Don't take the bullbar option?

[pah]

Hi Guys,

If you're buying a 4WD or ute, think twice about the bullbar option. The Gov't on the war path again.

Wouldn't worry me to see them banned. It might cause 4WD drivers to use a bit more indicator and change lanes more carefully. I won't hold my breath.

Government considers banning bullbars. Posted 53 minutes ago
The Federal Government is considering a change to the national road rules that could see bullbars banned.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/01/25/3120821.htm


PAH

[C4B]

Hi Guys,

If you're buying a 4WD or ute, think twice about the bullbar option. The Gov't on the war path again.

If they ever did ban bull-bars, it would only be on cars manufactured from that date. They aren't going to go around making you remove your existing bull-bar, in the same way that when seat belts became mandatory, they didn't go around forcing people to fit seat belts to older vehicles.

[swingtan]

Isn't this a rule already in SA? I thought there was one that only allowed bullbars in the metro area for a 2 week period before / after going bush. It seemed pretty crazy as I have no idea on how you would enforce it, but I do remember hearing about it some time back.

[theVman]

Isn't this a rule already in SA? I thought there was one that only allowed bullbars in the metro area for a 2 week period before / after going bush. It seemed pretty crazy as I have no idea on how you would enforce it, but I do remember hearing about it some time back.

Removing a bullbar (especially one fitted with a winch) is quite an unreasonable request if you live in town and go bush. I think it would cause more problems than sollutions and would be very hard to police.

I can see the argument but really given the country we live in and the risk of hitting wild life when on the open road its not really feasible in many places to not have them. And who's to say someone who has a car registered in the middle of a city doesn't still head out and use it. They are certainly not going to remove it when in town as steel bars (I'm assuming of most concern) are quite heavy. Add a winch and its a two person job.

[commodorenut]

Must be another slow news day is it?

No murders or gang violence to report, so lets dig into the back of the cupboard again. Let's see, we can't re-use the housing bubble about to burst story again, we only did that last week. Hoon stories with archive footage from 5 years ago are always good...nah, TT & ACA have already plundered them....hmmm, no more royal births tucked away? Nope - hey, look what I found, the good old chestnut - let's ban the bullbar again..... now where's Harold Scruby's phone number.....


They've been all talk about this for like 20 years, and nothing ever gets done (bar recycling the story every now & again).

[duke5700]

More people would die smoking related illness or just plain being fat than being killed by some 'idiot' in a 4wd with a bullbar.

I am an idiot in a 4wd these days, but its simple. Being on-call I drive all over NSW at strange hours and its a personal safety thing for me.

Someone somewhere needs to stop and think... hang on maybe we have our priorities screwed up here.. lets not go for the vote grabber lets do something that will actually make peoples lives better.

[toey]

will never come in. period.

[shaunv8]

Its not only 4wd's which have bullbars. Have a bloody look around at all the sedans with them, let alont the outregeously stoopid B&S ute farking things!!!!

[SAMCRO]

Its not only 4wd's which have bullbars. Have a bloody look around at all the sedans with them, let alont the outregeously stoopid B&S ute farking things!!!!

Couldn't agree more :goodjob:

[Red Beard]

I used to have a 4WD, just a nudge bar though, not a bullbar, more something to hang some lights on. This won't happen, not in the country anyway, and it would be bloody difficult to enforce in the city. Look how much trouble they have trying to keep them stupid fishing rod holders off the top of bullbars. I've mentioned to a number of local idiots, it's an automatic fine to leave them on if they're not in use. They don't care, but they're the perfect height to put a hole in a child's head.

They'll care when they get a vehicular manslaughter charge.

Sorry for the rant, but those particular idiots really annoy me.

[1BEAST2NV]

Are they serious???

good luck :confused:

but what a crock of shiiit...

A "BULLBAR" is no more dangerous than the rest of the car.....period.....

-its all metal,
-it all hurts,
-it all breaks bones
-it all takes lives,

just because there's a bullbar in front doesnt make it any worse than a car with out!!!!


Any way thats my thought, some wont agree but I dont care, every one has an opinion :), thats mine.

[smokey777]

Are they serious???

good luck :confused:

but what a crock of shiiit...

