Citizens against bull-bars! (and 4x4s)

[da SLUG man]

alternative "green fuel" cars get to go through london without paying the congestion charge... does this include vegoil fuel? or just lpg, solar, wind etc?

[turbotommy]

Isn't it amazing that in a so called Free country, those advocates of free speech would also remove the rights of others to do what they want to do. And isn't it amazing how statistics can read ......such as .

37% of SUVs roll over on fatal accidents, only 25% of other cars do.

The accident is still fatal, does it matter if a rollover happened or not. In fact you could say that the other cars are less safe.

Plus they say that SUVs are poorly designed and handle badly, have they ever driven a Surf or a new active suspension Disco or Rangerover, then go drive a Peugeot 806 or a Fiat Doblo, or any of the hundreds of delivery vans that scream around the roads of London.

Some people should just go and get a life and do the important things like looking after their families, teaching their kids that expressing themselves in whatever way they like (like graffity, beating up old people, etc etc) is not healthy, also maybe teaching their kids to look before they run out in the road (anyone remember the green cross code) would be a good idea.

Cars full stop are bad for the environment, mind you so are power stations, water treatment plants, wars, Buses, Trains, any form of manufacturing.

I tell you what lets go back to the dark ages and see how these city dwelling "we're great, you lot ain't) bunch of no account numbnuts get along without their TV's, Britta Water Filters, Detergents etc.

We need to get real here, some of us drive to work because we can't walk that far - we can't afford to live in London cos the prices are too high so we have to live 40 - 50 miles from work, I'm not cycling or walking 50p miles before doing a full day's work, some of us use the considerable loadspace for what it's meant for and don't want a van cos we have families.

Yes the use of 4x4s for the school run can get a bit annoying for other road users, well if they don't like it, take another route or even better - get up earlier. You shouldn't be driving to work at 08:45, you should get a real job and get into work at 07:30. And driving home at 15:30 or there abouts means you are only working part time - so go and get a REAL job and leave work at 17:30, you'll miss the school run then.

That should really annoy a large number of people.

Sorry if any of them were on this forum, I just get more and more steamed every day. Think I need a lie down in a dark room now.....

OK lucky, just why do you think that people need bullbars in the UK ?

Too many 'roos, or are there some reeeeealy big hedgehogs in your part of the world ?

[Guest]

OK lucky, just why do you think that people need bullbars in the UK ?

Too many 'roos, or are there some reeeeealy big hedgehogs in your part of the world ?

Tommy.

Actually I don't think that they are neccessary in the UK - I actually took mine off because I think they look rubbish, however I do feel that the right to use them is up to the individual. I also think that if a pedestrian or cyclist is hit by a 4x4 then the bullbars are the least of their problems. Also how about when a pedestrian gets hit by a car, van or 4x4 with lights mounted to the bumpers - do you think these are not going to hurt just as much if not more as the glass shatters and impales them.

However the same is true if hit by a Truck, Transit sized van, or anything that weighs more than a normal car.

If you are going to remove 4x4s from the cities because they can injure more than a car, what about people carriers, what about trucks, what about vans.

I still think that the problem these days is that there are far too many bandwagons for people to jump on if they want to get in the public eye.

Just wait, when this all dies down, there will be something else that they all jump on. Yes we all make jokes about the mums taking the kids to school in the big 4x4, but the vehicle of choice is not the issue here. We used to do the same about them when Renault Espaces were the current trend.

Impolite driving, parking with no respect for the rights of others, driving like a to**er etc etc, are all the root problems. Some people can cause a traffic jam in a Mini, other people can cause high emissions by driving with a heavy right foot, or driving large American classic cars that do less mpg and produce more emissions.

Personally I try to drive politely to cause other road users the least amount of hassle, yet I get cut up by idiots in repmobiles while driving on the M25 all the time. Who is the problem here.

Basically we have all got too selfish, everyone thinks that they have more rights to the planet than anyone else and will fight the good fight to deny anyone else an opinion that they oppose.

I stick up for everyone's right to have an opinion, even if I am vehemently opposed to it. Just when you get these kinds of campaigns based on very shakey so called facts then it really gets me steamed up.

Now I really must go and have a lie down.

[turbotommy]

Tommy.

