| Author |
Message |
    
michael burt (Mikeyb)
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 01:33 am: | 
|
after all this bumper talk of late i began to wonder:
1) are most aftermarket bumpers airbag compliant?
2) if not, do most users not worry about about it?
3) if it is "some are some are not," do the crush cans and other airbag items reduce the winching ability of the bumper?
thanks for any feedback... |
RonLF
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 07:47 am: |
|
It's not the Aftermarket bumpers aren't compliant, it's that most companies don't have the money to test them. The only one I know of that is Airbag test is the ARB. My ARB has not effected my winching ability, the winch is mounted to the frame. Only the fairlead is mounted to the the bumper. |
dave_lucas
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 08:58 am: |
|
ARB and TJM both have airbag compatible bumpers for the Disco II |
michael burt (Mikeyb)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 28, 2002 - 01:45 am: |
|
thanks for the info, gentlemen. it never hurts to ask, right?
mike |
Mike B.
| | Posted on Thursday, March 28, 2002 - 08:22 pm: |
|
Here are some interesting tidbits:
The air bag compliant bumpers are designed to prevent your air bag from deploying prematurely. You would think that a non-air bag complient air bag would prevent the air bag from deploying, but in fact, the opposite is true. An air bag compliant bumper needs crush zones to deflect some of the impact to the bumper (sort of like an Accordion (only made out of steel).
The sensors to deploy the air bags are located in various locations (depending in the year). However, they are not located in your front bumper.
Most people don't like the air bag compliant ARB bumper because it locates the winch below the bumper. This makes it hard to see what is going on with the cable while winching. Also, if you really get stuck, you have to reach down below the bumper to disengage the winch cable.
Thanks,
Mike B. |
F.J. (Rovercon)
| | Posted on Thursday, March 28, 2002 - 11:58 pm: |
|
Interesting........ so the non-air bag ARB bumper will still deploys the airbag? The non-air bag bumper cost less than the other one. And if the non-air bag one is "better" for winching, why do they make the other air bag compatible one and why do people buy them?
I was planning on buying the air bag compatible one because I wanted the air bag to work while I am on the highways but if the other one is still going to allow them operate, maybe I have to reconsider. Is there a site that talks more about this? Does it have to be a big crash for the air bags to deploy with the non-air bag bumper? |
michael burt (Mikeyb)
| | Posted on Friday, March 29, 2002 - 01:12 am: |
|
i assume that the issue is not that the non-compliant bumper will stop the airbag from deploying, but that it will deploy too easily.
i see that tjm lists their bumpers as compliant, but they too seem to mount the winch under the bumper.
is the risk of early bag deployment a big deal? is there a compliant bumper that mounts the winch above, or is this why we see so many making their own bumpers? if you use the kevlar rope, does that make under bumper winches easier to deal with?
should i shut up? ;) |
Greg Davis
| | Posted on Friday, March 29, 2002 - 09:27 am: |
|
Your airbag sensors are set to go off at a 30 mph impact. That could be you doing twenty and hitting a car head-on that's doing 10, etc. With a non-airbag bumper, there are no crush zones. Therefore, if you hit somebody or something, the impact will not be absorbed by the crush zones (since they're aren't any) and the airbags may deploy in collisions that may have been prevented by some of the impact being absorbed.
I personally feel that the differences would be minimal, and would not affect my safety any significant amount. I prefer a solidly mounted bumper and feel that the benefits of a solid mount would be enjoyed many more times than the slim chance of me being injured by a premature airbag. Just my personal opinion. |
Crash (Crash)
| | Posted on Friday, March 29, 2002 - 09:50 am: |
|
From someone that drives his Rover 30,000 per year (most on paved roads), I would not get a bumper without crush zones. Even 1" of deflection/absorbtion equates to 1000's of lbs of less impact transfered on the driver. That is what the impact zones of cars achieve.
2ndly, without the crush cans, the sensors would deploy the airbags too soon, possibly causing you to hit them at the wrong time. Again, I also use my ride as a daily driver.
As for the winch cable being released below the bumper, if you are refering to the disengagement clutch, you can and should rotate it so that it releases from the top (the instructions are included with the bumper and with the winch, or e-mail me and I will scan it for you). If you are releasing the cable hook, just don't hook it below the bumper.