A "BULLBAR" is no more dangerous than the rest of the car.....period.....

-its all metal,
-it all hurts,
-it all breaks bones
-it all takes lives,

just because there's a bullbar in front doesnt make it any worse than a car with out!!!!


Any way thats my thought, some wont agree but I dont care, every one has an opinion :), thats mine.

so youre telling me bullbars deform like cars do..... :confused:

[pah]

Modern sedans tend to be pointier at the front end. No doubt for fuel economy nemefits. Compare a VE to an HZ. I suspect it also has benefits in the event of connecting with a pedestrian. Being hit in the legs rather than the torso would produce less life threatening injuries. This benefit does not exist with Landcruisers or Patrols.

Remember the emblem bolted to Jaguar bonnets? How would you like to connect with one of them? Not a pleasant thought. There's a reason these types of ornaments have disappeared. Don't Rollers have an ornament that retracts at speed? And then we have the bullbar fraternity who bolt their fishing rod holders onto their bullbars with U bolts! TOP idea!

I think Jolden and Ford sell crashbars that are designed to be compatible with airbags etc, have a degree of compliance / flex and and match the profile of the car. I guess they'd do less damage to pedestrians? The least that should be enforced is very careful bullbar design and a ban on extras such as fishing rod holders.

I am not a fan of ANCAP and it's mono-focus attitude to safety. The type of focus that gives us A pillars that are so thick that we are more likely to hit things. Nor am I a fan of ever increasing humbers of air bags. Such as bonnet air bags: http://www.carandsuv.co.nz/tag/airbag




PAH

[fx160]

so youre telling me bullbars deform like cars do..... :confused:


i think its a valid statement , as most of the cars fitted with them are big and square
a bit like when air bags first came out
there was suggestions that they were producing prettier corpses

kev

[TIR33D]

If you are going to do it upgrade your springs and shocks in the front at the same time, it is not uncommon for me to see cars with 20000 ks or less with blown struts due to the extra weight hanging out the front.
It does also effect the way the car feels on the road.

[planetdavo]

Unfortunately the proliferation of American "SUV" culture in Australia has led to a vast number of "f#ck yous all" @rseholes and b!tches on city and suburban roads intent on intimidating anyone that dares to do less than 10km/h over the speed limit. Bullbars are one of the weapons of choice to intimidate other drivers.
PS: Bullbars are a well known destroyer of the human body. Sure a car without one will still often hurt you, but one with a bullbar can cause major injury at very low speeds, as they basically focus all the crash force on that top round bar attached to very rigid vertical supports, usually jutting menacingly forward of the vehicle. At least the car (even bulky 4wd's), have some ability to send people onto the bonnet.

[theVman]

Unfortunately thats what a bullbar is designed to do - defelect objects down and to the side as you dont really want a large animal going over the bonnet and smacking through the windscreen. Roos in particular can rip you to shreds if the hind legs smash through the windscreen.

Its a catch 22. More and more of us want to get out and have a lifestyle and 4x4's are becoming increasingly popular. I think some of the newer designed bars are better such as the factory 200 style bar however I don't know how rugged they are.

I have to use my fourbie as a daily so unfortunately it probably spends 90% of its life driving on urban streets but I can't have a daily and two cars sitting in the shed it just isn't practical.

[blu ute]

Ffs We live in Australia. This argument shits me to death. If you are going to ban bull bars ban motorcyclists. There would be less deaths on our roads. While you are at it lest not get our license gill your 25 and must have 4000 hrs behind the wheel.
People are unrealistic. You can drive 1/2 out if cbd and have the issue of animals on roads.
People have to take responsibilty for there own actions don't blame the bull bar blame the idiot behind the wheel of the flog that's steps on front or pulls in front.

[planetdavo]

Ffs We live in Australia. This argument shits me to death. If you are going to ban bull bars ban motorcyclists. There would be less deaths on our roads. While you are at it lest not get our license gill your 25 and must have 4000 hrs behind the wheel.
People are unrealistic. You can drive 1/2 out if cbd and have the issue of animals on roads.
People have to take responsibilty for there own actions don't blame the bull bar blame the idiot behind the wheel of the flog that's steps on front or pulls in front.

