What we need is a bumper cover to protect our bumpers. A friend's wife (of course) backed into a post filled with concrete. The damage looked minor and the insurance, minus the $200 deductible paid for it. But the total bill was $850, which included part of the tail lamp. The bumper, evidently flexed upward and damaged the tail light. I guess the message is, don't ever touch the bumper to anything, it's too expensive. I wonder if a cover could be put over the bumper to protect it from damage?
A product I'd like to see
- Thread starter Louie's gone fishing
- Start date
- Status
Kestas
Staff member
Isn't the bumper a cover itself?
Your friend should probably replace the bumper on his wife's car with a 2x8, like many redneck trucks. Then it can be replaced with something from Home Depot for $10.
Your friend should probably replace the bumper on his wife's car with a 2x8, like many redneck trucks. Then it can be replaced with something from Home Depot for $10.
In the 80s, bumpers were a lot better for that kind of accident... usually no damage at all. Of course, they were separate metal bars that didn't match the body color so they weren't pretty like today.
IIHS was testing bumpers for dollar value damage... but apparently they have stopped for now...
"Q: Why does the Institute's website no longer include bumper ratings?
A: Until recently our website included low-speed crash test ratings that indicated how well a vehicle's bumpers protect the rest of the bodywork from damage in low-speed crashes like the ones that occur in parking lots and city traffic. The ratings, which covered vehicle designs from 1995-2004, were based on the cost to repair damage caused in four 5 mph crashes — front-into-flat-wall, rear-into-flat-wall, front-into-angled-wall and rear-into-pole. The Institute is in the process of developing new bumper rating tests that are intended to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of bumper performance. We expect to begin publishing these new ratings sometime in 2006. As the new tests will produce different kinds of damage in some cases than the old tests, the old and new ratings are not comparable so the old ratings have been discontinued."
IIHS was testing bumpers for dollar value damage... but apparently they have stopped for now...
"Q: Why does the Institute's website no longer include bumper ratings?
A: Until recently our website included low-speed crash test ratings that indicated how well a vehicle's bumpers protect the rest of the bodywork from damage in low-speed crashes like the ones that occur in parking lots and city traffic. The ratings, which covered vehicle designs from 1995-2004, were based on the cost to repair damage caused in four 5 mph crashes — front-into-flat-wall, rear-into-flat-wall, front-into-angled-wall and rear-into-pole. The Institute is in the process of developing new bumper rating tests that are intended to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of bumper performance. We expect to begin publishing these new ratings sometime in 2006. As the new tests will produce different kinds of damage in some cases than the old tests, the old and new ratings are not comparable so the old ratings have been discontinued."
Louie's gone fishing wrote: "I guess the message is, don't ever touch the bumper to anything, it's too expensive."
Bumpers really should not be considered the "car part with which you bump things". I don't think that any of the parts were specifically designed to bump steel poles that are filled with concrete.
Bumpers really should not be considered the "car part with which you bump things". I don't think that any of the parts were specifically designed to bump steel poles that are filled with concrete.
Well they should be. On most vehicles today they aren't anymore, but they used to be. In fact, that's exactly what a bumper used to be for and is why they are called bumpers. Not too long ago almost all bumpers were made of substantially thick steel and were attached to the frame with substantial brackets. Most of them would withstand quite a hit with little or no damage. One personal example. Eight years ago my second vehicle was a 79 Dodge pickup. It had substantial bumpers front and rear. One of my sons drove it. While driving way too fast on a dirt road he lost control, went off the road and took out and busted 11 wooden barbed wire fence posts that were 4-5" thick. The bumper had one dent in it, which a body shop was able to get out with very little cost to me. I wish ALL bumpers on all vehicles were that way today.
If you had a '57 Buick you could push that pole right over without damaging the car.
Billions of dollars are spent each year to repair what should have been an "oops". We are paying for it and there is no excuse for not having a functional bumper. My $0.02 Canadian
P.B.
Billions of dollars are spent each year to repair what should have been an "oops". We are paying for it and there is no excuse for not having a functional bumper. My $0.02 Canadian
P.B.
