The people's voice of reason
The people's voice of reason
Every passing year, our automobile engineers continue to fail miserably in their production of quality products. In their efforts to build bling, style, and needless options, they are neglecting the basic essentials—durability, dependability, economy, and most of all—SIMPLICITY. That means easy to build, easy and inexpensive to repair, and the ABSENSE of gimmicks that tend to disrupt basic functions.
Among the most neglected car parts are the BUMPERS. Like their names imply, their purpose is to withstand bumps—to protect the car's body behind it, at least to a reasonable degree, and especially on the vital front end. Even the earliest cars had them for that obvious purpose. They were simple and functional, consisting of a strip of spring steel mounted onto projections attached onto the cars' frames. They also protuded several inches from the cars' bodies. Even these crude versions were superior to nearly all of today's modern abominations.
Today's bumpers are absolutely deplorable. Nearly all are made of the thinnest soft steel, or even just plastic or fiberglass with no steel at all. Nearly all are fitted tightly against the bodies, often jammed with nearly zero crush room ahead of the radiator and other functional parts—not even room to attach a tow rope or chain if needed. As expected, a mild impact can total a car or at least cause thousands of dollars in damage.
The most vulnerable part of ANY (ICE) car is its radiator. It is the first item to get hit and suffer damage in most crashes. Once hit and damaged, the car is disabled and becomes an immovable obstacle blocking the road for an hour or more until a tow truck can arrive.
Auto engineers should understand that protecting the radiator is a critical priority in highway safety. I haven't witnessed ANY manufacturer ever stressing radiator protection from impacts with adequate bumpers.
As cars evolved from the early 1900's until the 1970's, bumper technology took a back seat in development. However, they still retained some sturdiness in relation to today's "crushmobiles."
In the late 1960's, insurance companies began to take notice of the large numbers of claims and subsequent costs to settle the damages from minor impacts. In 1973, they pushed for a government mandate to require all automobiles to be fitted with bumpers, both front and rear, that could withstand a 5 mph impact with NO damage. Although some car makers protested, it was not very difficult to accomplish. All it took was two hydraulic cylinders similar to shock absorbers fitted behind each bumper and onto the car's frame to absorb impacts. These bumper designs became standard through the remainder of the 1970's and up until 1982. Claims for minor crash damages plummeted. Insurance companies AND their clients saved tons of money with the 5 mph bumpers.
Then in 1982, our idiot government agencies colluded with the car manufacturers, on the pretence of saving lives, to dispense with sturdy bumpers and substitute soft, crushable ends on all cars. Of course, this made the majority of all vehicles candidates for becoming totaled from minor impacts. This was terrible news for consumers, but manufacturers enjoyed higher sales volumes for new cars to replace the totaled ones. This imposed massive unexpected expenditures onto the numerous victims of minor car crashes.
A few manufactures did manage to continue building sturdy bumpers into the early 1980’s—until our bureaucrats mandated that ALL new cars become crushable throwaways, claimimg they could save the lives of the drivers, passengers, and reckless pedestrians running into the wrong places.
The entire idea of crushable is an utter oxymoron. Why haven’t at least a few automotive engineers objected to the brain-dead idea of totaling a car from a minor impact? Any reasonably competent engineer could design and build a hydraulic bumper system that could withstand even a 10 mph impact with no damage, or at least minimal damage. Every car would have a sturdy FRAME to support a proper bumper system. Sturdy bumpers would be attached with large hydraulic cylinders and provided with a foot of space behind them to absorb an impact. These would provide up to a foot of “crush”—about equal to the crush capacities in our current flimsymobiles. If two should collide, the crush on both cars combined would double the total to two feet. Damages would be minimal, and injuries and deaths would likely be no greater than with today’s abominations.
Lights and turn signals should NEVER be installed onto a bumper. They should always be placed onto the car’s body ABOVE and BEHIND it so the bumper can protect them.
This proposed bumper design might be considered ugly by some critics. If that is a concern, dealers could install optional, yieldable plastic covers over their tops.
