Staged? Maybe. (Probably?)
Fake? I'm not so sure.
If you were going to fake it, I'd think you'd change the name of the crane operator to avoid liability issues. Beelen (the name on the crane and the banner on the fence) is a Dutch demolition company.

I'm having a difficult time identifying the livery on the bus, but I think it's noteworthy that it's been stripped of anything that might identify it. Beyond that, it almost looks like the top edge has already been damaged even before the block drops on it.
The guy in green in the parking lot in the background seems entirely unfazed by the proceedings.
And yes, I do think it's also noteworthy that the video was posted to YouTube with comments disabled.

This is really just a silly Hyundai Elantra commercial where they also talk to one of the Walking Dead creators about his work. There are roughly 3 different versions of the car depicted, and none of them are feasible.



Of course no one would pick a compact coupe as the foundation for an armored car if they had any kind of choice in the matter (and if they don't, there's no reason to talk about what a great choice their only option is). There are a couple key areas in which this car really shows the limitations of the basic platform (a compact coupe): Height, Carry Capacity.

Basics:
An Elantra weighs about 2,800lbs unmodified (and roughly 3,500 - 4,000 as imagined), has about 150HP (not impressive numbers from a 1.8L engine), and has a sunroof roughly 4'8" feet off the ground.

Height:
The idea of a turret on top of the car for offense is great, except for the part where he's talking about a car with a height of less than 5 feet. The average person is about 5'6" with an arm's reach of at least an extra foot. So, the person in the protected turret is still likely in range (the hypotenuse of an arm reaching to this height would be slightly longer than the ~4'8" car height plus the roughly foot and a half of turret). Have you ever stood out of a compact coupe's sunroof while the car was in motion? There's not a lot of room in that car period, there's certainly no room for a person to stand in the center of it while it's in motion in a high stress situation.

Carry Capacity:
The Elantra has a roughly 900lbs carry capacity (this weight includes driver and passengers, plus armor and such). I'm going to assume the weight of the cow catcher is about equal to an average small truck snow plow (250lbs), and that it's for hitting zombies not clearing the road of vehicles, and I'm going to place a fair shot in the dark of roughly 172.5lbs for the rest of the armor (assuming 7 gauge sheet metal is ideal, and assuming 23 square feet will cover enough glass). So far we've got 477.5lbs of carry capacity for driver, gunner, passengers, and gear. Each person likely weighs roughly 200lbs which means the car has enough capacity to deal with a driver, a single gunner, and two moderately well stocked bags of supplies. Any more than this and the car will start to run into issues, a lot more than this (say, loading it up with passengers and gear) and you risk significant damage to the car's ability to continue driving. All of this assumes they don't want to beef up the rear of the car to allow the vehicle to be able to "safely" ram other obstructions in the road (in a demolition derby drivers drive, and crash into each other, backwards to protect all of the sensitive components in the engine bay).

Other:
The roman chariot style blades on the wheels of a car was tried in an episode of the tv show Top Gear and it threw off the wheel balance to the point of making the car entirely undrivable for any more than a mile or two. Also, just about the last thing you want to do when dealing with zombies is damage their legs because it's much easier to see a zombie walking than a zombie crawling (our soldiers crawl when they want to be harder to see in modern combat for a reason). The general purpose of a compact car is to be accessible (read: inexpensive), and often they utilize a small fuel efficient engine. Increasing the weight of this car by about 40% is not doing any favors to the already under powered car, and the fuel economy is going to suffer. Realistically, speed and acceleration are meaningless (of course the car will exceed the 3 mile per hour average human walking speed).

Improvements:
*Start with a different type of vehicle. Perhaps something that was designed to be large.
*Ignore the mad max spikes.


research tools:
http://www.hyundaiusa.com/elantra/specifications.aspx
http://www.hyundai-forums.com/197-i30-elantra-touring-forum/140546-load-capacity-2012-touring.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humvee
http://www.fisherplows.com/fe/showroom/homesteader
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/gauge-sheet-d_915.html
http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/scales/sheetmetal.html

Always up for a good demolition.

Hey, buddy. I don't know whether you'll be checking your profile much now that you've been sent on the CircleLine cruise, but I wanted to tell you that I for one am rather disgusted by the way this played out. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Northeast Irish-Catholic (now non-superstitious) liberal, and I don't give a flying fick about your politics.

You've been a QUALITY submitter & commenter here, and were probably one of the main reasons I came out of lurkdom and became a Sifter. When I saw your banination, I spent about two hours reading comments and looking at your submissions to try to rationalize your dismissal, but there just wasn't enough. I may be only a GoldStar, but I've been here longer than I'd like to recount. In all my days, I've seen few Sifters as committed to the QUALITY this site intends to promote. I suppose there is much to your banination that I'm not privy to, and I'm very sorry for that. Even though it seems you have trolled quite a few members in the recent past, I think this decision should have been opened to investigation and consultation with the community at large.

