It can be done!

[RR44TDV8]

Has anyone seen these pics? I copied them from Expedition Portal. Seems this vehicle was done by Roaring Fork Landrover, a dealer in the U.S.
I know it is a petrol V8 and not a TDV8 and so the usual weight problems may be invoked but just to know it has been done is a relief.........now to hunt the details......contacting dealer today for information.

[RR44TDV8]

iPad making me load one photo at a time!

[RR44TDV8]

Next!

[RR44TDV8]

Last one

[Tombie]

Looks great...

Thats what can happen when they dont have to comply with our regulations!!!

[harlie]

Has anyone seen these pics? I copied them from Expedition Portal. Seems this vehicle was done by Roaring Fork Landrover, a dealer in the U.S.
I know it is a petrol V8 and not a TDV8 and so the usual weight problems may be invoked but just to know it has been done is a relief.........now to hunt the details......contacting dealer today for information.

Is your point about "just to know its been done" referring specifically to TDV8? Because it's been done several times already, admittedly to pre 06 - but the chassis behind the bumper support is identical so why could it not be done to a later L322??

Sticking point is no one has had it certified, it's easy to adapt a D3 or D4 bar to fit the L322 - actually really easy - but it's not legal - which this solution will carry the same problem.

Other issue with that particular design, is it won't fit the earlier cars, and for someone to go through the approval process it really need to fit all versions of the L322 to enable scale of number to make it viable.

While we talk legals - to get around the weight issue you would need to go alloy on the TDV8

[RR44TDV8]

Is your point about "just to know its been done" referring specifically to TDV8? Because it's been done several times already, admittedly to pre 06 - but the chassis behind the bumper support is identical so why could it not be done to a later L322??

Sticking point is no one has had it certified, it's easy to adapt a D3 or D4 bar to fit the L322 - actually really easy - but it's not legal - which this solution will carry the same problem.

Other issue with that particular design, is it won't fit the earlier cars, and for someone to go through the approval process it really need to fit all versions of the L322 to enable scale of number to make it viable.

While we talk legals - to get around the weight issue you would need to go alloy on the TDV8

Yeah Harlie, I hear you but my point was that there is just nothing around for front and rear bar fitment for late model L322. My focus is on the 2010 onwards because I own a 2011/12 car and because whilst it is easy to say that the earlier and newer cars are technically the same and why wouldn't something fit, there's also a million little annoying reasons such as wiring, sensor placement, different bumpers, nut,bolt and screw placement, radiators, hoses, tubes, lights, securing brackets and so on that change between engines and year models. These things all have to be dealt with if the bar-work issue is to be solved and then you confront the issues of who is prepared to do without what function of the car because a hose or bracket or wire could not be re-fitted and the "She'll be right" approach was adopted.

I had a Porsche 993 Turbo that was gradually converted to a Turbo S and then back to a tarmac rally car and then back to a race car and finally back to a road/track car and each of these new identities required panel or body part changes. I always ordered genuine parts and always scoured the manuals before ordering and making the changes and every single time I found a bolt hole, wiring loom, plug or some other thing moved, changed or in the way or non-existent, even though the factory manual always told me this was not the case.

Anyway, I am just happy that someone, somewhere built and fitted a heap of good looking gear to a late model L322...........I just am!

[CSBrisie]

Saw a blue L322 with rear wheel carrier this avo in Brisbane near Showgrounds (visiting the 4WD / Caravan Show I bet!). Is that a Member here??
cheers

[RR44TDV8]

Saw a blue L322 with rear wheel carrier this avo in Brisbane near Showgrounds (visiting the 4WD / Caravan Show I bet!). Is that a Member here??
cheers

Any pics Chris?

[CSBrisie]

Yes, sorry, I will post - just haven't downloaded them yet

[MR LR]

Has anyone seen these pics? I copied them from Expedition Portal. Seems this vehicle was done by Roaring Fork Landrover, a dealer in the U.S.
I know it is a petrol V8 and not a TDV8 and so the usual weight problems may be invoked but just to know it has been done is a relief.........now to hunt the details......contacting dealer today for information.
KILL IT WITH FIRE!

Just because it can be done, does mean it should be.

[Homestar]

KILL IT WITH FIRE!

Just because it can be done, does mean it should be.