However, if the above sturdy bumper systems cannot be accepted by argumentive engineers, and especially foolhardy government meddlers (the ones the DOGE should have already fired on day one), manufacturers could build sturdy, slightly shortened car bodies and add INEXPENSIVE, easily replaceable, mostly plastic (even recycled plastic or high density foam) crushable “cushions” about a foot or more in thickness INSTEAD of using the car itself for a cushion. Their one purpose would be to absorb impacts of 10 mph or more and still provide crush zones for safety while leaving the cars intact. ALL wiring, lights, and other functional parts would be ABOVE and BEHIND these expendable crush pads, not on or in them. After a crash, the owner could remove and replace four bolts to exchange the damaged cushion with a new one. It’s a quick fix that saves the car without risking any lives.
The cushions themselves could also be made in replacable layers. In a soft crash, only the first layer or two might be damaged.
Highway safety would also be enhanced. After an accident, the cars would remain functionally undamaged and could be quickly driven aside to clear the road instead of blocking it for hours while waiting for tow trucks.
WHO is going to become the first engineer to adopt an adequate bumper system for automobiles?
We now have the DOGE. Its number one priority is to get government off of our backs and out of our pockets. We must immediately REPEAL all of its idiotic mandtes and regulations and go back to the days of the Model T Fords, when we had FREE MARKETS, and the consumers ruled on how cars and trucks should be built INSTEAD of the government.
Please save our car industries. JUST GET GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE WAY.
SOURCE
FIVE FAIRY TALES OF AUTOMOBILE BUMPERS
FAIRY TALE #1 All Automobiles Manufactured In The United States Have 5 MPH Bumpers.
FACT: In 1982, the federal government bowed to pressure from automakers and rolled back impact test requirements from 5 to 2.5 mph for 1983 and later model cars. The 2.5 mph standard also allows unlimited damage to the bumper and attachments – and most of today’s flimsy bumpers cost considerably more than the old 5 mph bumpers to fix.
FAIRY TALE #2 Today’s 2½ MPH Bumper Standards Apply To All Vehicles Manufactured In The US.
FACT: Federal bumper requirements apply only to passenger cars. There are no federal standards for Minivans, Pickup Trucks, or SUVs.
FAIRY TALE #3 Bumpers Don’t Need To Be More Effective.
FACT: Consumers want stronger bumpers and they want them on all vehicle types. In a 1998 Insurance Institute For Highway Safety (IIHS) survey, 77% of respondents said the government should require car bumpers to withstand a 5 mph impact with no damage. Eighty-eight percent said federal bumper standards should apply to all passenger vehicle types, not just cars.
FAIRY TALE #4 New Bumpers Are Better Than Old Ones.
Generally no. Bumpers used to be stronger. Example: “The 2004 F-150 is all new, but its bumpers are just as flimsy as before and even a little worse,” says Adrian Lund of IIHS. “The highest damage total was in the rear-into-pole test. The whole bumper was pushed downward, and the tailgate was crushed. In addition, the left and right ends of the bumper were driven into the rear fenders.” But it’s not just Ford.
FAIRY TALE #5 All Bumpers Are The Same.
No. Bumpers vary a lot in terms of both components and performance. In fact, some vehicles don’t even have bumpers. According to Adrian Lund of the IIHS; when one Toyota RAV4 was crashed into another Toyota RAV4 at 10 mph, “it didn’t engage the rear bumper because this SUV doesn’t have a rear bumper. Instead, the striking RAV4 hit the spare tire mounted on the tailgate,” Lund says. “This spare tire was the ‘anti-bumper.’ It didn’t absorb any energy. It didn’t prevent any damage. In fact, it caused most of the damage to both vehicles.
Why It Costs You Money…
Bumpers play a significant role in insurance costs because so many physical damage claims are for relatively small amounts of damage involving the front or rear of vehicles–damage that a well designed bumper could prevent. Half of all collision claims are $1,500 or less. Repair costs for these minor incidents are a major factor in overall collision insurance costs.
So, How Can Consumers Tell If A Vehicle Has A Good Bumper? Consumers cannot tell a good bumper from a bad one by looking at it. The federal government does not require automakers to disclose information about bumper performance.
THE VIEWS OF SUBMITTED EDITORIALS MAY NOT BE THE EXPRESS VIEWS OF THE ALABAMA GAZETTE.
Reader Comments(0)