Bull bars. Anyone got one? How do they fit?

[nicq]

The spare wheel carrier whith the wheel is part of the deformable structure I believe

[Oldiebut goodie]

Bullbars come under this, I don't know of any winch that forms part of a frontal protection construction nor front mounted wheel.
The directive says:

Whereas:
(1)
Systems providing additional frontal protection for motor vehicles have been increasingly used in recent years. Some of these systems constitute a risk to the safety of pedestrians and other road users in the event of a collision. Measures are therefore required in order to safeguard the public against such risks.

(2)
Frontal protection systems can be provided as original equipment fitted to a vehicle or marketed as separate technical units. The technical requirements for the type approval of motor vehicles with regard to any frontal protection systems that might be fitted to the vehicle should be harmonised in order to prevent the adoption of requirements that vary from one Member State to another and to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market. For the same reasons, it is necessary to harmonise the technical requirements for the type approval of frontal protection systems as separate technical units within the meaning of Council Directive 70/156/EEC of 6 February 1970 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers (3).

(3)
It is necessary to control the use of frontal protection systems and to establish the test, construction and installation requirements to be complied with by any frontal protection system either supplied as original equipment fitted to a vehicle or placed on the market as a separate technical unit. Tests should require that frontal protection systems are designed in a way that improves pedestrian safety and reduces the number of injuries.

(4)
These requirements should also be regarded in the context of the protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users and with reference to Directive 2003/102/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 relating to the protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users before and in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle (4). The present Directive should be reviewed in the light of further research and experience gained during the first four years of its application.

(5)
This Directive is one of the separate Directives within the framework of the EC type-approval procedure established by Directive 70/156/EEC.

(6)
The Commission should monitor the impact of this Directive and report to the European Parliament and the Council. If it is deemed necessary to achieve further improvements in pedestrian protection, the Commission should make proposals to amend this Directive in accordance with technical progress.

(7)
It is recognised, however, that certain vehicles included in the scope of this Directive, and to which frontal protection systems may be fitted, will not be subject to Directive 2003/102/EC. For such vehicles it is considered that the upper leg test requirements of this Directive may be technically unfeasible. To facilitate an improvement in pedestrian safety, with respect to head injury, it may be necessary to allow alternative requirements for the upper leg test, for application to those vehicles only, whilst ensuring that the installation of any frontal protection system does not increase the risk of leg injury to pedestrians or other vulnerable road users.

(8)
The measures necessary for the implementation of this Directive and for its adaptation to scientific and technical progress should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission (5).

(9)
Since the objective of this Directive, namely to promote the safety of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users through laying down technical requirements for the type-approval of motor vehicles as regards frontal protection systems, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore be better achieved at Community level, the Community may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve this objective.

(10)
This Directive is part of the European road safety action programme and may be supplemented by national measures to prohibit or restrict the use of frontal protection systems already on the market before its entry into force.

(11)
Directive 70/156/EEC should therefore be amended accordingly,


HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:

[max and caddy]

My van has had one at some point...if I wanted to refit it I would...I most likely wouldn't as they tent to do more damage to the vehicle rather than less but it wouldn't be the pedestrian twiddle stopping me I assure you...anyone hit by a syncro is funked and a child would likely pop out under the back rather than over the top I bet..damaged..

[Ralf85]

Just got a Bull Bar for my van but a little confused as to how It is supposed to be fitted. Only seems to have 2 mounting holes that are usable and highly doubt two bolts are man enough to hold its weight! I'm thinking that perhaps its been modified in the past but having never seen another up close or fitted one I have no idea.

What's the purpose of fitting them? Unless you are protecting your van from kangaroos or deer, there seems no purpose. Is it just for decoration?

[scottbott]

a lot of deer/vehicle accidents around Epping forest,even saw a police car smashed to hell after hitting one

[what2do]

The road is for vehicles pedestrians shouldn't be there.

May I just add that is has been known for a vehicle to mount a pedestrian area when either in a collision or avoiding one. Also, many motorists run into pedestrians rather than pedestrians walking into the path of oncoming vehicles. If it were my child that was struck and the driver quoted the above........he'd be eating his dinner through a straw - this is not a dig at you per se.

If commercial vehicles aren't fitted with them, then I'm pretty sure they're of no benefit to the majority of other motor vehicles.

[CovKid]

They fell out of vogue some years ago after a series of incidents with pedestrians made far worse by their being there. They have little to no functionality in terms of protecting vehicles. Personally I wouldn't fit one but there are still 'Mad Max' freaks who persist. Each to their own but as a parent I wouldn't advocate them.

