VW Vortex - Volkswagen Forum banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
6,513 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
quote:[HR][/HR]WASHINGTON -- The Ford Explorer, the world's top-selling sport utility vehicle, suffered extensive bumper damage in low-speed crash tests, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety said Thursday.
The 2002 Explorer sustained $5,432 worth of damage in four tests conducted at 5 miles per hour, earning the institute's lowest rating for bumper performance.
The tests are designed to imitate the kind of impact that often occurs in commuter traffic and parking lots.
Ford Motor Co. officials did not immediately respond to calls for comment.
The Chevrolet TrailBlazer was given the best rating of the four vehicles tested after suffering $2,445 in damage. All the damage was to the bumper, which protected the vehicle body.
Like the Explorer, the 2002 Jeep Liberty earned the lowest "poor" rating after sustaining $5,667 in damage. The worst result -- more than $1,700 in damage -- occurred when the vehicle was backed into a flat barrier, shattering the rear window and damaging the rear windshield wiper motor and the tailgate.
Adrian Lund, the institute's chief operating officer, said the Jeep Liberty performed so poorly because it has a spare tire mounted on the back. The spare extends out beyond the bumper, so the bumper doesn't absorb any of the impact.
Another vehicle made by DaimlerChrysler AG, the 2002 Dodge Ram 1500, improved in the tests. It sustained $3,843 in damage in the four tests, compared to $8,438 for the 2001 model.
"The Ram used to have the worst bumpers among the large pickup trucks the institute tested, but now it has the best bumpers," Lund said.
DaimlerChrysler spokeswoman Angela Ford said the automaker was pleased with the Ram test results.
"But it's important to remember this test measures insurance claims cost and is in no way a reflection of vehicle safety," she said. "Although we attempt to keep repair costs low on all of our products, our primary focus is safety, both in terms of government testing and real-world safety parameters." [HR][/HR]​
http://www.detnews.com/2001/autos/0111/29/-354918.htm
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,513 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Re: Explorer, Jeep Liberty get poor rating in bumper tests (Rob)

I'm gonna think about that....
Who gains by this? Not me, or you...because we have to shell out through insurance to pay for it, but where do the parts come from normally? The manufacture, so I see them not really caring until it hurts them in the pocket (as in bad press), so they probably won't do too much until they can atribute this to bad sales....
But I could be wrong...lol
 

· I could've been a contender.
Joined
·
36,399 Posts
Re: Explorer, Jeep Liberty get poor rating in bumper tests (VR6Stress)

hmmm, planning on looking at a jeep liberty this weekend. maybe can sling the spare underneath
?
bill
(btw, hi jon
!!)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,513 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Re: Explorer, Jeep Liberty get poor rating in bumper tests (jebglx)

I dunno if there would be much room, as short as it looks, I'm guessing that gas tank sits right infront of the bumper or somewhere close....I really doubt there's much room, explaining on why they put it where they did....
 

· Registered
Joined
·
14,072 Posts
Re: Explorer, Jeep Liberty get poor rating in bumper tests (CanuckPal)

Well they make the news, so the average consumer knows about them.
Anyways, you know what comes next - the high speed crashing. Let the carnage begin . . .
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,513 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Re: Explorer, Jeep Liberty get poor rating in bumper tests (CanuckPal)

I've been noticing dents on cars laltely...and I've been suprised at how many "back into pole/something". Especially on SUV's...I imagine it's due to little people not being able to see all around them when they back up (not really migets or anything just short, men or women).....
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,677 Posts
Re: Explorer, Jeep Liberty get poor rating in bumper tests (VR6Stress)

$5000 damage?? I once accidentally backed into my house VERY hard with my '89 MX-6. Total damage? $0. Unless you count the scratches in the paint. I also had a '92 Ponitac Bonneville that was rear ended by a Caddy deville going 20mph. Total damage $0 (well at least to me. The caddy got hurt pretty bad). I guess they really dont build them like they used to.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
19,758 Posts
Re: Explorer, Jeep Liberty get poor rating in bumper tests (VR6Stress)

quote:[HR][/HR]I've been noticing dents on cars laltely...and I've been suprised at how many "back into pole/something". Especially on SUV's...I imagine it's due to little people not being able to see all around them when they back up (not really migets or anything just short, men or women).....[HR][/HR]​
Ya I know what you mean.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
21,827 Posts
Re: Explorer, Jeep Liberty get poor rating in bumper tests (VR6Stress)

I don't know about this. Usually their test makes some sense, but who in the heck would back up their Liberty into a tall, flat barrier?!

I would think 99% of slow-speed, parking lot OH CRAP-OLAs involve bumper-to-bumper incidents. And as high as that Liberty sits, I'd imagine the driver would ram his exhaust and lower bumper edge into cars' hoods 70% of the time (low cost damage)... because of poor visability. I pity da fool who backs one up into the back of, say, an Expedition!
As far as the $5k of damage... yikes! You'd think the OEMs would make those backup radars an option... for the back-up-challenged drivers. They could use the Institutes' data as a selling advantage.
 