Doesn't mean you shouldn't either.

There are heaps of people (including me) looking for a good looking, strong, legal front bar for their L322. You can choose not to on yours - do you own one? - entirely your choice, but don't bag others out that want to.

The L322 is the most capable 4 wheel drive I've ever driven, and they make the almost ultimate tourer. Why wouldn't you want to take advantage of that?

[RR44TDV8]

Doesn't mean you shouldn't either.

There are heaps of people (including me) looking for a good looking, strong, legal front bar for their L322. You can choose not to on yours - do you own one? - entirely your choice, but don't bag others out that want to.

The L322 is the most capable 4 wheel drive I've ever driven, and they make the almost ultimate tourer. Why wouldn't you want to take advantage of that?

What he said!

[MR LR]

Doesn't mean you shouldn't either.

There are heaps of people (including me) looking for a good looking, strong, legal front bar for their L322. You can choose not to on yours - do you own one? - entirely your choice, but don't bag others out that want to.

The L322 is the most capable 4 wheel drive I've ever driven, and they make the almost ultimate tourer. Why wouldn't you want to take advantage of that?
I was referring to the hideous bull bar... It's very tasteless, typical from the U.S. Of A.

If it was styled decently I'd be all for it ;) :D

[chaybra]

Its not the best looking bar, ill give it that...

[Chops]

Why is they won't certify them, is it beacuse testing would cost so much, ie; by the time they write off seveal high end expensive cars?

Leeanne and I spotted a Rangie fully kitted in St Kilda one evening. Have no idea whether its was legal or not as we did'nt get long to look at it,,, it was traveling the other way.

[CSBrisie]

some pics of the RRV in Brisbane.

[CSBrisie]

some extra ones

[Graeme]

it's easy to adapt a D3 or D4 bar to fit the L322 - actually really easy - but it's not legalIts not necessarily illegal, indeed most likely is legal if done by an Australian bar manufacturer such as ARB or OL.

There are requirements for shape including following the body shape reasonably closely to minimise pedestrian damage, driver forward visibility, not exceeding the width including the mirrors nor 2.5m and an assertion from the bar manufacturer that its unlikely to adversely affect air-bag deployment. As long as the shape follows the body reasonably closely and the width acceptable, the bar would already comply with other pedestrian impact aspects so only the similarity or otherwise of the air-bag deployment needs to be considered. With D3/D4 and the RR made by the one manufacturer in the same era I suspect that air-bag deployment criteria could be safely assumed to be sufficiently similar. LR aren't going to give their approval so its totally up to the bar manufacturer. From what I can discover, no crash testing is done of bars fitted to vehicles so its only the assessment of the bar manufacturer as to its suitability. Its quite feasible that ARB and OL have been prepared to declare that their D3 or D4 bar complies for these RRs in general or at least on a vehicle by vehicle basis.

[RR44TDV8]

some pics of the RRV in Brisbane.

I don't think I like it.......covers pax tail light and all the support bar work hangs low and out back......goodbye departure angle.

I think I am going to go with a flat rack and store it up there when I am on the road. Been trying to avoid this as the fuel mileage is so good and resent any adverse affect to that but I think it is the only easy and sensible answer.

Looking at the blue car makes me realise how stupidly big a 275/55R20 is going to look hanging off the back of my car!

A fold down option from the trailer hitch would have been good option but can you imagine the rattle? It would drive you insane!

Crap.......oh well, move on to next project!

[RR44TDV8]

Its not necessarily illegal, indeed most likely is legal if done by an Australian bar manufacturer such as ARB or OL.

There are requirements for shape including following the body shape reasonably closely to minimise pedestrian damage, driver forward visibility, not exceeding the width including the mirrors nor 2.5m and an assertion from the bar manufacturer that its unlikely to adversely affect air-bag deployment. As long as the shape follows the body reasonably closely and the width acceptable, the bar would already comply with other pedestrian impact aspects so only the similarity or otherwise of the air-bag deployment needs to be considered. With D3/D4 and the RR made by the one manufacturer in the same era I suspect that air-bag deployment criteria could be safely assumed to be sufficiently similar. LR aren't going to give their approval so its totally up to the bar manufacturer. From what I can discover, no crash testing is done of bars fitted to vehicles so its only the assessment of the bar manufacturer as to its suitability. Its quite feasible that ARB and OL have been prepared to declare that their D3 or D4 bar complies for these RRs in general or at least on a vehicle by vehicle basis.