Actually I don't think that they are neccessary in the UK - I actually took mine off because I think they look rubbish, however I do feel that the right to use them is up to the individual. I also think that if a pedestrian or cyclist is hit by a 4x4 then the bullbars are the least of their problems. Also how about when a pedestrian gets hit by a car, van or 4x4 with lights mounted to the bumpers - do you think these are not going to hurt just as much if not more as the glass shatters and impales them.

However the same is true if hit by a Truck, Transit sized van, or anything that weighs more than a normal car.

If you are going to remove 4x4s from the cities because they can injure more than a car, what about people carriers, what about trucks, what about vans.

I still think that the problem these days is that there are far too many bandwagons for people to jump on if they want to get in the public eye.

Just wait, when this all dies down, there will be something else that they all jump on. Yes we all make jokes about the mums taking the kids to school in the big 4x4, but the vehicle of choice is not the issue here. We used to do the same about them when Renault Espaces were the current trend.

Impolite driving, parking with no respect for the rights of others, driving like a to**er etc etc, are all the root problems. Some people can cause a traffic jam in a Mini, other people can cause high emissions by driving with a heavy right foot, or driving large American classic cars that do less mpg and produce more emissions.

Personally I try to drive politely to cause other road users the least amount of hassle, yet I get cut up by idiots in repmobiles while driving on the M25 all the time. Who is the problem here.

Basically we have all got too selfish, everyone thinks that they have more rights to the planet than anyone else and will fight the good fight to deny anyone else an opinion that they oppose.

I stick up for everyone's right to have an opinion, even if I am vehemently opposed to it. Just when you get these kinds of campaigns based on very shakey so called facts then it really gets me steamed up.

Now I really must go and have a lie down.

I agree that it is the way that people drive today that causes many, if not most, of the problems. I'm also sympathetic to your argument about 'bandwagons'.

However, there is much research that has gone into making cars better in pedestrian impacts, eg no stick out badges, softer bonnets etc, making the nose lower so that it does not hit the abdomen to reduce internal organ injury. Now, this is progress and it to be encouraged, until we can make cars that are smart enough to avoid hitting people, no matter how stupidly they are driven (unlikley in the short term).

So why should we condone people putting dangerous things on the front of their cars ? We could inlcude spots etc. The most obviously un-necessary accessory is a bull bar, and also it is mounted on something heavy, just at abdomen height. A very bad combination.

Now, we don't need these things and they add danger, so why not ban them? I do support peoples rights, as long as they do not infringe upon other peoples safety or wellbeing. As a society, we have laws that reflect this.

Have a pleasant lie down...

[Sparky]

bullbars

Bullbars baned on london streets!
so does this mean rolles royces,armor plated ministerial cars,busses,HGVs,etc.as well?
As i'me sure any of the above would cause the same damage, If 'one' was to be hit by one.

[Morr]

Tommy.

Actually I don't think that they are neccessary in the UK - I actually took mine off because I think they look rubbish, however I do feel that the right to use them is up to the individual. I also think that if a pedestrian or cyclist is hit by a 4x4 then the bullbars are the least of their problems. Also how about when a pedestrian gets hit by a car, van or 4x4 with lights mounted to the bumpers - do you think these are not going to hurt just as much if not more as the glass shatters and impales them.

However the same is true if hit by a Truck, Transit sized van, or anything that weighs more than a normal car.

If you are going to remove 4x4s from the cities because they can injure more than a car, what about people carriers, what about trucks, what about vans.

I still think that the problem these days is that there are far too many bandwagons for people to jump on if they want to get in the public eye.

Just wait, when this all dies down, there will be something else that they all jump on. Yes we all make jokes about the mums taking the kids to school in the big 4x4, but the vehicle of choice is not the issue here. We used to do the same about them when Renault Espaces were the current trend.

Impolite driving, parking with no respect for the rights of others, driving like a to**er etc etc, are all the root problems. Some people can cause a traffic jam in a Mini, other people can cause high emissions by driving with a heavy right foot, or driving large American classic cars that do less mpg and produce more emissions.

Personally I try to drive politely to cause other road users the least amount of hassle, yet I get cut up by idiots in repmobiles while driving on the M25 all the time. Who is the problem here.

