http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6237811Oh my.
This bonfire's a little bit dated, from about six weeks ago.
trof (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 06:49 PM
Original message
Why aren't car bumpers at a 'standard' height?
Just watching a segment on the news about how expensive minor collisions are. One reason that I can see is that different car bumpers don't 'match'.
They override or underride.
We have a national standard for seat belts.
Why not one for bumper heights?
Seems like a no brainer to me.
For some reason, this innocuous bonfire turned out a big one.
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
1. There is a (somewhat loose) standard bumper height for passenger cars
16 - 20 inches from the ground. It does not apply to trucks or pickups, and therefore does not apply to SUVs.
A bumper the same height as a typical car bumper would create a ground clearance problem for the few people who actually drive their SUVs off-road on occasion (as I do).
FarCenter (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. You could have a hydraulic lift to raise them for off-roading.
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. An engineering fix - Not a bad idea in principle
But I think hydraulics would be unnecessarily complicated.
FarCenter (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 09:38 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. If you had an electrical winch, you could probably figure a way to use that
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. I think it could be accomplished with a simple set of levers, cams, catches, etc.
Having the height adjustable sounds better the more I think about it. I just think the simplest possible way would be best.
FarCenter (1000+ posts) Fri Aug-07-09 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #21
31. I just worry that anything that can't be done with the push of a button won't be marketable to the American public.
On the other hand, the folks who actually take their SUV off road are probably the folks who thought it was OK to get out and manually lock their 4WD hubs.
One_Life_To_Give (1000+ posts) Fri Aug-07-09 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #9
32. Keeping it aligned with the appropriate crach support frame
Keeping it aligned with the appropriate crach support frame members would be an issue. If the braces are only designed for supporting a crash when the bumper is low they would still interfere with ground clearance. If mounted high for offroad then people would be even more inclined to keep them up.
pokercat999 (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. Actually it varies from state to state. Here in VA they must have changed the law a few years ago because you would see a lot of cops measuring the height of raised vehicles, mostly 4 x 4's.
The way cars are built today with crash or crumple zones I don't think matching up bumpers would be all that effective. A deer ran into my 2005 Honda Van last year and did over $1800 in damage to the side door.
My wife's 2005 BMW was attacked by a shopping cart (as near as we could tell) and the damage was over $2000. These were not big accidents or crashes just minor stuff. Both were covered by insurance so the bills were not padded. If you have an actual crash at speed the bumper, hood and other front components are designed to crumple in a controlled way to protect the passenger compartment. The rear is the same. Check out some crash cars at the local body shop or junk yard and you'll see what I'm talking about.
A primitive with a BMW? Not exactly a proletariat vehicle, a BMW.
jody (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
2. We'll get back to you just as soon as we pass a Universal Health Care Bill.
Pedro Picasso, who's been on vacation since Labor Day:
Atman (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
5. Holy shit...is dyslexia contagious?
I read both the headline and the body as "bumper cars." I thought you were freakin' kidding.
Speaking of "no brainer."
The defrocked warped primitive:
Warpy (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
6. And why aren't they real BUMPERS instead of fibreglas over foam painted the same color as the rest of the car with a couple of rubber strips on top to kid you into thinking they'll do anything in a low speed collision?
I don't want a return to chrome, but I would like to see a return to real bumpers, preferably mounted with shock absorbers to reduce the chance of damage to the car.
Better Today (423 posts) Thu Aug-06-09 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Lighter weight meaning less fuel and exhaust, less expensive than metals
Ms. Toad (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. and more cost to replace, since they can't be repaired and the slightest bump to the bumper makes it look like a disaster.
Better Today (423 posts) Fri Aug-07-09 04:59 AM
Response to Reply #15
27. So you're either guaranteed to pay it in gas and environment, or you drive defensively without a phoning or texting, and you might make it through without an accident to cost you tons. I'll take the later. Furthermore they are tasked with protecting our lives at high speeds. What will protect at high speeds, dents a low speeds and probably costs less than heavy metal alloys. On the flip side, what would be "good" in your mind for perceived monetary reasons at low speeds, would be quite unpleasant I imagine at high speeds. A metal or bumper with strength as you mention would encourage the engine compartment on to your lap in a much worse way, than something that crushes like a marshmallow. Perhaps I'm wrong, I'm not an engineer, but it makes sense to me.
I think I saw the report and only the back ends were tested, I guess perhaps a stronger back bumper could be in order since it couldn't adversely effect the engine compartment. . . oh, scratch that, if you're rear-ended, its with someone else front end. If you're front-ended it could either be you rear-ending someone else, or it could be a true front end collision. Yep, sorry, but the bumpers as is make sense to me.
