Part 2 is here.

Suddenly seatbelts seem insignificant.

YIKES!!! They should fill the cars/trucks up with fruit, like a watermelon or something first.

And the Smart does surprisingly well.

good god, that first red French car that gets hit by the truck was completely flattened. That scared the hell out of me.

Argghh scary rat thing! Viral mind-games.

Yeah, impressed by the Smart car. Naff car but the front takes the impact very well. The driver's legs would be wreaked but you'd expect a lot worse from the speed, just look at the yellow car at t-30s! Of course, the deceleration would also mess you up. The green car in front of the red Citroen is just obliterated and the Citroen it's self disappears, that's scary.

I presume these are from all over the place? The 2nd clip, the train hitting the people carrier, was on Top Gear as part of a spoof safety ad.

Tank at t-50s FTW!

nm.

I said DAMN a few times.

Regarding that smart crash test (footage from a top gear bit), it went from 70 mph (112 kph) to full stop in one meter, the meter where the engine used to be and is quite a worst scenario.
The indestructible egg around the passengers is expected withstand anything and even trigger the colliding vehicle's crumple zone and sink into it.

I suppose it's better than to be skewered by your own car like the last car in the video, though.

"Line of cars" crash at -1:48 pretty much shows mythbusters is always wrong when they bust something. Alright, at least the one where they said that couldn't happen, anyways.

Upvote for the f'ing SPACE SHUTTLE crashing. So cool.

Reminds me of this quote I read from Richard Dawkins:

It is notoriously hard to persuade drivers to slow down in a fog, or refrain from tailgating at high speed. The economist Armen Alchian has ingeniously suggested that we should abolish seat belts and instead compulsorily fix a sharp spear to all cars in the middle of the steering wheel, pointing straight at the driver’s heart. I think I would find it persuasive, whether or not for atavistic reasons. I also find intellectually persuasive the following calculation: if a car travelling at 80 miles per hour is abruptly slammed to a complete halt, this is equivalent to hitting the ground after falling from a New York skyscraper. In other words, when you are driving fast, it’s exactly as if you were hanging from the top of the Empire State Building by a rope, sufficiently thin that its probability of breaking is equal to the probability that the driver in front of you will do something really stupid. I know almost nobody who could happily sit on a window sill up a skyscraper, and very few who do things like bungy jumping willingly. Yet almost everybody happily drives at high speed along motorways, even when they clearly understand in a cerebral way that the dangers are precisely equivalent. I think it quite plausible that we are genetically programmed to be afraid of heights, but not to be afraid of travelling at high speeds horizontally in wheeled vehicles, because our ancestors would never have met them.

*dead

This published video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by jonny.

rasch187 has fixed this video's dead embed code - no Power Points awarded because rasch187's points are already fully charged.