Topic: Old bumpers vs modern ones

[Marko]

I came across this: http://amerisrael.typepad.com/my_weblog/2010/07/notice-anything-missing-on-many-oftodays-new-automobiles---how-about-sturdy-chrome-front-and-rear-metal-bumbers--forget-th.html

It talks about how old cars had real bumpers that could take a 5 mph crash with no damage except a scratch, and how modern cars can't take a small bump without a thousand dollars in damage. That piece was obviously written by someone with no knowledge of how crumple zones work, but it got me thinking: Why isn't it possible to design a car with crumple zones that can protect the occupants in a high speed crash, but will also withstand a 5 mph bump without costing thousands to repair? Do automakers intentionally not want to design this, or is the technology still to expensive to put in mass-produced cars? The cost of repairing the damage from even the smallest bump is ridiculous, cars need to be built with the expectation that small bumps are likely to happen in heavy traffic. I can't believe the insurance companies aren't pushing for this.

[tpl]

Since you ask: The bumpers on SAABs 99 and 900, 1978 through at least 1982 did exactly what you are asking for.
The bumper self healed after small collisions, thick rubber over deformable plastic cells. Behind this a modern crumple structure to protect occupants. 

The bumpers took minutes to heal in warm weather and upto a couple of days at -10 or so.

[PJungnitsch]

One quibble with the article, the author has it in for 'plastic covered styrofoam filled bumpers'.

There's nothing wrong with that construction, the problem was the US rolled back their bumper protection standard to 2.5 mph in 1983.

Up until 2009 Canadian cars met the 5 mph bumper standard, my Vibe with it's styrofoam bumpers show no visible damage after a deer hit.



Pickups on the other hand were exempt and after a similar deer incident my work pickup with old style 'heavy steel' bumpers was all twisted up, $2000 in damage.



No give to the steel, while the Vibe's plastic and styrofoam (like a crash helmet) could absorb the impact.

[Schmengie]

One quibble with the article, the author has it in for 'plastic covered styrofoam filled bumpers'.

There's nothing wrong with that construction, the problem was the US rolled back their bumper protection standard to 2.5 mph in 1983.

Up until 2009 Canadian cars met the 5 mph bumper standard, my Vibe with it's styrofoam bumpers show no visible damage after a deer hit.

Pickups on the other hand were exempt and after a similar deer incident my work pickup with old style 'heavy steel' bumpers was all twisted up, $2000 in damage.

No give to the steel, while the Vibe's plastic and styrofoam (like a crash helmet) could absorb the impact.

One side-swipe from a shopping cart can easily damage a plastic bumper to the tune of $500 +, I know because it happened to me a couple of years ago. I remember just a few days after we got our new '76 Datsun B-210 back in the Stone Age (Rolling Stones that is ) we were rear-ended by a lady driving a big, and I mean BIG, Ford sedan. She hit us hard enough to push our car ahead a few feet with the brakes on. I was afraid to get out of the car and look, but there wasn't even a scratch. That car had thick chrome-plated metal bumpers with hefty rubber bump strips and they were mounted on shock-absorbing struts. Now THOSE were bumpers!

[Thinking Out Loud]

I recall how 'revolutionary' the Porsche 928's front and rear end treatments were relative to everything else - one of, if not the first, that essentially eliminated visible bumpers.

[CatsEye68]

Funny that you posted this, as I was just thinking about this today. I wasn't aware that the bumper standards had been rolled back, but it makes sense if that is what happened, since today's bumpers suffer cosmetic damage with the slightest impact. However, they may well still protect the sheetmetal and lights, which is what the original bumper standard was designed to address. If you think back to the late 60s and early 70s and cars like the Ford Maverick or Chevy Camaro with their thin "blade" bumpers, the slightest impact would result in body damage, broken taillights, etc. We went from that to the battering ram bumpers mounted on shock absorbers, which were heavy and ugly. The thing about todays bumpers that adds to the cosmetic damage is that most are painted body color instead of being black rubber, which would hide a lot of small impacts. Better stylistically but less practical.

[Schmengie]

I'm pretty sure Pontiac was the first to introduce 'modern' plastic bumpers back in the Sixties. The full-sized models had a resilient body-colored plastic insert in the front bumper called Endura by Pontiac, and the GTO had an all-Endura front bumper in the '68 to '72 MY.

[neil]

Funny that you posted this, as I was just thinking about this today. I wasn't aware that the bumper standards had been rolled back, but it makes sense if that is what happened,

The inconsistency between US and Canadian standards made a few models unavailable in Canada.  First year SRT4 is one that comes to mind.  With the intercooler in the nose, it couldn't handle a 5 mph crash.  I know there were a few others that fell into this category.

IIRC it was '74 when the US standards came into effect, and in my mind the best example of how this ruined a car was the Stingray.

Sexy 73




Dowdy 74 Tupperware

[CatsEye68]

Not sure if that is a '74. The '74 had a 2-piece rear bumper that was split vertically down the middle, a one-year-only design. I can't see a seam in the pic.

[ovr50]

Not sure if that is a '74. The '74 had a 2-piece rear bumper that was split vertically down the middle, a one-year-only design. I can't see a seam in the pic.

I don't think it is a '74 either. I thought the one with the seam was a '76. I had a '77 for awhile, and it had no seam.

Regardless, I agree that that Stingray design was degraded by the poly bumpers, and collectors will pay up for the '73 and prior cars (also the engines were stronger before '74). My '77 had a 350 with a whapping 170HP, IIRC. Pretty crappy.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Didn't do much for the poor MGB either.

[Minou]

The new bumper standards were enacted for the 1973 MY.

Look at pictures of any popular model of '72 and '73 and it's easy to spot the difference.

[CatsEye68]

The new bumper standards were enacted for the 1973 MY.

Look at pictures of any popular model of '72 and '73 and it's easy to spot the difference.

There was a one-year-only standard for '73 cars. I believe they had to endure a 2.5 mph impact with no damage. For '74 and beyond they had to take a 5 mph impact. That was the year they got bigger, and a lot of them looked like cowcatchers on locomotives.

[ovr50]

Correct, '74 was the first year for the ugly, bigger bumpers. The comparison should be between '73 and '74.

[neil]

It's a 75 in the photo.  Point still stands on how it affected the lines on the car.