Ms. Toad (1000+ posts) Fri Aug-07-09 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #27
30. The damage to my bumpers has been caused by people who park carelessly next to me, or other people who have hit me when there was nothing I could do to avoid it. The cost to repair the damage which (1) didn't happen with the old bumpers since it took more than a feather to leave a dent or scratch and (2) could be buffed out or the bumper replaced without having to replace the entire back (or front) end of the car.
FYI bumpers are not designed to protect at high speeds. They are tested at some ridiculously low speed - like 5-10 mph. The cost to repair the damage done at those speeds (i.e. the speed at which some bozo pulls into the parking space next to me and hits my bumper) is $1000-$3000. Typically I am not there when it happens and - surprise, surprise - they don't leave me a note fessing up. I am then left with shelling out big bucks to replace someone else's damage, or bringing in my insurance company (with a hefty deductible) or driving around in a car that looks like I enjoy running into things.
I want a real bumper on my car that doesn't require the replacement of the entire back or front end of the car when damaged, and is made of some material that can be cosmetically repaired without - again - replacing the entire front end of the car. I don't believe I said anything about wanting it to be made of heavy metal alloys.
Frankly, it sounds to me like you've never had a real bumper on your car.
Better Today (423 posts) Fri Aug-07-09 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #30
37. I guess we will just disagree then, because I don't want a heavy bumper forcing more of the engine or anything else into the passenger compartment in a higher speed wreck, I want the damned thing to collapse.
You may be right about the testing, but I was discussing more the designing, and I also mentioned I'm not an engineer, but can analyze based on simple logic and having seen a lady trapped in her car with her legs cut off because the engine was in her lap and the steering wheel had her beyond pinned into her seat which was shoved to where the back seat should've been back in the day when bumpers were made as you are suggesting they still be made. It was really horrible.
My understanding is that over the years since then, 1974, the car industry has been tasked with making the passenger compartment of the vehicles more safe. I believe that the softer bumpers probably add to that safety.
JerseygirlCT (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #6
18. Oh heck yes
Now a small bump at a very low speed will cause enough damage to mean replacing a whole section of the car. My car was totalled when the driver (not me), going about 15 mph, skidded on a wet road and slid into a wood rail. The whole front crumpled. Now, I'm glad that that meant no one was hurt, but at the same time, the same sort of bump when I was a kid would have resulted in... well, a bump. Probably no damage to the car.uncle ray (1000+ posts) Fri Aug-07-09 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #18
36. and that same 15 mph bump in a 58 buick would have your head cracked open on the dashboard. AND you'd have a real expensive massive chrome bumper to replace.
nostalgia isn't what it used to be. i own no vehicles newer that 1970, all have "real" bumpers on them. none of them would withstand a 5mph bump without at least moderate damage. heck, my 63 buick riviera has a big chrome "real" bumper that causes damage to the body if you actually use the bumper jack as intended to jack the 4500 pound tank. one of the hardest parts to find for ANY old car is straight undamaged bumpers.
we don't need better bumpers, we need better drivers. put down the phone, quit watching tv while driving and you'll seldom have to worry about testing those bumpers out.
JerseygirlCT (1000+ posts) Fri Aug-07-09 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #36
41. Well, my parents had a Ford station wagon that certainly took that sort of abuse without much happening to the car or the passengers. I remember it well, as it was the car I learned to drive in, same with my siblings.
My family also had the use of a Mercedes for a while when living overseas. The local drivers were terrifying, but that car was truly a tank.
The accident that totaled my car wasn't a case of phone, tv or any other appliance. Just a 90 degree turn on a rainy night - going about 15 mph, tops. Things do happen. It'd be nice if when they did, they didn't require a new car.
Mariana (594 posts) Thu Aug-06-09 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #6
20. Because they're designed to crumple, not "bump" nowadays so as to absorb the impact of the crash, protecting the passengers from such as neck injuries caused by the sudden stop or start. It works, too, but it does lead to much destruction of the car and expensive repairs.
Posteritatis (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #6
24. don't a lot of them still work fairly well in more life-threatening kinds of collisions?
I thought the idea wasn't to be rigid and unyielding, but to hold *just* enough to spread out the impact over a longer period. The energy difference between going from sixty to zero in an eighth of a second versus a quarter of a second - or even between a tenth of a second and an eighth of a second - can be astonishingly large.