· Registered
2022 BMW X5 xDrive45e; 2015.5 Volvo V60 T5 Drive-e; 2013 Ford Focus ST3; 2004 BMW R1150R
Joined
·
4,328 Posts
Re: Explorer, Jeep Liberty get poor rating in bumper tests (VR6Stress)

It's regulations, folks. Government regulations.
Until about a decade ago or so, car makers had to comply with a 5 mph bumper standard -- that is to say that bumpers had to be built to withstand an impact at 5 mph. Automakers argued that these bumpers were too expensive to build, that the bumpers looked ugly, and that it made the cars too heavy. So they successfully lobbied to get the regulation reduced to a 2.5 mph standard. That's why so many cars have expensive damage done to them at low-speed bumps.
SUVs are another matter altogether -- they are exempt from federal bumper standards altogether (this is a holdover from trucks being classified differently as passenger vehicles because they were used as work vehicles and not passenger vehicles). Take a look at the previous generation RAV4 for example (I'm not sure what the rear of the new one looks like). It has NO rear bumper! If somebody give you a rear-end tap in one of those, you hit two things -- sheet metal and the spare tire. The spare tire gets pushed into the rear door, the rear door deforms and the hatch glass pops. Voila! Thousands of dollars of damage from someone tapping you at 5 mph.
Other SUVs have bumpers, but they are not structurally sound. That's why you will so often see SUVs with dents in their bumpers.
[edited to correct typos]


[Modified by dts, 11:25 AM 11-30-2001]
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,513 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Re: Explorer, Jeep Liberty get poor rating in bumper tests (dts)

Speaking of lack of rear bumpers....take a look at a Wrangler....bumperettes??? I still remember when trucks had options for a rear bubmper, but normally didn't come with one...
As far as hitting something so high, think about what has largely increased on the roads today, SUV's....which are taller, so hitting something higher up isn't so unlikely now a days.
I wish someone would lobby on behalf of us car owners to make SUV's comply to bumper laws as cars do....a lobby for a speacial liscense would be nice too...hehehehe
 
G

·
Re: Explorer, Jeep Liberty get poor rating in bumper tests (dts)

quote:[HR][/HR]SUVs are another matter altogether -- they are exempt from federal bumper standards altogether (this is a holdover from trucks being classified differently as passenger vehicles because they were used as work vehicles and not passenger vehicles).[HR][/HR]​
Trucks are only exempt from a rear bumper standard--they still need a 2.5 mph bumper up front.
Bumper performance is not generally related to crash-test performance--for example, most BMW's do poorly in bumper tests, but by the same token, have best-in-class high-speed crash test scores.
Do consumers care about bumper basher tests? To some extent, I think, but in the end, the high-speed crash test scores are still more important. Which is more a factor in buying a family vehicle: the fact that the Ford Escape got a poor rating for the crash test and a good rating for the bumpers, or the fact that the Hyundai Santa Fe got a good rating for the crash tests and a poor rating for the bumpers? Once the bulk of vehicles are scoring "good" ratings in crash tests, the disparities in bumpers will become more important.
Do the car companies care about bumper basher tests? The last time IIHS tested a group of sport-utes, Dateline NBC sent a letter to the various manufacturers involved asking why their vehicles' bumpers failed so poorly. Ford, Toyota, Chevrolet and Dodge all replied with the typical letter--"meets government regulations", "faired fine in our in-house tests", etc. Only Hyundai replied differently, saying they would redesign the Santa Fe's bumper in 2003 to improve performance.
 

· Registered
2022 BMW X5 xDrive45e; 2015.5 Volvo V60 T5 Drive-e; 2013 Ford Focus ST3; 2004 BMW R1150R
Joined
·
4,328 Posts
Re: Explorer, Jeep Liberty get poor rating in bumper tests (bgluckman)

quote:[HR][/HR]Trucks are only exempt from a rear bumper standard--they still need a 2.5 mph bumper up front.[HR][/HR]​
Oops. I didn't check directly on that -- if you're right, then it's my bad.
quote:[HR][/HR]Bumper performance is not generally related to crash-test performance--for example, most BMW's do poorly in bumper tests, but by the same token, have best-in-class high-speed crash test scores.[HR][/HR]​
True. And I agree with you that consumers probably (and rightly) look to overall safety considerations before they look at bumper performance.
But bumpers are still important to consumers because it means that low-speed accidents can result in high repair costs. The consumer still has to pay the insurance deductible, may face higher insurance premiums associated with filing a claim, and may face higher premiums because insurance companies nationwide have to pay more to fix expensive damage to cars involved in low-speed mishaps.
 
G

·
Re: Explorer, Jeep Liberty get poor rating in bumper tests (dts)

The reason trucks are exempt from a rear bumper standard has to do with the fact that some owners remove the bumper to attach a heavy-duty tow-hook, or may remove the entire bed of the truck altogether.
It's an arcane regulation; the government really needs to set a different standard for sport-utes from pick-ups. More importantly, they need to bring back the 5 mph standard. The idea was that car manufacturers would comply due to competition, but clearly, that's not worked. Just chalk it up to yet another wonderful idea from the mushy minds of the Reagan years.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top