That's right Greame and the air bag calculations can be done by an authorised engineer for not a lot of money. I had these done with the mods I did to my Porsche a few times over the years.

[Graeme]

However I don't think the D3/D4 bars would suit the MY11/12 bumper and head-lights unless the bar is mounted higher to avoid huge gaps below the lights, Then the bottom of the radiators etc might be too exposed to damage, let alone the effect on the appearance.

[RR44TDV8]

However I don't think the D3/D4 bars would suit the MY11/12 bumper and head-lights unless the bar is mounted higher to avoid huge gaps below the lights, Then the bottom of the radiators etc might be too exposed to damage, let alone the effect on the appearance.
Yep, agree again. Sorry about the name dyslexia in last post too!:confused: I quite like the Rhino Products idea of a bumper but no tube work. I think if there was one I was happiest with, it would be this type of design but the one off cost would be eye bleeding.
I dunno!

[Graeme]

I would want the tubes for roo protection even though bars spoil the appearance. The ARB bar on the pre-facelift looks quite acceptable to me but I wonder what can be done for the later ones. I don't much like the ECB on my D4 but its there for a purpose.

Transpositions and different spelling occurs often with a name that has several different versions. I have a chuckle when people want to know how I spell my name so they can give me a call when an ordered part arrives - they all sound the same!

[harlie]

Graeme, it would be quite possible and cost effective to make a finisher panel to fill the gap under the headlights of the later L322 - use the same ARB bar as the early model and make a panel out of fibre glass, to suit? ARB do this for many of the Jap 4x4s already.

On the legalities issue; Now we are saying that it can be assessed? I ask because the leg work done by the guys (here) in Melbourne and Perth have both reported that it must be crash tested. Now, I'm not trying to argue but why would the manufacturers by shying away? Can we dig up something in print?

Stay with me.... If we can get a ruling that it can be based on assessment and an engineer can be found for reasonable $ then let's do it. How many on here want one ? we all chip in. The option of using the same bar for all models with finisher panels makes it more cost effective.

There's also been several conversations from the L320 RRS guys. We know some of the agents are fitting D3 bars to the RRS. If we have a solution, I'd be keen to have a crack, my car has bumper damage now.

As for compatibility; The 2012 bumper and lights fit straight on to a 2002 with the only mod needed being the headlight bracket (and the headlight electrical connector). So without touching the main headlights the rest swaps over - there have been hundreds of cars converted without issue. Sensors, cameras and fog light are an easy mounting issue to sort before powder coating. We are talking about replacing the skin that the bits mount to - none of the electrical devices are going to be touched so I don't understand the concern here - I'm not taking the she'll be right, I've just looked at and spoken to several people that have done the conversions. Not to mention how many times I've had the front end off my car. Is there something (like a washer bottle) mounted inside the bumper directly benith the headlight on the 2012?


Yeah Harlie, I hear you but my point was that there is just nothing around for front and rear bar fitment for late model L322. My focus is on the 2010 onwards because I own a 2011/12 car and because whilst it is easy to say that the earlier and newer cars are technically the same and why wouldn't something fit, there's also a million little annoying reasons such as wiring, sensor placement, different bumpers, nut,bolt and screw placement, radiators, hoses, tubes, lights, securing brackets and so on that change between engines and year models. These things all have to be dealt with if the bar-work issue is to be solved and then you confront the issues of who is prepared to do without what function of the car because a hose or bracket or wire could not be re-fitted and the "She'll be right" approach was adopted.

I had a Porsche 993 Turbo that was gradually converted to a Turbo S and then back to a tarmac rally car and then back to a race car and finally back to a road/track car and each of these new identities required panel or body part changes. I always ordered genuine parts and always scoured the manuals before ordering and making the changes and every single time I found a bolt hole, wiring loom, plug or some other thing moved, changed or in the way or non-existent, even though the factory manual always told me this was not the case.

Anyway, I am just happy that someone, somewhere built and fitted a heap of good looking gear to a late model L322...........I just am!

[RR44TDV8]

Graeme, it would be quite possible and cost effective to make a finisher panel to fill the gap under the headlights of the later L322 - use the same ARB bar as the early model and make a panel out of fibre glass, to suit? ARB do this for many of the Jap 4x4s already.