You want your bumpers to "fail" in that sense on impacts, and to do so in a certain way - an unyielding solid steel one is often more dangerous, since the time spent coming to a stop is shorter with those. It's a pain in the ass in low speed, relatively undangerous collisions, but there you're only losing money or aesthetics. When there's a collision at a high enough speed that you're physically in danger, how "poorly" the bumper holds up has a big impact on how much danger you're in.
Seriously; work out the energies involved in those kinds of decelerations over those kinds of periods. Tiny, tiny differences in the time over which they happen are a huge, huge influence.
The defrocked warped primitive, again:
Warpy (1000+ posts) Fri Aug-07-09 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #24
33. You're correct about that but most collisions are low speed, parking lot mishaps.
Nearly totaling the car by backing into a pole or some other object is beyond annoying. If it's an SUV with the tire on the back, you're really sunk.
Posteritatis (1000+ posts) Fri Aug-07-09 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #33
34. Definitely true
Still, I'd rather a setup that causes annoying expensive cosmetic damage (or worse, as you mention) but which also makes it more likely that you'll survive the rarer high-speed collisions than the other way around. We're more important than the vehicles we're in, after all.
Better Today (423 posts) Thu Aug-06-09 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
7. Because bumpers are to protect the occupants of the vehicle, and are placed strategically to that end rather than the cost replacement or other vehicle concerns. Since different vehicles are different heights and weights, bumpers tend to be relatively specific to the style of the vehicle.
Posteritatis (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #7
25. I think the OP's concern is that that means some bumpers are at other drivers' face height.
Better Today (423 posts) Fri Aug-07-09 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #25
38. True, but I don't see how that could ever happen since cars, trucks, buses, semis, etc. are never going to all be made the same height. So what? Require a two bumper system, one for the vehicle's needs and one to match a required height?
TheCowsCameHome (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 07:40 PM
Response to Original message
10. So they can break things in a wide range of heights.
The grouchy old primitive, from Illinois:
NNN0LHI (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
12. How would you match up a Lamborghini bumper with a pick-up truck bumper?
Think about it.
pipi_k (1000+ posts) Fri Aug-07-09 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #12
39. That's the first thing I thought of, though it was an SUV and a Triumph
Mr Pip had a Triumph but had to sell it when we moved here...
I live on a dirt road in the woods, where the winter and spring seasons can be hell on a vehicle. A couple of times we couldn't even get out on the muddy/snowy road with the Ford Escape because the undercarriage and bumpers were too low.
Enter the Dodge Ram 2500, and even then we nearly got stuck a few times.
Let's see now...where would the bumper on a Triumph go...on the roof?
Or maybe the Dodge Ram's bumper should be 12 inches from the ground...
hahahahaha
I swear, there's not a lot of critical thinking going on these days...
Johonny (1000+ posts) Fri Aug-07-09 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #12
44. driving isn't a right therefore I have no problem requiring vehicles that fit a universal safety standard. That people might not be able to drive monster trucks or Lamborghini, I'm a 100 % comfortable with. So there is no problem.
stray cat (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
13. Where would you put the standard bumper on an SUV - below it?
csziggy (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
17. Here in Florida we used to have a law covering bumper height
The mother of a friend of mine got it passed after a jacked up mud truck T-boned his VW bug and the bumper of the truck decapitated her son.
She fought for years to get it passed - that if a truck was jacked up, the bumper had to be lowered to meet certain standards so it would at least hit the frame of the body of a regular car. Worked fine for a few years until it was allowed to expire without any discussion. The Legislature made sure that it was not made to be a permanent law.
Nothing like driving down the highway and seeing a jacked up truck with the bumper at your eye level!
nini (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 10:16 PM
Response to Original message
22. I'd like to know why these things are street legal?
Anyone in a normal sized sedan would pretty much be dead on impact if t-boned by one of these penis-challenged idiots.
MindPilot (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-06-09 10:51 PM
Response to Original message
26. Why do you hate auto body shops?
Cid_B (752 posts) Fri Aug-07-09 05:35 AM
Response to Original message
29. Short answer.. My jeep needs more clearance than your miata...
RPG Codex (11 posts) Fri Aug-07-09 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
42. A VW for all!
Wouldn't it be rather boring when all cars are made even more alike?
Johonny (1000+ posts) Fri Aug-07-09 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
43. I'm 100 % for this
nothing scares me more driving than when a car comes up to me who's bumper is at my window level! It's insane what LA lets some drivers drive around in. It's no wonder people want giant SUVs for protection. It seems like a no brainer, universal bumper heights. sigh.
I dunno. franksolich has no opinion on the matter, living out here in the Sandhills of Nebraska, where there's more miles per vehicle, than vehicles per mile.
franksolich is more interested in knowing of tie-rods that don't bend or bust.