This argument might sh!t you to death but you perhaps need to start understanding the other side. Australia ain't that old school Australia any more. Hasn't been for a generation once you reach cities. Might be still right out in "the bush".
Manufacturers are forced to design in significant levels of pedestrian protection into new cars. Why does every new car have a higher bonnet line now? It's purely for pedestrian protection.
Simple fact is that most bullbars on city and suburban roads are there for either cosmetic reasons or for intimidation reasons. Arguments about wildlife in this enviroment are utter bullsh!t. There's almost more chance of winning lotto than having a large animal coming through your windscreen.
The fix is relatively simple. Make people who want one apply for a permit to have one. If they can't prove they meet the conditions, they don't get one.

[duke5700]

I knew it would never last...

I have to disagree with you on this one PD. Bigger things in life to worry about than banning bullbars.

The intimidating drives stuff with bullbars? did you just pull that out of your ass? I mean come on, doesn't take a bullbar to intimidate anyone. You can just tailgate and flash your lights. It gets the same message across. Jeez my 4wd takes about 40 secs to reach 100kp/h anyway.. I am sure I can be a real tailgating weapon with that.

There wouldn't be 5% of cars on Aussie roads even with them and for anyone who travels past the city limits for extended periods of time a bullbar is a good idea. 100kgs of roo @ 110kp/h make a huge mess of a car and with a bullbar 99% of the time you will still be able to make it home.

Anyway.. go to work at your dealership and get behind your parts counter. No need to worry about wildlife there other than cranky holden owners who pay 7000% mark up :poke:

[seldo]

Whilst the proposal is almost impossible to apply, and will not happen in the near future, there's no doubt that it has some merit.
I'm sure that a pedestrian hit by most current cars travelling at less than 10kph would stand a fair chance of getting off with not much more than a few cuts and bruises. But I sure don't like their chances if hit by a 4x with a bull-bar - esp if fitted with rod-holders which are usually attached with big ugly u-bolts that for some reason (ease of access?) always seem to have the surplus bolts facing forward.
The ADR legislation these days is so demanding and aware of this type of pedestrian injury that car design today even requires that there be no sharp solid objects under the bonnet at the front of the engine so that a hit pedestrian is not injured by anything in the engine compartment through the bonnet not being able to deform relatively smoothly. Also note that Rolls, Benz, Bentley, Caprice, Jaguar etc no longer have those kidney-gouging bonnet mascots of 20 years ago. Maybe Mack even?
Those who poo-poo the idea of the legislation clearly have a personal agenda of their own, and can give no cogent argument for the bars, other than to make infantile aspersions.
There is absolutely no doubt that the idea has irrefutable merit from a safety point, but I still doubt it will happen in the near future.

[planetdavo]

Duke, either people agree or people disagree. People don't tend to ever change their minds on this subject.
Perhaps the best way to describe it is that many people "justify" their purchase of a 4WD/SUV by saying that at some point in maybe the next 35 years, they will "probably" take their truck off-road or on that dream trip around Australia, even though they only plan on keeping it for 3 years... :confused:
Bullsh!t reasons, as I said. :yup:

[Lofty]

I live in a city of 90,000 odd and i constantly see big red roo's as road kill on the side of the road.
My next car is going to be a 200 series twin turbo V8 diesel Land cruiser and that will have a big bullbar fitted.

[C4B]

I'd love to see the stats on how many pedestrians are killed by 4WD bullbars each year (and I don't mean by 4WD's in general, I mean how many were hit by a 4WD with a bullbar and it was deemed the cause of death was as a result of the bullbar being fitted).

(And just take note: if you come back with the argument that it's impossible to determine whether the person would have survived had the 4WD NOT been fitted with a bullbar, it is equally impossible to say that actually having the bullbar fitted caused their death)

PS. I have a 4WD but don't have a bullbar. (But after reading this thread, I'm tempted to get one)

[planetdavo]

http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/Home/SafetyAndRules/SaferVehicles/VehicleDesignStandardsAndAccessories/Bullbars.htm

[VYSHSV8]

there are too many variables involved to say a bullbar caused a death and NO 1 i wouldnt believe anyone in a or involved in producing that vic roads report as they probably have never been in the bush or been in a car with a bar fitted...