On the legalities issue; Now we are saying that it can be assessed? I ask because the leg work done by the guys (here) in Melbourne and Perth have both reported that it must be crash tested. Now, I'm not trying to argue but why would the manufacturers by shying away? Can we dig up something in print?

Stay with me.... If we can get a ruling that it can be based on assessment and an engineer can be found for reasonable $ then let's do it. How many on here want one ? we all chip in. The option of using the same bar for all models with finisher panels makes it more cost effective.

There's also been several conversations from the L320 RRS guys. We know some of the agents are fitting D3 bars to the RRS. If we have a solution, I'd be keen to have a crack, my car has bumper damage now.

As for compatibility; The 2012 bumper and lights fit straight on to a 2002 with the only mod needed being the headlight bracket (and the headlight electrical connector). So without touching the main headlights the rest swaps over - there have been hundreds of cars converted without issue. Sensors, cameras and fog light are an easy mounting issue to sort before powder coating. We are talking about replacing the skin that the bits mount to - none of the electrical devices are going to be touched so I don't understand the concern here - I'm not taking the she'll be right, I've just looked at and spoken to several people that have done the conversions. Not to mention how many times I've had the front end off my car. Is there something (like a washer bottle) mounted inside the bumper directly benith the headlight on the 2012?

Harlie, I agree with everything you have put in your message. I am not saying this is gospel as I have not attempted to do this particular thing with these cars but as I said, when I needed to change the front and the identity of my Porsche, I would have an engineer approve the fitment, and that did at one stage include a half cage and then a fully welded in complete cage and harnesses. Once the engineer approved it and I gave a copy of the engineering report to my insurance company, the car was insured and the modifications noted on my policy. I never had a problem with rego as the inspection and acceptance in NSW is done at "pink slip" time by the mechanic inspecting the car and issuing the pink sip. If the engineers report was attached to the inspection report, car rego'd and no problems.

So my suggestion is one based purely on insurance criteria, ie: getting the insurance to pay out if you have an accident with the bar work fitted. If the bar meets the registration authorities specifications for bull bar fitment, then what issue is there to be had by the registration authority?

Now, if you are a commercial enterprise making a profit from a product designed and built by you, then you would need to offer blanket approval and I believe this is called "type approval". This would require whatever testing and approval processes were required by the authority that has charge over the product you produce. In respect to bull bars...the testing is not so much a test of the bull bar but rather a test to prove that it's use does not inhibit or detract from the safety systems built into the vehicle by the manufacturer. This can require crash testing if engineering modelling data is not available but the likes of ARB and so on would have gigabytes of engineering modelling to show crumple rates and stress points and designed deformation capabilities. They would only be crash testing completely new materials, designs or bars to be fitted to uniquely designed vehicles.

Whilst I am not suggesting that the computer modelling data is available to every engineer, certainly the stress characteristics and material behaviour information would be available. This would not work for getting "type approval" for all of us, as the concept of a specifying engineer is to work with people producing "one-off's". What would benefit all of us is to use the same engineer to report on our bars that should be all the same.

**Disclaimer**
This is my understanding of the registration requirements here in NSW and what can be done by working with an approved specifying engineer - dont flame me!:soapbox:

Rgds
Grant

[Graeme]

Have a read of this;
94765

Perhaps it has to be done on a vehicle by vehicle basis.

See the table in section 3.1 on page 5.

[Graeme]

it would be quite possible and cost effective to make a finisher panel to fill the gap under the headlights of the later L322 - use the same ARB bar as the early model and make a panel out of fibre glass, to suit?
I had thought that the 11/12 headlights were effectively closer to the bonnet than earlier ones but closer comparisons reveals that they are not. I've lined-up pictures of the fitted D3/D4 bar with an 11/12 from the same angle and now think it will look OK. Indeed the lenses of the bi-xenon lights don't reach as high as the earlier ones so having the top of the bar at the same height would not present a problem for the lights. I must say that I'm not a fan of the standard deep panel under the 11/12 lights so a nice finisher might be an improvement. With the mud-guard cut-off looking to be at the same point as earlier vehicles its appropriate to have the same on the 11/12.

