Thread: Bull bar blitz: rural drivers fined

It appears that (in SA and NSW at least) AS4876.1-2002 will only be enforced for vehicles manufactured after 1 July 2013, so no need to panic yet, Muppet.

The Australian 4WD Industry Council

Apart from the bling factor ( and thats all I think it is ) why would you want or need to put lights on the roof ?

The Bajarack "Spylight" system, which AFAIK is only as yet for Fj Cruiser, swings the lights down 90degrees when switched off.

Regards Philip A

Originally Posted by crash

That is the way the older bull bars were designed to do, if you hit a pedestrian you stood a good cahnce of running them over after you hit them. They now want vehicles / bullbars designed not to knock them over onto the ground but to fall onto the bonnet minimising pedestrian injuries. It is no longer about protecting the vehicle but protecting pedestrians.

Good luck with having a pedestrian fall on to the bonnet of even a standard height Defender, unless you are running a front bar like this one

The 440 American,, what a classic!

Originally Posted by olbod

Apart from the bling factor ( and thats all I think it is ) why would you want or need to put lights on the roof ?

Because they work a hell of a lot better than at the front,I drive at night more than in the day to keep away from the heat,and it's way more fun and drive on unused tracks a lot so need the lights shining down onto the road to see washouts,ruts,lights on the front shine over the road so all you see is shadows. Pat

Originally Posted by crash

That is the way the older bull bars were designed to do, if you hit a pedestrian you stood a good cahnce of running them over after you hit them. They now want vehicles / bullbars designed not to knock them over onto the ground but to fall onto the bonnet minimising pedestrian injuries. It is no longer about protecting the vehicle but protecting pedestrians.

This is the reason I'm fed up with do gooders,people are hit by vehicles because they are on the road,so now we make the driver of a car responsible for pedestrians being on the road were the vehicle is supposed to be and the pedestrian is not.Lets start charging people who get hit not using crossings and let natural selection deal with the rest of them and the problem will sort itself out. Pat

Originally Posted by PAT303

This is the reason I'm fed up with do gooders,people are hit by vehicles because they are on the road,so now we make the driver of a car responsible for pedestrians being on the road were the vehicle is supposed to be and the pedestrian is not.Lets start charging people who get hit not using crossings and let natural selection deal with the rest of them and the problem will sort itself out. Pat

That's a somewhat unforgiving attitude you have there Pat. No-one is making drivers responsible for pedestrians being on the road, just that they are attempting to maximise their chance of survival if they do get hit.

Chalking such accidents up to "natural selection" seems a bit harsh too. What about the child that pulls away from it's mother's hand at the wrong moment? What about the old guy suffering from dementia and wanders into the road? Feel free to tell them that it's just natural selection. Just so long as they don't dent your car.