Basically we have all got too selfish, everyone thinks that they have more rights to the planet than anyone else and will fight the good fight to deny anyone else an opinion that they oppose.

I stick up for everyone's right to have an opinion, even if I am vehemently opposed to it. Just when you get these kinds of campaigns based on very shakey so called facts then it really gets me steamed up.

Now I really must go and have a lie down.

Very well said

[Smeg]

I have bullbars. Why? Because I like them. I also feel they'll add more protection to the front of my car when offroading. I may be wrong but being a free country I'm entitled to my opinion whether you like it or not (as are you whether I like it or not).

What people are not entitled to is to quote so called "facts" that are actually just nothing more than hearsay, opinions or distorted use of statistics.

Where is the research behind this? Answer: it doesn't exist.

The 27% more deaths by bullbar fitted cars? Oh, a distortion of the statistics again. This was a comparison of bullbar fitted vehicles vs. non bullbar fitted. i.e. my surf with bullbars is more dangerous to a pedestrian than a metro without. Wow, I'd never have guessed that. When someone dug into the stats on this they tried to compare bullbar fitted 4x4s vs. non bullbar fitted 4x4s - that gave something like a 0.3% increase in chacne of death from memory. A figure I'm not going to get too upset by really.

IF you can point me to links that show true research into the matter, I'll happily change my mind (I'm a scientist therefore I work on facts), you may even convince me to remove my bullbars.

turbotommy - what do you drive? If it's a Surf, I'd like to know why as you must have some really strong need for it as even without bullbars it's not exactly the most pedestrian friendly car out there. Also, without bullbars my car will still hit a pedestrian at the same height btw, and believe me, it won't crumple very much either.

Geoff.

PS I'm not having a personal dig at you mate, I just get riled by this arguement because of the amount of people who quote these so called "facts" at me!

[turbotommy]

I have bullbars. Why? Because I like them. I also feel they'll add more protection to the front of my car when offroading. I may be wrong but being a free country I'm entitled to my opinion whether you like it or not (as are you whether I like it or not).

What people are not entitled to is to quote so called "facts" that are actually just nothing more than hearsay, opinions or distorted use of statistics.

Where is the research behind this? Answer: it doesn't exist.

The 27% more deaths by bullbar fitted cars? Oh, a distortion of the statistics again. This was a comparison of bullbar fitted vehicles vs. non bullbar fitted. i.e. my surf with bullbars is more dangerous to a pedestrian than a metro without. Wow, I'd never have guessed that. When someone dug into the stats on this they tried to compare bullbar fitted 4x4s vs. non bullbar fitted 4x4s - that gave something like a 0.3% increase in chacne of death from memory. A figure I'm not going to get too upset by really.

IF you can point me to links that show true research into the matter, I'll happily change my mind (I'm a scientist therefore I work on facts), you may even convince me to remove my bullbars.

turbotommy - what do you drive? If it's a Surf, I'd like to know why as you must have some really strong need for it as even without bullbars it's not exactly the most pedestrian friendly car out there. Also, without bullbars my car will still hit a pedestrian at the same height btw, and believe me, it won't crumple very much either.

Geoff.

PS I'm not having a personal dig at you mate, I just get riled by this arguement because of the amount of people who quote these so called "facts" at me!

Geoff

I drive a '96 4runner, without bull bars. I, too, am a scientist.

I have not read the primary reports or data regarding the effects of bull bars in accidents, though do recall 'anecdotal' reports from accident admissions reports.

It seems to be obvious that the front of all vehicles has undergone massive change over the past few years. This was driven, to a large extent, by crash test laws forcing manufacturers to remove 'sticky out bits' from the front of their products. Gone are the sharp bonnet logos and wing mounted mirrors etc. Also, this has made the fronts lower and softer. I can't quote the laws mandating this, but i'm sure that exist (probably EU).

Now, being a scientist, you'll most likely understand kinetic energy and how it is better to spread this force (in a pedestrian collision) over a large area, rather than to focus it into a small one (eg how crash helmets work, to some extent). So bull bars will focus collision impact forces quite tightly, incurring greater damage. Is this not obvious ?