They just produce this shit to justify there job


No 1 line of site comes down to the height of people and there seat position, I could go on and on...

I admit I dont have a car fitted with 1 but when I lived in the bush they saved me many a time when I had 4WD's and they are the ones that they say are no good, let me tell you another fact when in romote areas not all 4wd's carry HF radios to call for help, but if ya had a decent roo and bull step out in front of you, you would have a better chance of surviving with a decent bar fitted:):).

Not for only allowing you to continue your journey but also saving you from the sometimes inevitable death of dehydration if stuck in a remote area.


But hey this is just my take on it and dont take it as gossiple

[planetdavo]

Perhaps one of the main reasons people bring up is the most disturbing one.
It give ME more protection in an accident.
Besides being a debatable point (bullbars can dramatically alter the crumple zones, leading to potentially more trauma for said person), it indicates that the person saying it has no real issues causing signicantly more injury to other drivers/pedestrians than they might otherwise have.
Keep them away from me in the cities, PLEASE. I have no issues with them being used in their intended environment.
End result of it all though is that it's still often down to attitude, and if one's attitude loves them, that person wont ever change their mind, no matter what mountain of evidence can be produced.

[lowriding]

Ffs We live in Australia. This argument shits me to death. If you are going to ban bull bars ban motorcyclists. There would be less deaths on our roads. While you are at it lest not get our license gill your 25 and must have 4000 hrs behind the wheel.
People are unrealistic. You can drive 1/2 out if cbd and have the issue of animals on roads.
People have to take responsibilty for there own actions don't blame the bull bar blame the idiot behind the wheel of the flog that's steps on front or pulls in front.

Well said mate . Some people never get out of a 3 block radius and cant comprehend the idea of rural driving ,or how common it is to hit roos at 100 kmph ... As for permits and this sort of carry on get real ,you expect the government to do this effectively ? Once you open the doors to Government dictating what you can or can not have based on need or location you are stepping into dangerous ground . Luckily despite moronic do gooders trying their hardest it will never happen anyway .

[VYSHSV8]

I think the biggest problem is the people who buy a 4WD and dont use it as a 4WD, they buy them to look over the top of cars to see ahead or to say hey look mines bigger than yours and they love to use that presence to push people ie tail gate to get them to move quicker..

hey I dont have anything against 4WD's at all but if I was going bush regularly or towing heavy loads yes I would have 1, but for daily driving around town I can pick and choose which car I take, but then again I do drive a truck daily and it has a bar on it....To hold my spot lights:):)


But it comes down to people's driving habits end of story Bullbars don't kill, people do and unobservant pedestrains:(

[planetdavo]

Well said mate . Some people never get out of a 3 block radius and cant comprehend the idea of rural driving ,or how common it is to hit roos at 100 kmph ... As for permits and this sort of carry on get real ,you expect the government to do this effectively ? Once you open the doors to Government dictating what you can or can not have based on need or location you are stepping into dangerous ground . Luckily despite moronic do gooders trying their hardest it will never happen anyway .

Unfortunately my friend, you aren't grasping what is being said.
Most of the issues are for 4WD's/SUV's whose longest "bush trip" is for a Sunday picnic to a lake somewhere. The rest of the time they spend trying to barge well behaved citizens doing 50 in the 50km/h school zones off the road. How dare they do 50 when they should be doing 70 in that zone! :vpo:
That is why they keep attracting attention to themselves. The attitude of the driver is the problem, but the bullbar is an additional "weapon" at the drivers disposal. The other option, of course, is to just ban them fully. Then it wont be too much paperwork regulating it. It's much easier to control the "weapons" than it is to control the drivers fragile mental state it seems...

[seldo]

There is no doubt that bull-bars are a valid and important feature for country driving....
But - there is also absolutely no doubt that they are extremely dangerous in the city for pedestrian impacts.
Big problem - how to segregate the two issues?
And for those who doubt their safety issues, just ask yourself to answer honestly - if you were to be hit by a car, do you think you'd be likely to suffer more injury if it was equipped with a bull-bar.... especially with rod-holders...
Be honest now... :)

[C4B]

Perhaps one of the main reasons people bring up is the most disturbing one.
It give ME more protection in an accident.

