They really don't build 'em like they used to!
 

WASHINGTON — Those minor fender benders might cost more than you think, according to new crash tests released Thursday by the insurance industry.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that most bumpers on midsize cars do little to prevent costly damage to vehicles, even in low-speed crashes of up to 6 miles per hour. The crashes frequently occur in parking lots and in commuter traffic.

Testing for the first time by the Virginia-based Institute found that only three midsize vehicles — the Mitsubishi Galant, Toyota Camry and Mazda 6 — sustained less than $1,500 in repairs from each of the four crash tests.

The tests were conducted to review damage from front, rear, front corner and rear corner crashes.

"The cars with the lowest repair bills after our new bumper tests still sustained much more damage than they should have in some of the tests," said Adrian Lund, the Institute's president. "We got crumpled grilles and headlights plus buckled fenders in impacts at speeds equivalent to an average person walking fast."

The Institute conducted tests on 17 midsize cars in low-speed tests. In one test of the front-end at 6 mph, four vehicles — the Nissan Maxima, Volkswagen Passat, Pontiac G6, and Hyundai Sonata — had damages of more than $4,000.

By comparison, the Institute conducted similar tests on a 1981 Ford Escort and found the front-end test only caused $86 in damages. They said it highlighted federal requirements that were in effect until 1982 that required bumpers to keep damage away from vehicle safety equipment and sheet metal parts in crashes of up to 5 mph.

Since 1982, the Institute said the required test speeds have been cut in half, leading to more damage.

Automakers said they work to design vehicles to resist low-speed collision damage. Nissan, for example, said it believes the Maxima "performs competitively in terms of cost of repair."

Volkswagen of America Inc. said that "while low-speed collision repairs are an element of the total cost of ownership, we're confident that Volkswagen products continue to provide exceptional customer value." <<Mmm Hmm... :rolleyes: >>

General Motors Corp. said in a statement that the tests "have everything to do with damageability, but they are really not an occupant safety issue. These are new tests and we are assessing the results."

Serious injuries are uncommon in low-speed crashes, and the institute's bumper tests did not assess passenger safety.

theclencher -

Integrated bumpers suck :( .... but they look so cool!!!!! ;)

CarloSW2

in the past the front of a car was made of metal with a metal bar in front of that with sometimes rubber blocks on it.

now the bumpers have gone and the entire front if the car is made of plastic.


still pedestrian safety and aerodynamics are also considerations of course....

My mid-80s Volvo was an absolute tank. One night a drunk driver in a newer Chrysler backed into it at maybe 10mph. The police showed up and asked me where the impact took place so I pointed to the scuff mark on the left rear corner. (I rubbed it off with my fingers the next day.) The other car, which I eventually saw in the daylight, was completely torn up and cracked by the impact. Stupid driver, solid technology! Funny thing is, that car had a curb weight almost identical to my Prius.

I think designers are trying to make bumpers softer for pedestrian safety. People are better off being struck by a newer car with plastic bumpers than an old one with chrome.

brick -

My Dad had a 1971 Chevy Impala. One day in the 1970's, somewhere in Hollywood I think, me and my sister in the back seat feel a little "bump" while stopped in traffic. It turns out that we were at the front of a 3 car fender-bender. Our Chevy Impala at the front, a late 60's Chevy Impala at the back, and a Japanese compact car (Datsun?) in the middle. Both Chevy's were without a scratch. The Datsun was literally compacted ;) .

CarloSW2

Peakster -

I do think that cars are much more complex than they used to be. If they sacrificed style and aerodynamics, they could come up with a safe bumper that looks "old school" but doesn't cost an arm and a leg to repair.

But ... maybe it wouldn't sell.

CarloSW2

In the days of detriot Iron, they were all made like the Queen Mary, but I think pound-for-pound, cars are much safer today.

Check it out though: 6 mph impact => $4,000+ in damages
vs.
$86 in damages on '81 Escort! :eek:

This is why car insurance is so G*#&$%& D^%&$*&#@ expensive!!! Well, that and insurers are greedy bast$%@#s.

I believe the Tempo/Topaz was constructed with 5 mph bumpers too so you can have the styled plastic bumper covers and the cost effective durability if the manufacturer decides to make it a design objective.

Here's the CTV News Article about the low-speed tests. (there's a video link about the story on the right side of the page)

Attachment 239

Looks like the bumpers are simply too low. The barrier just hits the headlights, hood, etc. According to the story, bumper standards are higher in Canada than the USA: "...which means that some cars available down south are not considered road worthy north of the border."

It would be nice to know which cars those are.

How can the 1981 not sustain any damage from being hit in the corner?

My highschool physics teacher used to make a joke that went something like this: "In the old days you'd get in a wreck going 20 MPH and the whiplash from the solid metal frame would break your neck, now crumple zones total the car but keep you safe." Take your pick...I'm sure his wife was happy when she hit a tree in her civic and had a bunch of plastic, squishy cushion seperating her and the tree.

Escorts are hardly impenetrable fortresses of steel; no doubt they crumple too. I'll take my pick: a vehicle with 5 mph bumpers that can take a hit and not break the bank or my neck.