I get what people are saying about a solid bumper and higher winch mount, and if it is a dedicated trail rig then I 100% agree. I just feel it is important for those that use their rides as daily drivers to understand that some of the posters here mave multiple rigs. |
Kyle
| | Posted on Friday, March 29, 2002 - 10:05 am: |
|
Crash , you are right and you are wrong. You cant really make those statements about non air bag bumpers . They are classified "Non air bag" simply because they have not been tested. We have a truck here that was in a frontal impact sufficient enough to trigger the bags. The system worked flawlessly and the bumper was a "Non air bag bumper" both of our trucks have aftermarket bumpers on them and we both run in traffic 70-75 MPH door handle to door handle type stuff. I have been in/under and around cars most of my life and around air bags since their beginning. My opinion is that the bag timing is not thrown off enough to damage you or your ocupants..... I say , worry more about the other guy , the guy you hit. Thats where your problem lies...
Kyle |
michael burt (Mikeyb)
| | Posted on Friday, March 29, 2002 - 03:01 pm: |
|
Kyle,
i noticed recovery points on your bumper...i guess crush cans would make recovery points on the bumper less usefull, or should recovery points be frame mounted with a bumper with cans?
thanks,
mike |
Kyle
| | Posted on Friday, March 29, 2002 - 03:44 pm: |
|
Yeah , I wouldnt put much strain on the Air bag bumper itself if you havnt done any mods to it . Some have made somechanges to them to get them a little more rigid though..
Kyle |
michael burt (Mikeyb)
| | Posted on Friday, March 29, 2002 - 10:54 pm: |
|
thanks Kyle...
i am kinda of new at the rover stuff, so i appreciate your imput...
mike |
Ron
| | Posted on Friday, March 29, 2002 - 11:15 pm: |
|
Crumple zones.
Conviently located in the vehicle you hit.
Ron |
michael burt (Mikeyb)
| | Posted on Friday, March 29, 2002 - 11:27 pm: |
|
Ron
thank god they put them somewhere!
;)
mike |
JEspelien (Superj)
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 02, 2002 - 09:30 pm: |
|
My wife had some fool pull out in front of her with one of our previous Discoverys with a non compliant ARB (POS-but it was on the truck when I bought it) the air bags deployed properly with no injuries. The insurance companies in this case Economy Premier Assurance (Ours-the best Metlife auto subsidiary) and State Farm (theirs-cheap ass rat bastards) had a field day about the "unnecessary and escalated damage caused by unapproved untested aftermarket additions/modifications". Eventhough the accident was clearly the fault of their insured State Farm categorically refused to pay the "extra" costs related to airbag deployment like $3800 at that point. Our insurer said they would pay and try to subrogate the claim but they warned us that if they were unsuccessful they would have to charge this claim to our record. As we also own some other very expensive to insure exotics we value our no points "Top Driver" status too much to risk it so we declined coverage of the airbag components scrounged used stuff and traded off the truck. The point is if you think the insurance company won't be wise to the aftermarket bumper if you get in a wreck think again. Metlife said that State Farm and Allstate have gone so far as to argue that personal injury resulting from accidents involving aftermarket modifications should be mitigated or subrogated to the vehicles owner or the part manufacturer. My state, Minnesota has extensive legal precedent on these issues stemming from accidents involving snowplows on pickups being driven outside the course of normal snowplowing travel. |
Anonymous
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 03, 2002 - 01:44 am: |
|
In another thread in this forum, it was strongly argued that ACE with 16 inch wheels was "dangerous". This was simply because LRNA chose not to supply the combination, although LR in most other countries supplies this combination as standard. Yet now we argue that negating the crumple zones that define the firing timing of what is possibly the single most expensive and complex item of safety equipment on the vehicle is perfectly acceptable. I bet LR would say that was dangerous too....
The intepretation put forward of "not compliant" simply meaning "hasn't been tested" may be true, but how many manufacturers don't test simply because they know their gear will fail? It takes a great deal of time and effort to design a compliant bar, much less time to weld something up that looks OK. In this particular situation, I would suggest that "not compliant" should be taken as a failure, rather than anything else.
Overall I agree with Crash - if it's 100% trail use, fit whatever is best for that, but if you're driving on the roads, consider both your safety and that of other road users. It could be your parent/child/friend that you hit! |
JEspelien (Superj)
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 03, 2002 - 05:26 pm: |
|
Hey count me out of this the sky is falling gloom and doom crap! All I wanted to make clear was that in my experience insurance companies don't like to pay for claims related to aftermarket parts/modifications. Changing the bumper isn't going to endanger anything in a wreck except your pocketbook when the bags go pop in a wreck where they shouldn't have. |
Crash (Crash)
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 03, 2002 - 07:44 pm: |
|
Kyle,
First, let me say that I dig your new bumper. Bumper envy, I think you might call it.
But I never made a statement about "non compliant" bumpers, I said bumpers without crush zones--which I feel is a huge difference.
I think you are probably right about deployment timing--it probably would not make a much of a difference for injury. Deployment--probably, but not injury.
Thanks for your input and opinions |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page