You find it disturbing that a person would want to do everything possible to protect themself and their family in an accident. :confused:

[lowriding]

I think the best solution is to ban pedestrians ...let's face it they are just a jaywalking menace most of the time anyway .

[IJ.]

Where I live there's more Roos than people.... :(

I'll be fitting one to both of my vehicles once I get around to fabbing up something decent that won't do more harm than good, till then I drive slow at dawn/dusk.

[planetdavo]

You find it disturbing that a person would want to do everything possible to protect themself and their family in an accident. :confused:

Absolutely, but not for the reasons you support C4B.
In the face of a mountain of evidence about how bullbars can increase the effects of a car accident on that vehicle, people still justify their fitment in the city on "safety" grounds. So, potentially more injury to pedestrians, as well as the family in that vehicle. :eek:
Yep, lot's of "safety" benefits there. :confused: I would much rather a destroyed vehicle with the passengers minimally injured (no bull bar), than a lightly damaged vehicle with smashed up occupants (bullbar that affected the crush zones). Wreckers do tend to like those sorts of vehicles though. Wash out the blood, bin a few front panels, but otherwise, much of the car can be stripped and sold off.
I said earlier that people will either support or disapprove of their fitment, and wont change their minds. Pretty obvious how people are aligned in this thread I reckon. :yup:

[VYSHSV8]

There is no doubt that bull-bars are a valid and important feature for country driving....
But - there is also absolutely no doubt that they are extremely dangerous in the city for pedestrian impacts.
Big problem - how to segregate the two issues?
And for those who doubt their safety issues, just ask yourself to answer honestly - if you were to be hit by a car, do you think you'd be likely to suffer more injury if it was equipped with a bull-bar.... especially with rod-holders...
Be honest now... :)

Rod holders on Bullbars have been banned over here for a long time they must be fitted behind the bar not protruding from the front of the bar as it becomes a sharp object if fitted to the front side

[Red Beard]

Simple solution, increase the cost of green slips (third party personal insurance) for vehicles fitted with bullbars. You want the protection, you pay for it, and if you're willing to cause more damage to anything you might hit accidentally, you should pay for that as well.

[the big fist]

You find it disturbing that a person would want to do everything possible to protect themself and their family in an accident. :confused:

This is actually wrong. Impulse is a change in inertia which is a function of force multiplied by the change in time. So in an accident if the change in time is small (such as hitting something solid and coming to an abrupt stop) then the force is much higher. If the change in time is slow (such as the front of your car crumpling) then the force is much smaller.

So really you are worse off in a front collision with a bullbar.
I couldn't care either way, just that they are the facts.
:smilesandbanana:

[smokey777]

And cars take a good beating nowdays i hit a roo & pig "same time" in me ve ss at cobar still drove perfectly to bris plus around for 3 months before got it fixed, i was doin well over speed limit at tme aswell

[Phizzle]

There is no doubt that bull-bars are a valid and important feature for country driving....
But - there is also absolutely no doubt that they are extremely dangerous in the city for pedestrian impacts.
Big problem - how to segregate the two issues?
And for those who doubt their safety issues, just ask yourself to answer honestly - if you were to be hit by a car, do you think you'd be likely to suffer more injury if it was equipped with a bull-bar.... especially with rod-holders...
Be honest now... :)

Maybe if people looked left, looked right and looked left again instead of just walking out onto a road with anywhere from 1.5 to 50 tonne vehicles travelling at speed with their iPod turned up flat out or sending an ever so important text message that both begins and ends in "LOL", there might not be so many pedestrian vs vehicle accidents in the first place!

Yes, I am aware of kids chasing balls into the street and no doubt no-one would want to be involved in anything to do with it, either as a driver, neighbour or worst case, parent. That is why all over the country 50km/h suburban speed limits have been reduced as well as 40km/h school zones being implemented. Funnily enough the ones I always see speeding through these zones are parents in 4wds, not cammed, stoked and lowered Holdens!! Work that out! In a perfect world with attentive drivers and attentive pedestrians, there would never be a collision. It seems parents don't teach their kids the basics of crossing a road in the interest of one's self preservation.