Thread: Oh What A Feeling ........................

Originally Posted by bigkevg

After many years as a crash investigator I am well aware of how the srs system works, and as per the other post I bet that bar was not complianced with those side bars....any other questions?

Cheers

More detail, what are your findings as a crash investigator?, how many accidents with non compliant bullbars that have caused harm and are proven at fault? Im intrigued now, I'd like to know what you have found in these scenarios and how often?

Originally Posted by rovercare

More detail, what are your findings as a crash investigator?, how many accidents with non compliant bullbars that have caused harm and are proven at fault? Im intrigued now, I'd like to know what you have found in these scenarios and how often?

Not what you asked originally.....you asked if I knew how the srs system worked.

What you are asking now is research and lots of it. If you search the forum, I have made several posts on the srs system and been very honest is stating I am not an engineer, am not an expert in this matter, and have relied on experts in their respective fields to supply that evidence. I have learnt over the years though how the system works, and more importantly what CAN happen when it doesn't work properly.
Nor have I been involved in every matter that has occurred, so any numbers quoted by me would be misleading.
More importantly I am no longer in that area so I have no access anyway. What I do have is experience of dealing with all types of events where injury or death has occurred because of people's carelessness and stupidity in fitting vehicles with unroadworthy devices....not limited to bar work.
These are findings made by the court, based upon investigation by police in general.
A search of the Internet will find the information in regards to what happens when the srs does not work how it should because of either malfunction or misadventure by modifying it's environment.
Fortunately I have not seen the extreme results (death) that can occur from these circumstances (airbags specifically). I have learnt that humans break very easily and anyone that modifies their car in such a manner to effect the deployment of srs is an idiot.
Sorry it's not the chapter and verse you were after, I'm not about to supply a complete resume on my work history nor am I going to sit for hours and conduct a research project to satisfy your ....err...ummm....inquisitive nature.....especially when I suspect you know the information anyway

So to get back to the bull bar, I understand that the design has its advantages in certain situations, but it's not to my liking. I do not believe those side bars are legal (on this vehicle specifically) and I believe in my opinion that that bar did not pass compliance with those side bars fitted. How much they effect the srs deployment remains to be seen....but the driver is betting his life and that of his passengers on it.....and to be honest, if I was still in that job, if I saw that driving around, it would get a little visit to the pits to check its compliance. Don't get me wrong, I like modified rigs, and I'm very liberal with mods within reason, but some things are just yelling get me, like that bar.

It's quite obvious that some mods to vehicles even though technically illegal are going to have less impact in regards to safety, but srs mods, or alter the ability of the srs to work as it should is an area that should be not fooled with.IMO

Originally Posted by bigkevg

Not what you asked originally.....you asked if I knew how the srs system worked.

Correct, but

Originally Posted by bigkevg

....any other questions?

Cheers

You asked if I had anymore questions

I just wanted real life scenario stuff, about this being a real issue

I think the problem that is caused is moreso the premature deployment of airbags from rendering the crush cans useless as opposed to lack of deployment, which airbags have somewhat increased injuries in collisions where they have deployed, but reduced fatalities

I think the questioning of the compliance needs to be backed up more than just an assumption, although I'm all for questioning, but let's not just stop at bagging a product for it's claim, just by opinion, maybe find out if they really have compliance, having history in the field would certainly help you do this I would imagine

From the Tuff site:

TUFF Bullbars Australia is one of the leading all-Australian manufacturers of vehicle frontal protection systems and enjoys being a nationally recognized and well respected brand, in the aftermarket accessory industry. Offering a life time warranty, our range of bars are built using premium aluminium or steel that ensure maximum performance, strength and protection for you and your family. TUFF Bullbars adheres to ALL relevant Design Rules and guidelines for bullbar engineering and fitting, making them fully compliant, not affecting your new car warranty.

They certainly seem to be claiming that they are compliant, from the front page of their website.