Why do i drive such a large beast ? Several reasons, including load space, passenger safety (selfish for those inside). I would need a minivan to cart around my children and associated stuff, though might manage it in a big estate car. Also, i've driven a 4runner since '92 and like them as they don't wear out too easily (and have been to some wild places needing high clearance/4WD). I've never shunted anyone, though have hit a couple of deer (and they hardly made a dent, though unfortunately for them, died).

Thus, i just can't see the point of bull bars, and am confident that they are an un-necessary hazard. If there is sound evidence that they do not increase the risk of injury (when comparing 4x4 with or without, at low speed; high speed=death either way) then i'd be happy to accept them as not being a hazard.

[icsys]

Here's a little light reading:

Some models of vehicle, particularly 4-wheel drive ones, have been type-approved (i.e. been passed as meeting EC vehicle safety standards) with bull bars fitted. Under EC rules, no member state can ban type-approved vehicles. The Government therefore accepts that it cannot prevent these models of vehicle being sold with the approved bull-bars fitted - although the Government urges all EC type approval authorities to take as restrictive a view as possible in future of what vehicles with bull-bars may be type-approved.

Not all bull-bars are dangerous to pedestrians. Some manufacturers have begun to address the safety issues; in particular, some of the modern plastic bull-bars are relatively soft and can be less dangerous than the front of the vehicle without bull-bars. So simply banning all bull bars would mean that we would also ban some bull bars which are no more, or possibly less, dangerous than the vehicle to which they are fitted. There is therefore a strong case for banning only aggressive bull bars rather than all bull bars.

Extracts taken from:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group...pdf_506881.pdfThis document is now seven years old!

[turbotommy]

Here's a little light reading:

Some models of vehicle, particularly 4-wheel drive ones, have been type-approved (i.e. been passed as meeting EC vehicle safety standards) with bull bars fitted. Under EC rules, no member state can ban type-approved vehicles. The Government therefore accepts that it cannot prevent these models of vehicle being sold with the approved bull-bars fitted - although the Government urges all EC type approval authorities to take as restrictive a view as possible in future of what vehicles with bull-bars may be type-approved.

Not all bull-bars are dangerous to pedestrians. Some manufacturers have begun to address the safety issues; in particular, some of the modern plastic bull-bars are relatively soft and can be less dangerous than the front of the vehicle without bull-bars. So simply banning all bull bars would mean that we would also ban some bull bars which are no more, or possibly less, dangerous than the vehicle to which they are fitted. There is therefore a strong case for banning only aggressive bull bars rather than all bull bars.

Extracts taken from:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group...pdf_506881.pdfThis document is now seven years old!

Some 'near facts' at last. Thank you.

I might be missing something, but a plastic bull bar might not really do the job these things were designed for eg preventing a large object from damaging the radiator/engine in an impact.

I thought that all (?) new 4x4s could not be sold with bars on, though they were unable to ban accessory manufacturers from selling them ?

More info would be appreciated, especially 'real' data....

[turbotommy]

I have bullbars. Why? Because I like them. I also feel they'll add more protection to the front of my car when offroading. I may be wrong but being a free country I'm entitled to my opinion whether you like it or not (as are you whether I like it or not).

What people are not entitled to is to quote so called "facts" that are actually just nothing more than hearsay, opinions or distorted use of statistics.

Where is the research behind this? Answer: it doesn't exist.

The 27% more deaths by bullbar fitted cars? Oh, a distortion of the statistics again. This was a comparison of bullbar fitted vehicles vs. non bullbar fitted. i.e. my surf with bullbars is more dangerous to a pedestrian than a metro without. Wow, I'd never have guessed that. When someone dug into the stats on this they tried to compare bullbar fitted 4x4s vs. non bullbar fitted 4x4s - that gave something like a 0.3% increase in chacne of death from memory. A figure I'm not going to get too upset by really.

IF you can point me to links that show true research into the matter, I'll happily change my mind (I'm a scientist therefore I work on facts), you may even convince me to remove my bullbars.

turbotommy - what do you drive? If it's a Surf, I'd like to know why as you must have some really strong need for it as even without bullbars it's not exactly the most pedestrian friendly car out there. Also, without bullbars my car will still hit a pedestrian at the same height btw, and believe me, it won't crumple very much either.

Geoff.