I don't have my 11/12 yet but will be wanting a bar very quickly once I do, for which I've set a time-frame of about 2 more months to find one with an e-diff before settling for one with an open diff.

[harlie]

Have a read of this;
94765

Perhaps it has to be done on a vehicle by vehicle basis.

See the table in section 3.1 on page 5.




Complying

The bull bar manufacturer provides a statement that the bull bar complies with AS 4876.1.

The bull bar manufacturer has assessed the effect of the bull bar on the intended vehicle's compliance with the relevant ADRs, and can confirm ongoing compliance with the ADRs once the bull bar is fitted.

The bull bar manufacturer identifies the vehicle model for which it has been designed to be fitted

On reading this, I really can't see why ARB haven't fitted bar for us. They already have ticked point one. It is easy to tick point three - and two requires their engineer to sit down and look at the front of the L322? What are we missing?

[MR LR]

On reading this, I really can't see why ARB haven't fitted bar for us. They already have ticked point one. It is easy to tick point three - and two requires their engineer to sit down and look at the front of the L322? What are we missing?
Sales volume...

[chaybra]

I have spent countless hours trying to get the L322 bullbar movement happening (Check out the "bullbar development" thread) I have approached every manufacture, large and small about getting one put into production. 90% of the time its a flat out no there just isn't a big enough market (Despite my explanation that one bar would cover 10 years of production and they would be the only people in the world to build one), the other 5% is yes but we need at least 10 deposits down before we can even design one or a yes (By Xrox in Perth, and lets be honest they would look like crap on a RR)

I took it to the point of manufacturing them myself and gaining airbag compliance that way, the construction and the design in terms of being ADR compatible (Shape and pedestrian safety) is the easy peasy part, the larger costs come into the crash testing obviously.
I have spoken with the engineers that actually give a report, that you then submit to Vicroads or whatever governing state you are in to say that it has been tested and the deceleration rates of the new bar is within a certain tolerance of the existing manufactures' bar. No engineer will approve without one of these reports.

The actual crash test doesn't involve a full sized car at all, it requires the existing crash bumper (metal bit behind the plastic bumper) and 2 prototypes of the new bar to be installed (one for a high speed and one for a low speed impact) The cost to run the sled and the sensors and gain possession of a report, excluding the costs of the 3 bumpers is around $9k with then the engineering approval costs of the state approved engineers.

So to round it all up, we can have one but it will look like ****
we can have one if everyone wants to pay for it without seeing exactly what it will look like
Or we done have one and we go with my new plan of rear mounting a winch...with no front protection still

[Graeme]

OT but perhaps relevant to the cause: I know of a new Jeep GC that will be off the road for at least 6 more weeks awaiting a replacement radiator support bracket from the US after an encounter with a roo.

[RR44TDV8]

Two separate issues.......one is the concept of production and the other is a one off for a single car. I know this stuff inside out from my Porsche experience and you can do all sorts of stuff on a one off basis.......not easily, granted, but can do.

Production issues are all together different and so much more complex that it is incalculable. Rules and regs and traceable responsibility are what production is all about and this is the issue with asking any of the major manufacturers to build a bar for retail sales. They not only have to deal with liability insurance but you have the many and varied rules and regulations across the world, ADR's, TUV, U.S. state rules and so on.

Don't reckon the l322 bar will ever go into production as it would have needed to do so in around 2008 so as to pick up the previous models and the yet to be sold ones. The manufacturers would have spoken to Land Rover about model life and variations and would have been told the answers honestly. Moons ago, I owned one of Austalia's major bar manufacturing companies and we regularly spoke to car companies about life spans, model variants, new engines, suspensions and so on so that we could develop new products and keep their products relevant to the market.

As a one off, all things are possible.......it's a matter of time and money, nothing more and nothing less!

Just my thoughts and ramblings.......nothing personal meant.

[Graeme]

For the NSW 2 year exemption period it appears that if the ARB D3/D4 bar was fitted by an owner then an exemption could be expected to be granted. It would be preferable if ARB could supply appropriate brackets but maybe the one in the picture was owner-fitted and has owner-manufactured brackets. With the ARB stickers prominent on that vehicle, perhaps there is an ARB branch that fits the bars on a 1-off basis and assists in obtaining or provides the exemption. This will be my approach once I have my vehicle unless a specific L322 bar is being developed that has frontal protection, not just somewhere to mount lights and a winch.