Impacts tests I'm aware of crash the vehicle into a flat barrier so if there's a good stout bumper sticking out there far enough to take the hit then that's where the damage is confined (at a certain speed or below of course). Also the bumper needs to be a "floating" design, by that I mean there are gaps between it and surrounding parts like fenders, hoods, and grilles so that when it "gives" it doesn't take all that other stuff along for the ride. If a vehicle doesn't have 5 mph impact resistance and whatever bumpers it does have don't protrude very far and if all the front end bits are attached and/or butt up to each other and if there is a specially-tooled model-specific $700 exotic HID light cluster sitting out there on each fender corner instead of a universal $5 sealed beam it's gonna cost a lot more.

Edit: Peakster you linked a more informative article than I originally found. So it wasn't a flat barrier- that makes bumper height much more crucial to performance.

Also speaking of pedestrian safety, cars are having to have higher, blunter noses to meet new standards. I bet the Fiero wouldn't stand a chance in whatever test they came up with for that. I wonder how Corvettes plan on passing?

They're much more complex than they need to be. But, useless complexity is something extra to charge the buyer for and fatten profit margins...

I think that low-slung vehicles would be better for pedestrian safety because the impact would be below the vital organs (lower legs). If someone got smoked off by an SUV, the chances of chest and head injuries would be more likely.

Hey, stop bashing German cars... well ... ok, you're right. :D

An illustration of what I mean: The Audis all seem to be saying "Smack me, I'm rich and I love to squander lots of insurance money on bodyshops and parts."

Look at all the expensive stuff that would be sacrificed at the slightest tap:

https://www.audi-szqm.com/ShowImage.asp?ID=765

https://www.automoblog.net/wp-content...i-tt-coupe.jpg

https://usuarios.lycos.es/pakor666/TUNING/audi_2.jpg

^Above and V Below: Look how the part line between fascia and fender is vertical, not horizontal. When the fascia gets pushed back from a hit, it doesn't slide along fender with easy-shearing plastic fasteners acting as "fuses"; it butts right into the fender and messes it up too. Also note how tight bumper surface is to lighting and adjacent panels- any little hit and flexure and the adjacent stuff gets it too.

https://www.hofele.com/formula/de/Sho..._silber_04.jpg

^Above: Would you push anything with that front end? V Below: I would with that one!

Gap between bumper and other parts allows movement without buckling/breaking everything else in the vicinity. Plus, bumpers protrude a generous amount:

https://home.comcast.net/~petebre/mav...size/tempo.jpg

Damn! Wish this shot went a little more to the left:

https://www.oniva.com/upload/104/ford%2083%20escort.jpg

https://www.escortfocus.com/assets/images/82Escort.jpg

That's how an Escort can take a hit and incur a cost of $0. Bumper ends are a rubbery plastic; in that test apparently the bumper ends didn't scuff or break and the lighting, grille, hood, and fender was protected. Lightly smack the corner of the Audi and you are looking at fascia replacement or refinishing and painting at a minimum plus all that other stuff already mentioned.

Our cars would be best off if they used one or two-piece mass produced composite bodies that were easily recyclable. Get into a fender bender or even a serious crash, just slap on a new body, recycle the material from the old one. Done right, it would actually be an inexpensive proposition while allowing cars to be more liberal with aesthetic appearance and making them much safer and lighter in weight than today.

Henry Ford built a Model A sedan with a hemp and wheatstraw body. 10 times more dent resistant than steel, 1/3 the weight of steel, never rusted, extremely cheap to manufacture and replace, fully recyclable, and in accidents would bend and then bounce back into place(unless the accident was severe enough to cause a crack). But this goes contrary to the goals of a company who seeks to maximize ownership cost and profit...

Oh, but that's a lot of work to switch out all that stuff. I like collision hits to be contained as much as possible to the point of impact; service that spot and not have to fiddle with the rest of the structure and components.

https://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/1...y.ford.500.jpg

There's the old man goin' at it with an axe. https://www.chanvre-info.ch/info/en/A...ord-s-Car.html They say a plastic prototype car weighed 2300 lbs.; 2/3 the weight of a comparable steel one.

my vx has been run in to a number of times at low speeds while parked, and it has a rather solid front end, with a nice big chunk of white bead foam, and a big plastic cover over it, $100 to replace the cover, and $15 in paint, and the front end looked like new.
crumple zones are nice, my brother crashed a simaler mid 80's civic in to a power line pole at 25mph putting a foot deep dent in the metal bumper, grill, engine, and walked away without more then a bump on his head.
I've also had the front end of my crx riped appart after sliding a crose ice, and the whole front end is modular, with $85 replacable colloms that are made to collaps on collision, this is what the soft plastic bumper bolts to.
I compleatly agree that new cars are designed to cost alot when they run in to something, and that it should not be the case.

Hello -

I think that fashion is dictating alot of this. Keeping up with the Joneses and such to the point where ALL CARS MUST BE MONOTONE IN PAINT SCHEMES so that every bumper repair also requires a matching repaint of the bumper.

Tangential Note : That's why I like the Pontiac Vibe. You can actually get this car without painted bumpers, and the design is such that it *works* visually.

Overall I like the increased safety requirements. I just want a car that goes against the fashion grain and provides "old days" common sense utility. Maybe a new "Beetle equivalent", but doesn't have to look like a beetle. Gimme that old time manual rack and pinion steering and that old time roll down windows!


CarloSW2