PS I'm not having a personal dig at you mate, I just get riled by this arguement because of the amount of people who quote these so called "facts" at me!

Geoff,

I did some googling, as i'm sure you will have.

I found these links which may be of interest. They are aussie, which may be good since they have more outback and use of bull bars.

I have made one quote, and have endeavoured to be unbiased in my selection.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/road/res-exec/cr200ex.cfm

and

www.atsb.gov.au/road/pdf/

An aussie government report on bull bars, which suggests, but does not prove, the bull bars are bad for pedestrians.

Quote – Conclusions

This report provides no conclusive basis for opposing the use of newer-style bull bars. The experimental findings reviewed here about impacts with bull bars with pedestrians and other unprotected road users do, however, provide some case for considering measures to phase out the use of older style, protruding, rigid bull bars, especially in urban areas.

http://www1.tpgi.com.au/users/mpaine/4wd.html#bullbar

Don’t know the reliability of this source, but may be of interest

There were other sites that suggested that bull bars weren't that good at preventing the damage to the vehicle and occupants.

[coggie2k]

As I do not currently own a surf I may be booed off the site but…..

I think the bigger issues are a removal of freedom from the British public and an increase of stupidity and bandwagons.

I need a big vehicle, I have an 8 month old dog that has outgrown my estate in the last 4 months. I do not have a small football team of children to carry around so do not fancy a people carrier, I also have a close friend whom is a mud monster so have been persuaded to get dirty with him on weekends, my vehicle of choice is a surf. I am in contact with my local importer and eagerly await my gas guzzling death box.

My 8 month old dog will not cross a road, he is never alone out of the house, he stops and sits a the kerb, unlike most children who are far more capable of realising the dangers of a collision with any road vehicle. Yet the motorist is always penalised for speeding or careless driving. Don’t cross in front of a moving vehicle=not getting hit. I’m only an engineer and this equation makes sense to me.

Keep death of the roads, educate people, drivers should be capable of driving, even whilst smoking, drinking (soft drinks) and changing CD’s etc, if you need to prevent people from doing anything other than watching the road, they are obviously incapable of driving safely. We have motorists, I nearly said drivers, who can manage to drive the wrong way along motorways and dual carriageways, or even with handbrakes on. Oh please. We have car criminals allowed to drive with the police in pursuit for many miles endangering lives and property, and then they are sentenced to 1 year. It was on police motoring program last night.

Crime is on the increase, especially violent crime, and people want to worry about what car I drive and what extras I fit, well I would obviously cause less of a problem if I just shot all bus drivers, reps, cabbies and other drivers I disliked or saw driving obnoxiously. Okay the last bit is a bit stupid.

I live in Essex and drive the M25, or try to when it’s moving, a number of times I have been undertaken by busses and been overtaken by them using the 3rd lane, an illegal manoeuvre. I have repeatedly been undertaken by reps at very high speed sometimes, people have cut me up as they have not been paying attention and nearly missed the exit. All of this is more dangerous than bull bars and makes me want them to protect me over idiots who cannot drive. I also ride a motorcycle and have had a number of near misses with car drivers who have not been paying attention, the “I didn’t see them” syndrome. But no one has tried to ban cars as they are fatal to motorcyclists.

Well I’m off to sell crack and rob shops as it is easier than driving my car of choice.

I too need a lie down.

[turbotommy]

As I do not currently own a surf I may be booed off the site but…..

I think the bigger issues are a removal of freedom from the British public and an increase of stupidity and bandwagons.

I need a big vehicle, I have an 8 month old dog that has outgrown my estate in the last 4 months. I do not have a small football team of children to carry around so do not fancy a people carrier, I also have a close friend whom is a mud monster so have been persuaded to get dirty with him on weekends, my vehicle of choice is a surf. I am in contact with my local importer and eagerly await my gas guzzling death box.

My 8 month old dog will not cross a road, he is never alone out of the house, he stops and sits a the kerb, unlike most children who are far more capable of realising the dangers of a collision with any road vehicle. Yet the motorist is always penalised for speeding or careless driving. Don’t cross in front of a moving vehicle=not getting hit. I’m only an engineer and this equation makes sense to me.