You must notify your insurance company if you do fit them and they must be approved - ie they are crash tested (and proof of that). If you don't do that, you'd have to be a complete nob. Insurance companies will void cover for major mods like that.

Further reading: http://www.autostylinguk.co.uk/content/ ... lbars.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have no prob with them used offroad (good idea) but can't support their use on public roads. What on earth for?

[silverbullet]

Thankyou for posting that up OBG. I had my own replacement bumper project put in doubt, that kind of seals it for me.

I believe that the basic rule of "sail before steam" still applies on the public highway i.e. pedestrians, as the most vulnerable road user, have right of way before all others. Then riders on horseback, then cyclists, then motorized vehicles.
The argument that "pedestrians shouldnt be on the road, its for cars" is utter bollox.
This isn't Australia or South Africa, bullbars are bulls#!t.

[CovKid]

Tends to pass all the way down the line I think. I give way to buses, cyclists the lot. Any gains you might make in terms of being one car ahead are soon lost. As I travel with the lad up front every time, my view of motoring has changed a great deal. Life is certainly not infinite and neither is anyone elses.

Was chatting to a sales rep at HIC insurance at Stanford Hall (nice to see them there) as to why they were able to offer such good packages to T25 owners and as I suspected, its because owners don't take such great risks. But, like any insurance provider, the one thing they won't tolerate is unsuitable alloys and mods that in their view could increase risks. One can argue the toss over whether bull bars are an additional threat to pedestrians or not but the industry most definately does take that view and has done since the 1980s. They were in the press a lot at the time. Some of the injuries to children were horrific. Insurance companies take a dim view of undeclared or what they deem as unsuitable mods and may in some cases cancel or refuse to pay out.

As Wikipedia says:

"Due to the number of deaths and injuries caused by the rigid fronts of cars, often with metal bullbars "in 2000 some 2,000 deaths/year and 18,000 serious accidents/year in Europe), the sale of metal bullbars which did not comply with the European Union Directive was banned."

Being hit by a bare T25 is bad enough but I think you'll struggle to find any bull bars meant for T25s that do actually comply with the European Union Directive and that will affect insurance. They have a certain aesthetic appeal I guess but the practicalities would preclude them for all except off-road. Colliding with a pedestrian or cyclist is difficult to bear, worse if it causes death, but I'd hate to think I limited their chances of a recovery simply because I liked the look of some feature I'd added.

Had the chance of some numerous times but still won't fit them. Most that come up for sale are via owners who had the same reservations and just wanted rid. If you were not driving in the 1980s, you won't get it anyway.

Finally, 'Mines a money pit' - yours will be if you modify your vehicle and dismiss Oldie's succinct and correct observations. You may not agree with him, but he is still right. There is a big difference in a whinge and pointing out the drawbacks to the ill-informed.

[discipleofsketch]

Its only us pandering to the EU with silly pedestrian laws. The road is for vehicles pedestrians shouldn't be there.

These actually improve/ make no difference to crash worthiness of older vehicles, especially T25's with their flat front!

Seriously? Apart from on motorways (the clue is in the name), pedestrians can legally walk on the road if there is no pavement provided. Common sense dictates that you would walk in single file at the side of the road rather than the middle if there are vehicles around. People need to cross roads and thankfully there is no "jaywalking" law in the UK, so you have the freedom do that wherever it is safe to do so in this country.

Bull bars dramatically increase the likelihood of death or seriousness injury in low speed collisions with humans.

[what2do]

A little bit related to this topic in that we're concerned about harm to pedestrians, etc. WHY THE FXXK do some people still have bonnet decorations? Those chrome horses and the likes that would shred through a body like a knife in an accident. And more to the point, why don't test inspectors pick them up on it? There's a couple I see and I'll be honest, I feel like yanking the things off regardless of the damage to the metal work - but I haven't and probably won't!!!

[silverbullet]

Good point there, I thought they were made an MOT fail point years ago.

Re: spare wheel and deformable structure.

Some models of Caravelle store the spare vertically in the back, on the left side of the boot. Syncros had the option of a rear swingaway carrier, in which case a basic pressed steel "bash guard" under the front would be fitted. There was also a much more substantial drop-down wheel carrier/bashplate, usually found on Tristars.

The spare wheel might add to the front crash resistance a little, but it's not an integral part of it. I suspect the tyre would burst or demount from it's rim before the latter met the collapsing front end, in which case front occupants would already be in serious trouble.

PS Bullbars are also completely pointless offroad, they just serve to reduce the already poor front approach angle.

[Ralf85]

Has anybody on here told their insurance company that they modified their van by having bull bars fitted? If so what was their response?

[bigherb]

Why would you want to drive around with everyone thinking you have got a small dick?

[Oldiebut goodie]