many hatch back vehicles with no truck area behind, the rear seats can be more dangerous than the front. ---
**Author:** ![davesmopar](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/davesmopar/32/41750_2.png) [@davesmopar](https://community.cartalk.com/u/davesmopar)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 2:44pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/10 "2025-08-19T14:44:45Z")
> [@TheWonderful90s](#): > > Only because of airbags Ummmm, isn’t the front and side air bags one of the main reasons for overall safer front seats also?? ---
**Author:** ![texases](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/texases/32/862_2.png) [@texases](https://community.cartalk.com/u/texases)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 2:48pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/11 "2025-08-19T14:48:11Z")
> [@TheWonderful90s](#): > > the rear seats can be more dangerous than the front. How do you know this? ---
**Author:** ![VOLVO-V70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/8e8cbc/32.png) [@VOLVO-V70](https://community.cartalk.com/u/VOLVO-V70)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 2:55pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/12 "2025-08-19T14:55:07Z")
Once again I can not find anything to agree with the Snowman and his theories that only he knows about. ---
**Author:** ![jtsanders](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c2a13f/32.png) [@jtsanders](https://community.cartalk.com/u/jtsanders)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 2:56pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/13 "2025-08-19T14:56:21Z")
I recall a rear passenger test in 1998. The Buick Regal had a higher rating for rear side impact than the Olds Intrigue. The door panel on the Regal was higher than on the Intrigue. I guessed that was the reason. ---
**Author:** ![Purebred](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/purebred/32/46796_2.png) [@Purebred](https://community.cartalk.com/u/Purebred)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 3:11pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/14 "2025-08-19T15:11:06Z")
Same as people know an electric frying pan is better than factory/dealer cold weather package. ---
**Author:** ![davesmopar](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/davesmopar/32/41750_2.png) [@davesmopar](https://community.cartalk.com/u/davesmopar)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 4:21pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/15 "2025-08-19T16:21:04Z")
One of the forums Court Jesters strikes again… ---
**Author:** ![TheWonderful90s](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/thewonderful90s/32/29584_2.png) [@TheWonderful90s](https://community.cartalk.com/u/TheWonderful90s)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 11:37pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/16 "2025-08-19T23:37:40Z")
> [@davesmopar](#): > > Ummmm, isn’t the front and side air bags one of the main reasons for overall safer front seats also?? Yes but not for children, which was what the previous comment was about. A front airbag can cause serious injury to a child. ---
**Author:** ![Nevada\_545](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/cartalk/user_avatar/community.cartalk.com/nevada_545/32/41232_2.png) [@Nevada\_545](https://community.cartalk.com/u/Nevada_545)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 11:58pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/17 "2025-08-19T23:58:20Z")
> [@TheWonderful90s](#): > > A front airbag can cause serious injury to a child. …in older cars. Most passenger vehicles sold during the last 20 years are equipped with an occupant classification system that deactivates the passenger airbag if the passenger weight is below a certain threshold. ---
**Author:** ![jtsanders](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c2a13f/32.png) [@jtsanders](https://community.cartalk.com/u/jtsanders)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2025, 2:44pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/18 "2025-08-20T14:44:04Z")
> [@TheWonderful90s](#): > > Yes but not for children, which was what the previous comment was about. A front airbag can cause serious injury to a child. That’s why children aren’t supposed to ride in the front seat. ---
**Author:** ![sstreky\_177112](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8dc957/32.png) [@sstreky\_177112](https://community.cartalk.com/u/sstreky_177112)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2025, 3:54am UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/19 "2025-08-24T03:54:42Z")
They occasionally will test a modern car by crashing it into an older vehicle from 20–30 years ago. And they publish the crash data from both vehicles. The differences are huge. Everyone in the modern car walks away with relatively minor injuries. Completely different situation in the old car. The trauma registered to the test dummies indicate life altering injuries for the same accident. ---
**Author:** ![TwinTurbo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8baadc/32.png) [@TwinTurbo](https://community.cartalk.com/u/TwinTurbo)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2025, 2:15pm UTC](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527/20 "2025-08-25T14:15:41Z")
I recall quite a few instances where the front seat back would collapse backwards from the force of an adult in the front seat during a rear end collision. Especially dangerous for kids riding in the back seat that were crushed as a result. I believe this may still be an issue… [Next page](https://community.cartalk.com/t/older-cars-are-safer-than-newer-cars-for-rear-seated-passengers/201527.md?page=2)