The washer jets for the bi-xenon headlights would need to be aimed appropriately.

[RR44TDV8]

I've given up on a front bar.......too damn hard and I've now figured out some interesting aerial and led brackets. More to come on those. A momentary lack of concentration on the weekend has turned my focus to a rear bar. The insurance company have agreed to meet the cost if the bar complies. Not sure if it will go ahead but the car is with the engineer now to see about compliance.

[rar110]

I've given up on a front bar.......too damn hard and I've now figured out some interesting aerial and led brackets. More to come on those. A momentary lack of concentration on the weekend has turned my focus to a rear bar. The insurance company have agreed to meet the cost if the bar complies. Not sure if it will go ahead but the car is with the engineer now to see about compliance.

What happened?

[chaybra]

I've given up on a front bar.......too damn hard and I've now figured out some interesting aerial and led brackets. More to come on those. A momentary lack of concentration on the weekend has turned my focus to a rear bar. The insurance company have agreed to meet the cost if the bar complies. Not sure if it will go ahead but the car is with the engineer now to see about compliance.

Almost anything can be done with a rear bar, basically as long as you cant cut someones leg off when driving past and the lights are visible.

[RR44TDV8]

What happened?
I really want to tell you I was all twisted up with a wheel 3 feet in the air squeezing between two house sized boulders in the rain and struggling through slimy clay mud two feet deep and I clipped one of the boulders but really I backed into a concrete bollard in an underground car park. I could have listened to the parking sensors or looked at the reversing camera screen but I didn't! Let's just put this one down to unbridled stupidity and move on!:confused:

[Graeme]

I started wondering if the chassis behind the bumper reinforcement mounting points are strong enough to sustain a roo hit on a bar directly mounted to the reinforcement mounts, considering that from memory my previous D4's alloy ECB bar is bolted directly to the chassis. However I spotted that the ARB D3/D4 bars are bolted to a deformable bracket so possible lack of chassis strength should not be an issue. A decent impact on the original reinforcement bar would take its toll on the chassis rails anyway but would not want a higher-up but lighter impact on a bullbar to damage the rails.

[chaybra]

I started wondering if the chassis behind the bumper reinforcement mounting points are strong enough to sustain a roo hit on a bar directly mounted to the reinforcement mounts, considering that from memory my previous D4's alloy ECB bar is bolted directly to the chassis. However I spotted that the ARB D3/D4 bars are bolted to a deformable bracket so possible lack of chassis strength should not be an issue. A decent impact on the original reinforcement bar would take its toll on the chassis rails anyway but would not want a higher-up but lighter impact on a bullbar to damage the rails.


It would be illegal to mount a solid bar to the front of any car with airbags.
The deformation rate (crumple speed) of the original metal bumper, must be matched within a degree of tolerance to satisfy the requirements for airbag certification. If a solid bar was mounted, the energy would be transferred to the chassis crumple zones and in-turn could set off the air bags at lower speeds than intended.

[Graeme]

I don't understand your point unless you're referring to the comment about the D4's ECB bar which I checked yesterday to find 2 long slots in each of its vertical brackets which would provide some force relief on impact, but still no head-on crumple capability unless the manufacturer expects the vertical brackets to distort sideways.

[diesel]

It would be illegal to mount a solid bar to the front of any car with airbags.
The deformation rate (crumple speed) of the original metal bumper, must be matched within a degree of tolerance to satisfy the requirements for airbag certification. If a solid bar was mounted, the energy would be transferred to the chassis crumple zones and in-turn could set off the air bags at lower speeds than intended.

Not entirely true. People keep speculating that this & that would be illegal without actually understanding the requirements.

Plus, as a point of interest, the crash bar under the bumper cover is bolted directly to the monocoque front bar.
The Land Rover winch mount, bolts directly to the same monocoque front, this is also legal, and very heavy!

The crash sensor is located above the transmission tunnel & senses forces in all directions. A crash would produce the same force regardless of winch bar or standard crash bar.

Don't take note of manufacturers and others that speculate 9k for some crash test, the aim is to keep competition out of the market.

A positive approach is needed if this is to become real.

[chaybra]

Not entirely true. People keep speculating that this & that would be illegal without actually understanding the requirements.