Regards,
Tote

Originally Posted by rovercare

Correct, but




You asked if I had anymore questions

I just wanted real life scenario stuff, about this being a real issue

I think the problem that is caused is moreso the premature deployment of airbags from rendering the crush cans useless as opposed to lack of deployment, which airbags have somewhat increased injuries in collisions where they have deployed, but reduced fatalities

I think the questioning of the compliance needs to be backed up more than just an assumption, although I'm all for questioning, but let's not just stop at bagging a product for it's claim, just by opinion, maybe find out if they really have compliance, having history in the field would certainly help you do this I would imagine

Sorry, lead with my chin didn't I?
Absolutely, cannot agree more, but you forgot to mention that the airbags deploying late can be fatal, this research is freely available on the net. in WestOz those bars are few and far between because the local boys have cracked down on compliance.

The bar may infact be compliant, I merely raise the question of it being stronger or more effective if the crush cans are infact compliant. They will crush at the same rate with an arb/Tjm or whoever bar so other than more surface area on the bar, is it infact more effective. If it is more effective, is it infact compliant? If it is stronger, my logic suggests the mounts(crushcans) must be stronger. But how can they be if they are still compliant? This questioning is because those who have these bars say they can mow down Roos with impunity.....
I realise the side bars are made to fit without effecting srs compliance, but all the ones that arb and others make are single tubes.
This is double with bracing. IMO that is a brace for the bar as those tubes appear far stronger.
I have not said that I know it to be illegal, I'm suggesting that it could be based upon my opinion, what people say about how it is stronger, I question how? If it is stronger, I'd like to see its compliance proof. What makes it better than the other bars that are proven to comply?
Bars made now have to comply to certain design requirements in regards to pedestrian safety (?) get hit by a bar I think your stuffed anyway....but that's another discussion....but because I have not contemplated putting such a bar on my car, I have not researched how close that bar comes to NOT meeting those requirements....how far has the manufacturer pushed the limit to keep that design style...?
Another arguement is that these style bars are really "in your face" and give arguement to the no bars crowd. So if these bars are compliant, but in reality no stronger than the usual ones, why have them? The answer appears to be because they are stronger....hence my question....and around we go

I don't mean to bag the item, I'm a big advocate of people being allowed to modify in their own way without being bagged, I've been modifying cars since I was 12, I'm now in my 50s. But I will comment on safety....anyway as I said before, in it's own way, that truck is certainly an eye catcher.

I stand by my comments about if I had the opportunity it would go to the pits though.....just make sure

Originally Posted by Tote

From the Tuff site:

TUFF Bullbars Australia is one of the leading all-Australian manufacturers of vehicle frontal protection systems and enjoys being a nationally recognized and well respected brand, in the aftermarket accessory industry. Offering a life time warranty, our range of bars are built using premium aluminium or steel that ensure maximum performance, strength and protection for you and your family. TUFF Bullbars adheres to ALL relevant Design Rules and guidelines for bullbar engineering and fitting, making them fully compliant, not affecting your new car warranty.

They certainly seem to be claiming that they are compliant, from the front page of their website.

Regards,
Tote

Not to play devils advocate, but that makes no mention of the side rails.
If it said "TUFF bullbars and associated protection items..." or something maybe.
I'm not suggesting they're deliberately weaseling their way around things, but it's like your average fast food outlet saying "100% Australian beef" and you either get 100% Australian or 100% beef, not both.
Or it could be they didn't consider the possibilities of scrub rails impacting safety.
Or it could all be legit

Actually looking closely at their site, and reading the rules, I would argue that they are legal because they don't appear to follow the contour of the car do they, a major requirement of the design rule, ...

And some, including the one posted here have thin bars edge onwards over the headlights, again I would argue that these are "sharp" edges....hit by that and they would slice you, again not in the spirit of the rules.

But that's just my opinion.......and I think that here in the west you'd be pushing your luck to expect not to get a sticker......can't say for the other states....