Kestas
Staff member
Not many people know the bumper requirements have changed some time in the past 10 years. They used to be 5 mph front and rear. Now they are something like 2.5 mph. I forget the details. I believe the standard requires the damage be limited to the bumper after hitting a wall.
People hold a lot of value to cars with style. It's not 5 mph bumpers that draw people to the showrooms and out with new cars. That's why we have bumpers that are essentially non-functional.
People hold a lot of value to cars with style. It's not 5 mph bumpers that draw people to the showrooms and out with new cars. That's why we have bumpers that are essentially non-functional.
Crumple zones save lives.
You haven't looked at lumber prices recently, have you...
"Crumple zones save lives."
You can have a good bumper AND crumple zone.
It's insane to have the grill and headlights right out front unprotected like some of the new cars do...just ignorant. And OUR premiums go up with every $1000 3mph "oops".
P.B.
You can have a good bumper AND crumple zone.
It's insane to have the grill and headlights right out front unprotected like some of the new cars do...just ignorant. And OUR premiums go up with every $1000 3mph "oops".
P.B.
I hit a concrete pole, too. It was not high enough to see in the mirror, about two feet. I was in a rental car, in a parking structure at night and it was very dark. It was abosoutely my fault, but I was creaping back and bump. The rental car insuarance plus my auto insurance covered it but it was just over $1,000. If you were two car lengths away you could not see the damage, except the tail light, which was also broken by the flexing bumper, not the pole. It left a light colored mark about 4" by 1/8" on the pole, and the trunk would not open without a hard pull, and this for backing up three feet. Rental cars are good for one thing. I will never consider buying that car that I rented. I think you could have a tough bumper and still have a crumple zone.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Matching bumpers is the key. I had a Hardy's 18 wheeler come up on me at a traffic light. I was trained to look in the rear view mirror at a stop light. Unfortunately they didn't tell you what to do when the 18 wheeler miscues his stopping distance by 1 foot. He plowed me into the intersection ..I hit the back window ...stumbled out of the pickup truck. All he did was wrinkle my cheap bumper (not a step bumper). I asked for a $20 and sent him on his way (yes, I'm much too kind
). He was thankful that it was a pickup truck instead of a passenger car. He figured that he would have easily been in the back seat.
A foam bumper cover cover could be useful for places where contact parking is frequent.
I thought loud valves saves lives? Or is that loud clutches? I wouldn't mind one of those state trooper style pushbars on the front of my van.
drive by feel.
So we need bumper-bumpers?
I too did the below-the-mirror concrete stanchion encounter. This was in my Tacoma, which has a pretty substantial "old-school" type bumper, and it still put a big hickey in the bumper and bent it down five inches. Repair cost was about $350.
I too did the below-the-mirror concrete stanchion encounter. This was in my Tacoma, which has a pretty substantial "old-school" type bumper, and it still put a big hickey in the bumper and bent it down five inches. Repair cost was about $350.
Someone hit a full sized van behind me which, in turn, pushed the van into me. I was in a 2004 Tacoma, extra cab. The impact pushed the bumper down. Estimate was $400. What they didn't see was that the impact pushed the bed into the cab and cracked the paint. Repairs were $1300. My 93 Corolla too a rear hit too. $1300 in fix it costs as well. With the size of todays vehicles, would you really want a 2 ton SUV with a solid front bumper broadsiding a 1 ton neon? Nope. Not me. Even lower speed impacts would become fatal, air bags or not. The really issue here is to not hit stationary stuff. If you do, you pay.
Poles are certainly the worst possible thing you can hit in terms of causing damage to your vehicle. There's no better way to concentrate all the vehicle's momentum on one little spot. Even the old heavy steel bumpers will incur damage with that type of a hit. Personally, I'd rather have a car that both weighs and costs less and take the risk that I'll have to fork over some money if I'm unfortunate enough to damage it.
As often as the local morons like to cut in front of me approaching a stop -- usually with little room -- I'm more than tempted to put one of these on for that inevitable day
http://www.ranchhand.com/frontbumperstandard.htm
http://www.ranchhand.com/frontbumperstandard.htm
- Status