Plus, as a point of interest, the crash bar under the bumper cover is bolted directly to the monocoque front bar.
The Land Rover winch mount, bolts directly to the same monocoque front, this is also legal, and very heavy!

The crash sensor is located above the transmission tunnel & senses forces in all directions. A crash would produce the same force regardless of winch bar or standard crash bar.

Don't take note of manufacturers and others that speculate 9k for some crash test, the aim is to keep competition out of the market.

A positive approach is needed if this is to become real.

Bull bars need to be approved by a government appointed engineer (VASS in Victoria) I have approached many of them and all gave me the same response, they will only accept a report stating that the deceleration speeds are within a tolerance of the factory impact bumper speeds.
I have then independently contacted several of the facilities that conduct these tests. 2 impacts must be done at each of the high and low speed tests, one with the original bumper (to determine the base line) and one with the new bull bar. excluding the price of 2 factory impact bumpers and the bull bars, they want 9k. This is not a speculation, this is a quote.

The price of running the tests is why, with manufactures that would agree to deveolping, want a large deposit without even designing from about 10 people to cover the costs of developing.

I am very very keen to have bullbars made for the L322, it may just have to wait a bit until more and more people start to use them off road and show the numbers are there.

[harlie]

this may be a stupid question:

Why can't a bar mount directly to the existing steel crash bar behind the plastic skin? Deformation would then match the factory bar.

I assume all of the solutions involve removal of the crash bar but why not use it? It is very solid, runs within an inch of the corners. The factory wrap around bars bolt directly to the crash bar without any deformation parts - which is why the factory bar is so solid, IMO it just lacks headlight protection.

[Graeme]

I considered that as an option to be assessed once the bull-bar has been acquired and the plastic bumper has been removed. In some ways leaving the reinforcement bar in-situ provides more flexibility in mount options if the distance between bull-bar mounts doesn't match almost exactly with the mounts for the reinforcement bar but the bull-bar may then protrude too far forwards. By my reckoning the ARB crush-cans would allow the bull-bar to sit closer to the body but could be too close anyway. I need to temporarily remove the plastic bumper for some initial measurements but that task will now have to wait a while as harvest madness is about to start. Retaining the reinforcement bar should avoid any insurance arguments regarding possible early or late triggering of air-bags.

[chaybra]

this may be a stupid question:

Why can't a bar mount directly to the existing steel crash bar behind the plastic skin? Deformation would then match the factory bar.

I assume all of the solutions involve removal of the crash bar but why not use it? It is very solid, runs within an inch of the corners. The factory wrap around bars bolt directly to the crash bar without any deformation parts - which is why the factory bar is so solid, IMO it just lacks headlight protection.

I too have attempted to go down this path, however...an approval from an engineer would still be required because it technically still modifies the pedestrian impact zone. modification to the bumper itself will still require modification if you wanted a winch.

This sounded good and promising to me, All I had to do was find a VASS certified engineer to see the point that it was impossible for this to affect the airbag sensors...but no, every single one (im talkin like 20 ppl I called) would not touch it with a 10ft pole unless it had the report from the crash tests.
Alot of effort to go to to get a metal bumper with no winch or decent headlight protection still.

[donrover0]

Some years ago, around 2004 I fitted a TD5 into soft dash LSE Classic.
I made up some aluminium extras, ie roof rack, ectra tanks (wing)-one water and 1 fuel,PLUS a bullbar. There were no "commercial/approved" bars available then for a classic with driver and passenger airbags.
I used the centre section of a (blush) Landcruiser and made up each end Made it to mount to the original crush cans that were on the car.
also made a winch mount that bolted to the chassis, NOT the bar.
Anyhow, when I had the vehicle modification inspection done, the engineer passed/approved the engine conversion, gearbox conversion, wing tanks, 7 seat edition, AND the bar, saying that as I used the original crush cans, he deemed it ok.
All items were included on the paperwork and mod plate.
I included all these extras/info in insurance application and they were all covered up to when I sold the car to WA, 2013.
Maybe just lucky?

