So insurance premiums are being affected by the high cost or repairing front or rear bumper sections on modern cars. These might be able to absorb parking nudges but are destroyed by low speed shunts.
First there were steel strips attached to dumb irons. These became shaped Chromed beams attached to 50's and 60's barges.
Triumph tried rubber bumpers on the Herald but they didn't catch on with other makers.
Renault came up with the sculpted shock resistant plastic front and rear apron sections on the original Renault 5. Gardually other makers adopted the idea. Soon these bumpers became body coloured. More recently these sections have expanded to take in more and more of the front and rear of cars, becoming fully blended into the lines of the vehicle.
Modern front and rear panels gave cars a clean, uncluttered look so manufacturers bestowed grilles, scoops, stakes etc upon them. But are they bumpers? I would say cars do not have bumpers any more.
A colleague of mine drives a battered old banger and unashamedly goes in for contact parking - part of the reason the banger is battered.
Cheers, SS
|
This is close to my heart. We have an au pair who was reversing in a car park and someone hit him from behind. The other driver got out, shouted abuse and drove off, no details exchanged. A few weeks later we get a letter from his insurer saying we reversed into his car causig £450 of damage.
I loked at our car on which the the paint on the bumper wasn't even scratched, let alone broken. There was a dent half the size of your palm, 2mm deep.
I took the bumper off at the weekend and I was amazed it was held on with a few 5mm self tappers and by placing the bumper on a piece of carpet I was able to re-shape with my fingers.
- They tried to rope our insurers into it but the loss of no claims on an au pair policy is more than the cost of the repair so I've written to the other party's insurers disputing their version of events and basically said "so sue us". I'm inclined to think that if it ever gets to court a judge will laugh when he sees the photos of the damage.
|
Those with old Volvo *tanks* need have no fear; under the plastic cover lurks a solid steel channel section, allegedly these are sprung loaded (there certainly is a corrugated side section) to absorb impacts of up to 5mph without any damage...to the Volvo that is :-)
----------------------------------------------
One mans junk is another mans treasure
|
Bumpers, as well as becoming fashion items are a victim of crash protection to the occupants.
Crumple zones now built into cars would be severely compromised by heavy resitant bumpers.
Given that there was never an international standard for bumper height its not possible to create crumple zones with bumpers that actually do anything useful at serious speeds.
|
"Bumpers, as well as becoming fashion items are a victim of crash protection to the occupants"
Also, bumper design provides greater protection for pedestrians.
|
|
|
|
Those with old Volvo *tanks* need have no fear; under the plastic cover lurks a solid steel channel section, allegedly these are sprung loaded (there certainly is a corrugated side section) to absorb impacts of up to 5mph without any damage...to the Volvo that is :-) ----------------------------------------------
A lot faster than that, actually. Two drivers have so far written off the front of their cars by driving into mine, one at about 10 mph, the other probably doing 20.
No damage to the Volvo, just mild annoyance at having to put the tow-ball cover straight again.
|
|
|
|
Take care, Nsar. They may point to collateral damage to justify the cost.
I've been on the receiving end for the last few years - I seem to have received an average of one rear-end collision per year. All of which the insurance companies charge me for, strangely.
Most have been at low speed and have been a case of bumper off, sand down, respray, and back on. Typically £300 each, although I'm not sure of the exact cost as the other driver's insurer has coughed up each time. However, one was at a slightly higher speed and once the bumper was off, it was found that the impact absorbers underneath had been called into action and had crumpled - replacement pushed the bill into the £5-600 range IIRC.
Interestingly, my father-in-law took me to task last time, for letting the garage replace the whole bumper when the damage was confined to a small area (the number plate screw from the other car punched a neat hole in the bumper). He thought the garage was just inflating the insurance claim, but changed his mind when I showed that the cost of lending me a car for three days while the paint layers dried was actually less than the cost of the new bumper - and getting a new one meant they could paint it ready for me and fit it in one day, so no need for a loan car.
Where the newshounds got a figure of £x,000 for repairing a 10mph collision is beyond me.
|
New wings, bonnet, headlights, radiator......
The price is worse case: Tail ending an SUV with a micra. However, if you look at thatchams website, there is a video of a polo hitting a golf. This appears to cause quite a bit of damage to the polo, but not a lot to the golf.
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Old SAAB 900 bumpers were sectioned and segmented rubber. Brilliant protection. Once hit a Sierra. Our car nothing. Even the number plate was sunk and therefore protected. Sierra was horrible.
I thought the SAAB bumpers were a response to the USA which has a '5 mph no bumper damage' regulation.
Modern bumpers do look good, but costing hundreds to replace with even a nick of damage are madness.
|
Modern bumpers do look good, but costing hundreds to replace with even a nick of damage are madness.
You don't think I'd repair it if I had to pay, do you?
I'd just wait until the car was finished with and then see if it was worth my while doing [however many] bump repairs in one hit. But I can't suggest to insurance companies that they wait and see if anyone else is going to help share the cost in a year or two.
|
|
|
Old SAAB 900 bumpers were sectioned and segmented rubber. Brilliant protection. Once hit a Sierra. Our car nothing. Even the number plate was sunk and therefore protected. Sierra was horrible.
No damage to either car then!!! ...cheers...keo.
|
Once hit a Sierra. Our car nothing..... Sierra was horrible.
>>Having owned both a Sierra and now a 98 Mondeo I am certain the Sierra bumper was vastly better re impact resistance.
I have taken the bumbers off both cars for various reasons.
The Sierra bumper had the skin bonded to the foam.
The Mondeo bumper is a piece of thin brittle plastic in thin air. Touch anything and risk it splitting. I have done just that. I am now very wary at causing even the slightest parking bumper kiss unlike the Sierra.
I used to not know why there are so many Mondeos with damaged bumpers. I do now and also understand the reluctance to replace them.
|
|
|
|
|
