Dangerous modifications. What’s your mind set?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DieSchnelleKafer

i give up. You are not right in the head.

---

I said keep it civil! :bat:

Although it does worry me a bit I must say that I do not know what the alternative is?

I have a P38 range rover and ARB has very long since stopped making a bar for that vehicle, no one makes one and to put it simply: I can not go without one. The plastic POS that does a good job of correcting the aerodynamics of that container on wheels a tad bit does nothing else of value (ok perhaps looks) but it will not survive a few days of bush (been there, done that) not to mention I need to mount my winch somehow?

So, yeah, airbags are the only thing I worry about. Specifically: them going of when I do not want them to so I have considered disabling them all together. Not sure how to do that and certainly not without the dash lighting up like a christmas tree which will give me trouble with the next MOT so I left it as is for now.

Other that that I think that weight is the biggest problem on custom build vehicles. I am of the opinion however that when one uses his or her brains you can get things build quite well without added risk.

-P

A couple of points to the original post, the bit about not being covered as far as injury goes is wrong - just like work cover, traffic accident insurance is a no fault system - if you were in a registered vehicle at the time, no matter if it is legal or not you will be medically treated to the extent it covers (what that is and how farit doesn't go is a different matter), the insurance to cover damage is a different story.

As for insurance assesors, yes most will look for these sort of things if the vehicle is at fault, not too much scrutiny is given to the other vehicles that I've seen or heard of from a couple of people I know, but in general insurers will look for ways to avoid paying.

Now, what am I prepared to do? Well, none of my own vehicles have airbags so thats a moot point, and I will be having a VERY bad day if I'm involved in an accident in the 101 that's for sure, but my driving style takes this into account. I've modified the brakes to improve them, I'm happy within myself knowing what I've done and how it was done. I don't recommend the things I've done to people that ask too many questions because that to me shows they aren't up to the task if they need to know every detail, but that's just me.

I do think in general that we have turned into a pack of sooks and nannys when it comes to this sort of thing to be honest, you can't and shoukdn't try and protect people from themselves IMO. Driving a motor vehicle is inhenently dangerous to start with, we all know this and we all still happy to jump into one every day. How many people actually die from badly modified vehicles in the grand scheme of things? Very few compared to everything else going on in the world. If those that modify their vehicles are happy with what they are doing, who am I to argue?

Should we crucify those that make decisions different to our own? No, I wouldn't. Different people are happy with different kevels of risk. Be that with how they modify thier vehciles or anything else in life.

I have an ARB winch/bull bar fitted to my D2a and it is attached to the truck using specially designed "Crush Cans" to enable the air bags to deploy correctly in the event of a frontal impact, I can't recall seeing anything like these "Crush Cans" fitted on home made/self engineered bull bars.
Maybe If the home made bars were to designed so that these specially designed crush cans can be used to fit it then that would make them a lot safer as far as the deployment of the air bags are concerned?

I recall when fitting my TJM winch bar to my D2 the same thing Trout noted with his ARB - removal of the alloy crush cans and replacement of those with TJM steel bracket plates that had a wave design. Both companies did a lot of design and testing to keep the air bag deployment the same as a stock front end.

I hope our SA mate keeps posting because his work is first class but at the same time Tombie's post raises some good points (although as Homestar says it doesn't necessarily cause issues with CTP insurance in Qld at least and the argument that an insurer can deny indemnity on the basis that the vehicle should not have been on the road in the first place due to being unroadworthy is questionable - but given that Qld CTP doesn't cover you in all places - like private property - and a fixed bar to chassis might reasonably increase property damage (and therefore loss) and insurer might well have a good argument to deny or reduce indemnify for property damage and as such personally I would not have a vehicle that wasn't roadworthy in terms of front bar work).

Cheers

I agree with Mike its all fun until someone gets killed
Ever had the Coroner go through a company or situation when someone gets killed?
Not good, D2s are cheap if you trash it buy another one and live on

I agree with Mike. Any mod that compromises safety is unacceptable. That's why the car based road toll is so low now compared to 20 years ago - proper engineering. Pedestrians, cyclists and motor bike riders make up a bigger percentage than previously though.

Interesting thread.
My first thought was, well im guilty of doing exactly as thread indicates. Working outside whats "acceptable". My bar is not legal, my rear bar was totally made by me. Among other things.
My second thought was what about all the cars that get sold which are faulty? You complain about a front bar that may effect the air bags right? What about the gazillion NEW airbags that are infact deadly!
There are always recalls over faulty cars.

In response to the original query: what's my mind set? I know the forum would be a better place if people didnt take it on themselves to be the Sheriff on matters such as this.

If someone disagrees with your input, and they may have knowledge or genuine experiences that contradict yours, dont take it as a throwing down of the gauntlet, or a slap in the face, and then proceed to chase them all over the forum for years afterwards. Just practice a bit of wisdom and personal control and let their own experience take them wherever it goes.

The balance is knowing when you have moved past legitimate input and into the phase of vengeful malice.

What I see in this case is another example of why I rarely come on this forum anymore. I have just witnessed an escalation of a rebuttal and it turning into a thousand word spitting multi-post hammering. So, tombie, have a bit of honesty with yourself, who has really been triggered here?

Meanwhile the moderators are either too blind or too closely tied to the perpetrator to man-up and deal with the rot that permeates the forum.

I called it out recently, Tombie is the forum Troll, and its to the detriment of the forum.

Interesting point of view.

No Sheriff in play - Nothing about ceasing any work occurred, concern was expressed about their safety.
Then to keep it away from the aforementioned build thread this one was created so that the thread stands on its own to avoid contamination of the other.

All it asked, was what do people consider as acceptable risk, and the SRS discussion is one of the most common facing modern vehicles being modified.

The other poster then took it as an afront to their sensitivities and went on the attack. Yet they have Mechanical and Engjneering aptitude And could provide great insight into their methodology.

Are you missing the ongoing recognition of their quality of work?


Perhaps if a few of you had to scrape a person out of a vehicle or a piece of plant, to pick up the broken pieces that once were part of a human, or participating in ICAMs and investigations due to death and injury - you may just understand how it plays out in this modern world. It’s not pretty at times.

Sure there are plenty of poorly maintained and certainly more dangerous vehicles running around out there, that’s not the core of this post - it’s to understand how and why people arrive at the choices they do with regards to risk - perhaps even why people choose to thumb their nose at some legislation whilst abiding by other parts of it.

Personally I think if consideration is made during design, then it’s likely not a public problem as it’s impact is only on the vehicle operator and occupants, not the general public.

There are risk takers in this world, adventure seekers there are also cautious people. There are those who like the freedom of creating their own work or bending rules where perceived to be acceptable.

That is what this thread is about. Understanding those factors - not attacking individuals for creative builds.

It also highlights some interesting legal potential - forum owners are quite protected under legislation. But what if, Somebody recommends a course of action or modification, and you do it and something goes wrong?
We touched on it in the Gunshot thread - there are liability issues.

There’s an old saying that contains “Walk a mile in their shoes”.
I probably need to heed that also.

(Back to the Bridge)