[RR44TDV8]

Some years ago, around 2004 I fitted a TD5 into soft dash LSE Classic.
I made up some aluminium extras, ie roof rack, ectra tanks (wing)-one water and 1 fuel,PLUS a bullbar. There were no "commercial/approved" bars available then for a classic with driver and passenger airbags.
I used the centre section of a (blush) Landcruiser and made up each end Made it to mount to the original crush cans that were on the car.
also made a winch mount that bolted to the chassis, NOT the bar.
Anyhow, when I had the vehicle modification inspection done, the engineer passed/approved the engine conversion, gearbox conversion, wing tanks, 7 seat edition, AND the bar, saying that as I used the original crush cans, he deemed it ok.
All items were included on the paperwork and mod plate.
I included all these extras/info in insurance application and they were all covered up to when I sold the car to WA, 2013.
Maybe just lucky?

No Don, not lucky at all. As I said in a previous post on this subject, if you are doing a one off for own use, and you do your engineering in line with the rules, your engineer can pass it without the crash test rubbish that keeps getting sprouted. The crash test issue is for commercial applications where a 3rd party manufactures the product and on sells it for a profit and possibly makes many copies. It has nothing to do with the profit component but that fact that you have brought a 3rd party liability and insurance issue into the equation. Also, if there are many copies of the one design out there, the likelihood of some kind of crash or accident is exponentially higher with each copy that goes out there and thus, the insurers try to make sure the liability and need for them to pay out is as low as possible.
Now, this has caused a reticence in a lot of engineers to swim against the tide as they also then assume the liability but they do have the authority to certify a one off if done correctly. The "crash test" defence is simply a ruse to get you to go away. I have a lot of documentation to prove this.
Grant

[Graeme]

A point to ponder: who says that all L322s are programmed to trigger their air-bags on the same impact severity? These vehicles have undergone several major changes and have been under the control of several different owners. Crash testing a bar on 1 particular model doesn't prove that the same result will occur on another model. Even if the same accelerometers are fitted to the whole range, programming will undoubtedly be different and may have different trigger levels. The air-bag modules from pre-MY10 will not fit or work on a MY10+ due to using different canbus specifications and I suspect pre-MY07 are different to MY07-MY09, but perhaps not.

I doubt that any bull-bar manufacturer would be interested in building a bar if they knew of these differences and could not ascertain that LR's impact specifications were identical across the range.

[diesel]

No Don, not lucky at all. As I said in a previous post on this subject, if you are doing a one off for own use, and you do your engineering in line with the rules, your engineer can pass it without the crash test rubbish that keeps getting sprouted. The crash test issue is for commercial applications where a 3rd party manufactures the product and on sells it for a profit and possibly makes many copies. It has nothing to do with the profit component but that fact that you have brought a 3rd party liability and insurance issue into the equation. Also, if there are many copies of the one design out there, the likelihood of some kind of crash or accident is exponentially higher with each copy that goes out there and thus, the insurers try to make sure the liability and need for them to pay out is as low as possible.
Now, this has caused a reticence in a lot of engineers to swim against the tide as they also then assume the liability but they do have the authority to certify a one off if done correctly. The "crash test" defence is simply a ruse to get you to go away. I have a lot of documentation to prove this.
Grant

This is exactly right, no crash test is required as a couple of us have pointed out.

The bottom line is engineers want to see that you have performed the correct calculations for your modification. You cannot just 'guess' the gauge of steel being used with folds & joins that just look 'nice'...
You have to prove your knowledge, show how the design will handle the kinetic energy in the event of a collision for example.
Finite Element Analysis can be done with CAD software, ARB use this approach, as do others.

Remember I said the Land Rover winch attachment attaches to the front of the bumper, and the front subframe. It's heavy & made of steel... :)

[bigbluemav]

Hi All

N00b here. Very interesting thread! I am only 'looking', but I think I'll be getting a 2007-8 TDV8 L322. VERY nice vehicles. Wifey likes lots!!

But to the point of my post......my background, as you may have guessed from my username, is with Nissan Patrols. I've owned a GQ (Ford Maverick) and currently own a 2001 GU Patrol.

When we get an L322 we'll be using it as an everyday and as an occasional tourer, SO I'll be wanting to get a bulbar and preferably a rear bar. I like adapting a steel D3/4 front bar but the rear bar is perplexing. In Patrol world there are HEAPS of guys who just fab up their own. Some are hideous, some are more competition oriented but some are really really good.

Many here fab up their own stuff?