DivinDriver

iTrader: (15)

Not the kind of thing a marketing department will generally include unless forced to.

Safety standards were lower back then, both for production and aftermarket parts.

Having recently had the tank out of my SA, I have a very clear picture in my mind of just how little protection the fuel tank has from rear impact, absent the bumper.

The "5 MPH bumper" mandate was designed to allow for impacts up to that limit with little or no body damage. That doesn't mean it provides no energy dissipation/transfer above that rating - - just that it and the car will take damage from an impact above that force. It's still part of the design's impact prevention even in impacts above 5mph.

It still provides mitigation; in essence, it shaves the force equivalent to a 5mph impact 'off the top' of transferred energy.

That might be the difference between a wreck that penetrates the tank, and one that doesn't, depending on circumstances.

Same deal with the collapseable steering column; it won't help you if the accident is so bad that the column bottoms in its travel limit & proceeds to ram your ribcage out your spine, but that 5 or 6 inches of collapse might make the difference between a serious bruise, and a cardiac penetration.

As they say in the armor business; "only the intact survival of the last millimeter really counts."

Cars from this era of manufacture have nothing like the protective strength required of current cars. A first-gen, if made today, would surely fail to pass government testing & safety mandates.

Reducing its protective capabilities even further in the name of aesthetics? To me, that just seems unwise.

Kentetsu

Carry the bumper with you, and if you get rear ended just throw it on the ground behind the car and claim that it got "knocked right off the car".



.

84stock

iTrader: (5)

Best idea so far.....

Hate to imagine what litigation a person could have if rear ended and injured seriously enough to needing a wheelchair and the adjuster questioned the missing bumper.

Not a chance i would take...

Oh well, I think i have beat this topic to death with my opinions, I'm out.

j9fd3s

iTrader: (3)

not me! all of my street cars are actually 100% legal. Peepers isn't a street car

j9fd3s

iTrader: (3)

at least the SA has the steering box mounted behind the front wheels, the shell needs to collapse like 3 feet before the box moves.

contrast this to the Tr3, the steering box in that is literally right behind the bumper. the steering column is one piece too. ducking isn't an option, the rear view mirror is a rectangular piece of glass, with no liner/protector or anything.

the question mark of course is since the Tr is british steel, it might actually go right thru a Honda, everyone dies, but it would be cool!

DivinDriver

iTrader: (15)

[cough, cough] Titanic [cough, cough]

Banzai

iTrader: (13)

Are you telling us someone removed the bumpers from the HMS Titanic before sailing?

j9fd3s

iTrader: (3)

lol! i still think Honda civic vs Tr3. the Tr goes thru the Honda like an arrow.

DivinDriver

iTrader: (15)

Ever hear the comedy song, "Japanese Car" By Jumpin' John Goldsmith? Was popular on Dr. Demento, ironically right about the time I was buying my -7.

It agrees strongly with you.