Over the last years, we've had a disappointing diaspora of QUALITY members, but yet you stuck around. As the years have progressed, the QUALITY of submitters and high-level, long-term members has dwindled. I came here for people like you, like @Farhad2000, like @eric3579, @djsunkid, @mlx, @silvercord, @dystopianfuturetoday, @NetRunner, @kronosposeidon, @dag, @MarineGunrock and even like Choggie. You are among these names.

A (seemingly) long time ago, this site celebrated its diversity of both style and opinion. We've banned, and supported the banination of conservative trolls in the last few years, but only because of EXCESSIVE violations (eg. CaptainPlanet, and (to his unfortunate discredit) Choggie; this is NOT an exhaustive list). I've watched the progression, and while I agree with the socio-political principles of those in support of the exclusions, I cannot but think how the actual QUALITY of the site has suffered.

This was a place I came to enlighten myself, with submissions like this, this, this, this, this, this, and this (which is truly just a smattering of the QUALITY you've brought here). I used to hit the VideoSift link and expect to see submissions that I wouldn't have seen elsewhere. Unique submissions, with a higher intellectual quotient than the rest of the horse-apple internet digest sites. But now it's a site nearly indistinguishable from this one, and this one, or this one. Certainly (and obviously) I like and frequent those sites, but this is VideoSift, and I have always expected more bang for my buck.

I'm sure you've realized by this point that this comment is not just for you to read, as it both is public, and draws the attention of many other QUALITY members of the community. But I assure you that whatever the reaction, I want you particularly to know that you've affected my understanding of the world-at-large in a most positive way over the last four years. It was a privilege to have had your influence, and I will miss it.

I like a good demolition.

2 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

OK.

In reply to this comment by brycewi19:
>> ^ReverendTed:

I take it this is the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building?


My bad. I thought this was a poor-taste joke. I realized that you are actually talking about the final, controlled demolition of the Murrah building.

Someone want to upvote his comment to get negate my wrongful downvote?

>> ^ReverendTed:

I take it this is the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building?


My bad. I thought this was a poor-taste joke. I realized that you are actually talking about the final, controlled demolition of the Murrah building.

Someone want to upvote his comment to get negate my wrongful downvote?

Your video, Reporter Miscalculates Building Demolition, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Wow - a sifted demolition video where everything went as planned. How unexpected.

Thanks for the quality!

In reply to this comment by Boise_Lib:
*quality

It's called a cover. Distract everyone with planes so that they aren't focused on the buildings blowing up. It's not that complicated or difficult to imagine. It would be a lot more difficult for terrorists to have set up the demolitions.
You have to admit that this video presents some interesting connections and coincidences, no matter what you believe.>> ^volumptuous:

Retards, all of you.
If there were controlled demolitions, why would they involve airplanes at all? Why not just claim terrorists planted the demolitions, instead of going through all the trouble to ALSO hijack airplanes filled with people, and fly them into buildings at precisely the moment the explosives were set to detonate? Jesus fucking christ you have to be so thick to believe any of this horseshit for even a second.
You must literally have to remove your brain to not instantantly brush this off as the dumbest fairytale ever told.
You people are worse than Religious freaks. Zero evidence, and you keep banging your head against the same retardation wall endlessly.

>> ^volumptuous:
If there were controlled demolitions, why would they involve airplanes at all? Why not just claim terrorists planted the demolitions, instead of going through all the trouble to ALSO hijack airplanes filled with people, and fly them into buildings at precisely the moment the explosives were set to detonate?

Obviously critical thinking isn't your strong suit. A pretty common tactic used by terrorists is to have a one attack followed by a secondary attack after attracting medics or other responders to the initial attack.
The only reason they don't blame the demolitions on Muslim terrorists is because even the brain-dead sheeple wouldn't buy that lie. So they have to deny reality, ignore and cover up all evidence that demolitions were used.

>> ^volumptuous:

Retards, all of you.
If there were controlled demolitions, why would they involve airplanes at all? Why not just claim terrorists planted the demolitions, instead of going through all the trouble to ALSO hijack airplanes filled with people, and fly them into buildings at precisely the moment the explosives were set to detonate? Jesus fucking christ you have to be so thick to believe any of this horseshit for even a second.
You must literally have to remove your brain to not instantantly brush this off as the dumbest fairytale ever told.
You people are worse than Religious freaks. Zero evidence, and you keep banging your head against the same retardation wall endlessly.


u mad bro?