Keep death of the roads, educate people, drivers should be capable of driving, even whilst smoking, drinking (soft drinks) and changing CD’s etc, if you need to prevent people from doing anything other than watching the road, they are obviously incapable of driving safely. We have motorists, I nearly said drivers, who can manage to drive the wrong way along motorways and dual carriageways, or even with handbrakes on. Oh please. We have car criminals allowed to drive with the police in pursuit for many miles endangering lives and property, and then they are sentenced to 1 year. It was on police motoring program last night.

Crime is on the increase, especially violent crime, and people want to worry about what car I drive and what extras I fit, well I would obviously cause less of a problem if I just shot all bus drivers, reps, cabbies and other drivers I disliked or saw driving obnoxiously. Okay the last bit is a bit stupid.

I live in Essex and drive the M25, or try to when it’s moving, a number of times I have been undertaken by busses and been overtaken by them using the 3rd lane, an illegal manoeuvre. I have repeatedly been undertaken by reps at very high speed sometimes, people have cut me up as they have not been paying attention and nearly missed the exit. All of this is more dangerous than bull bars and makes me want them to protect me over idiots who cannot drive. I also ride a motorcycle and have had a number of near misses with car drivers who have not been paying attention, the “I didn’t see them” syndrome. But no one has tried to ban cars as they are fatal to motorcyclists.

Well I’m off to sell crack and rob shops as it is easier than driving my car of choice.

I too need a lie down.

As you may have seen, i drive a gas guzzling, 2 tonne, danger to pedestrians (and i usually stop to let them cross the road at junctions, just becuase other drivers don't, and the highway code says you should...) though i oppose bull bars.

Why ? They make a bad situation worse, and they are not necessary.

OK, i'm going to have a lie down as well.

[coggie2k]

Not wanting to deviate from the thread but I love this site and the people on it, an argument has been running and no one is offensive or rude.

Perhaps the users of this site should run the country at least the leaders would be realistic and fair.

I agree that bull bars are of little use on the road, but off roading they have benefits and it would be silly to expect people to fit and remove after every adventure. Being sensible I do not think when fitted to a vehicle as sturdy as a surf they would make a great deal of difference against a car, only if the collision was head on as the A frame does not protect the corners.

I also feel that the bars are for asthetic reasons which is why I would want them, but I do feel that the plastic crumple bars are safer than the bonnet of a surf and can look just as sexy. Why are they fitted to vans, many of which drive around london and other town centres, because van steerers cannot drive wihtout inflicting damage to their vehicles, a number of vans are now being fitted with the rigid steel rear and front bumpers to protect the van from damage during an impact, this is more dangerous as a pedestrian now hits solid steel. the reason for this is the vans are hired and the company would have to pay for any damage to the bodywork. But this is acceptable in the eyes of the tree hugger/do gooder with nothing better to do.

zzzzzz

[turbotommy]

Not wanting to deviate from the thread but I love this site and the people on it, an argument has been running and no one is offensive or rude.

Perhaps the users of this site should run the country at least the leaders would be realistic and fair.

I agree that bull bars are of little use on the road, but off roading they have benefits and it would be silly to expect people to fit and remove after every adventure. Being sensible I do not think when fitted to a vehicle as sturdy as a surf they would make a great deal of difference against a car, only if the collision was head on as the A frame does not protect the corners.

I also feel that the bars are for asthetic reasons which is why I would want them, but I do feel that the plastic crumple bars are safer than the bonnet of a surf and can look just as sexy. Why are they fitted to vans, many of which drive around london and other town centres, because van steerers cannot drive wihtout inflicting damage to their vehicles, a number of vans are now being fitted with the rigid steel rear and front bumpers to protect the van from damage during an impact, this is more dangerous as a pedestrian now hits solid steel. the reason for this is the vans are hired and the company would have to pay for any damage to the bodywork. But this is acceptable in the eyes of the tree hugger/do gooder with nothing better to do.

zzzzzz

Needless to say, i don't like bullbars on anything (other than aussie road trains), so vans are also a no-no.

Alas, i'm having a crisis with my homeopathic-solar-powered-karma-defibrillator, which will need to be driven halfway across the country to be fixed by my favourite peoples collective (using two tonne vehicle, of course). And since i often mis-type while netsurfing while surfing (so to speak) i'll have to desist for the evening....