pthomp52 Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 Hi veryone, I'd like to know what everyones thoughts are regards to fitting frontal protection systems (nudge bars) to Motorhomes. We manufacture a nudge bar which conforms to the new EU regulations and enhances the safety of vehicles to which they are fitted. We do them for Transit, Traffic, Vivaro and VW Transporter (caravelle). We have never marketed them to Motor home owners and would like to know what you think of them. Take a look at the web site and let me have your feed back. If you have any questions I would be happy to answer them as best I can. Many thanks. www.endura-fps.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenewellhome Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 Not a fan of them personally, I don't like the look of them and I dread to think what additional injuries a pedestrian might suffer if they came into contact with one. D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyishuk Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 Not a fan, I am afraid. OK on farm or forestry vehicles, or meeting the odd kangaroo, but not in urban traffic. Rgds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will redfearn Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 I haven't met any straying kangaroos on the Uk road system. However plenty of children in urban roads on bikes whose heads are the right height to 'caress' a 'roo' bar.!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest caraprof Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 Am I missing something here? These are not traditional bull bars but a plastic safety system. If you hit a pedestrian these will flex back a couple of inches and cause far less injury than being hit by the metal front of a large vehicle.I presume that you've all actually visited the website and read the spec? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyishuk Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 Nop ! Have now ! (Maybe if that was said in the first posting, reactions may have been different) Hindsite is great ( if you can remember to use it ) :$ Rgds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenewellhome Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 My apologies, I hadn't looked at the site. I still don't like the look of them but accept that (assuming the test data is correct) they are not going to pose a significant threat to pedestrians. I wonder why Ford, Peugeot, Fiat, Iveco, Mercedes and all the other makers don't fit them as standard or at least use the same materials in their front end designs. D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest caraprof Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 For the same reason that they don't fit cruise control! It keeps costs down legislation doesn't require it and up to now, no one has thought of it!If these attachments are proven to save lives then perhaps the big manufacturers will eventually fit them. To me they seem to be an excellent idea. They offer a softer cushion for any pedestrian you hit and will also save a lot of damage to the front of your vehicle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pthomp52 Posted June 12, 2007 Author Share Posted June 12, 2007 Sorry guys, I should have said that you need to view the web site to see our product0. Tests show that we can make vehicles up to 50 times safer than the base vehicle. I very much appreciate your comments. I myself have a Compass Avantgarde on a Peugeot Boxer. I had benevr thought of fitting anything to the front. I have never been in an accident with a pedestrian in any vehicle, but am seriously considering letting my company use the van to design a bar for Boxer. They will only do that if they think they can get enough sales. What do people think about the possible sales to motorhome owners? We had a great deal of interest at the Caravan Club national rally from caravan owners with 4x4 vehicles as tow cars. Only a few enquiries from motorhome owners. I just wondered if that was because motorhome owners never thought of this kind of accessory. Once again, really appreciate your comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 Came to this late but, for what it's worth, my comments are as follows.The tests sem to have been carried out by a competent organisation, and so should be as reliable as any others involving vehicles.The pedestrian has to be struck by the part of the vehicle so protected. It appears the system does not extend across the full width of the vehicle, tending to concentrete centre front. Its actual effectiveness will therefore tend to relate to the number of centre front pedestrian impacts. Statistics, so far as I could find, not provided.It may provide some "nudge" protection against careless parking. This may influence sales more directly than notions of protecting pedestrians, or am I just a cynic!The tests appear not to have been carried out on the 2007 models, most of which appear, superficially, to already carry the essence of this profile at the front. I just wonder, therefore, whether the benefits will follow through to these newer vehicles. The certification appears not to apply to the 2007 models, for which new tests would appear necessary to gain new certification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pthomp52 Posted June 13, 2007 Author Share Posted June 13, 2007 Hi Brian, You are correct, every model change needs to be tested to gain certification, so if we have not done a 2007 model year, we would need to test it again. As far as the centre design is concerned, we are limited by the EU directive for FPS and the EU directive for viewing angles for lighting. If we extended the bar across the vehicle at the full height, then the test would have to be done 50mm from the outside edge, and to achieve the head impact criteria (HIC) we would need the bar to be full depth (front to back) and this would obscure the light viewing angles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grocer jack Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 tonyishuk, Is a hindsite where you park your bum????? (lol) (lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Chapman Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 One of the objections to fitting Bull Bars or any other frontal protection system is that the fitment can interfere with the operation of the Frontal Collision Airbag system. Had this been taken into account when the tests were carried out? Regards, Mike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Keats Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 I'm not in favour on my vehicle Rapido 987M I had them on several VW vans but in the end I calculated they were more dangerous than useful, unless you work amongst either farm animals or forestry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flicka Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 I agree with Brian regarding the protection area, I would think that the majority of pedestrian impacts occur outside the central zone. (although I do not have any data to verify this) The instinct of drivers would be to swerve away from a potential head-on collision making the nearside front the most vunerable impact area. I think the FPS would have minimal benefit for this type of situation. Now if a system could be devised thet covers the full width of the vehicle, it would change the whole scenario. Despite it's certification to the EU regs, has there been any comment from Insurance companies regarding the product.? Flicka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 John Keats - 2007-06-13 8:08 PM I'm not in favour on my vehicle Rapido 987M I had them on several VW vans but in the end I calculated they were more dangerous than useful, unless you work amongst either farm animals or forestry. You need to look to see what is actually being discussed John. These are not bull bars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 flicka - 2007-06-13 8:53 PM I agree with Brian regarding the protection area, I would think that the majority of pedestrian impacts occur outside the central zone. (although I do not have any data to verify this) The instinct of drivers would be to swerve away from a potential head-on collision making the nearside front the most vunerable impact area. I think the FPS would have minimal benefit for this type of situation. Now if a system could be devised thet covers the full width of the vehicle, it would change the whole scenario. Despite it's certification to the EU regs, has there been any comment from Insurance companies regarding the product.? Flicka What about external, frontal, airbags? (Not sure if I'm serious about this, or not!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 I think you have all fallen into the trap. This posting is an advert. C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Newell Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 I think most of us spotted that Clive but why haven't the Mods pulled it? D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 I cannot see the point of fitting plastic to the front other than to reduce the area succeptible to paint chips or make it look pretty. I had a propper steel bull bar on my old Landrover. It included the mounting for the winch, two radio antenna and a pump up mast mounting. In one shunt I adequately modified the boot of a brand new BMW 735I. OOps. landrover was unhurt. My fault! Why should we not be able to have the same metalic protection as a lorry?? One copper said to me at a Road safety Presentation "You cannot beat metal". His patrol vehicle was a range Rover. He was right. In a shunt the vehicle with the greatest mass will have the least deceleration. Basic physics. The smaller vehicle is your crumple zone. Name me any member of the cabinet who drives about in a small car?? How many are driven about in Range Rovers? Sauce for the Goose ....... C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 Dave Newell - 2007-06-14 2:11 PM I think most of us spotted that Clive but why haven't the Mods pulled it? D. They're either asleep, on strike, have resigned, or their computers have crashed! Funny, innit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenewellhome Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 Yes Brian it is a bit. There have been a few items that could have done with some moderation input recently but they seem to be noticable by their absence. Have we become a self policing forum now? D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyishuk Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 grocer jack - 2007-06-13 1:03 PM tonyishuk, Is a hindsite where you park your bum????? (lol) (lol) Trying to work a SOGgy reply, but can not quite get my brain into gear *-) Rgds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mel B Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 The way a certain thread is going the 2 squabblers will probably need frontal protection shortly! (lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 I was thinking more a frontal labotomy?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.