Car bumpers and safety.

remken · Feb 11, 2010

I am having an argument with someone who is saying that bumpers offer no safety advantage on a car versus not having any. That they are basically only for looks since they are made to crumble at 5mph. So are they right?

TechnoGranola · Feb 11, 2010

Here's what NHTSA has to say about bumpers:

2) What is the purpose of bumpers?

The car bumper is designed to prevent or reduce physical damage to the front and rear ends of passenger motor vehicles in low-speed collisions. Automobile bumpers are not typically designed to be structural components that would significantly contribute to vehicle crashworthiness or occupant protection during front or rear collisions. It is not a safety feature intended to prevent or mitigate injury severity to occupants in the passenger cars. Bumpers are designed to protect the hood, trunk, grille, fuel, exhaust and cooling system as well as safety related equipment such as parking lights, headlamps and taillights in low speed collisions.

Quote obtained from this NHTSA FAQ http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/Cars/Problems/studies/Bumper/Index.html

And I believe I've read that automotive engineers are designing bumper (and hoods and other parts of vehicles) to absorb energy in a such a way that will produce less injury to a pedestrian struck by a vehicle. So, bumpers on some newer vehicles may also serve that purpose as well.

Guest · Feb 11, 2010

Yeah, they're sort of like a third nipple nowadays.

remken · Feb 11, 2010

What if it was a car made in 1978? Would that make a difference? I'm thinking a car made back then could use all the help safety wise that it could get.

TechnoGranola · Feb 11, 2010

remken said:
What if it was a car made in 1978? Would that make a difference? I'm thinking a car made back then could use all the help safety wise that it could get.

I found this:

Canada and the United States introduced safety standards for bumpers in the early 1970’s. When the Canadian and the United States safety standards were originally introduced, they were harmonized with a test speed of 5 mph (8 km/h) for front and rear impacts and 3 mph (4.8 km/h) for corner impact tests.

I got it from this Government of Canada web site http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2008/2008-06-25/html/sor-dors199-eng.html and there's actually lots of cool info in the article.

But, it seems there wasn't much difference of the bumper purpose in the 70's, other than that bumpers were much harder and more likely to injure a pedestrian.

beeman · Feb 12, 2010

A solid steel pipe as a bumper will absorb more energy than 2 frame rails hanging out each end of the vehicle :twocents: . A larger surface area will help absorb energy more evenly, and allow the frame to crumple properly. Besides, if on bumperless vehicle rear ends another bumperless vehicle, there would be a high risk of a frame rail penetrating the gas tank, and acting as a possible source of spark and ignition. Even if they are crumpled, they are still a steel barrier (yes there is metal under the plastic). Plus any energy absorbed by the bumper is energy not absorbed by the passengers.

Car bumpers and safety.

remken

Member

TechnoGranola

Forum Ambassador

Guest

New member

remken

Member

TechnoGranola

Forum Ambassador

beeman

Active member

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Sponsors

Forum statistics