bullbars for country and city

Bullbars slanted forward are believed to push be more likely to push a person under the car,causing greater injury.

Can I ask WHY you would have it tested?? I wouldnt! What I dont know dont bother me.... I like my bar as it is thanks.

As for sloping forward pushes pedistrians under the car, it also pushes roo's, cows, Emus, etc etc UNDER where you want them... remember thats the idea of them. (Ever had a 5ft angry kangaroo sitting in the car next to you, I know I wouldn't like it... - thats why it SHOULD slope forward!)

If pedistrians are dumb enough to be in the road, not on crossings, lights etc, then .... they cant complain. Its not that hard... This has been done to death, its the same as if a Falcodore hit them at 60kph, they are going to be shagged.


EDUCATE NOT LEGISLATE

Educate them to cross at crossings and LIGHTS....

Well we tested so that we can give the people with VY VU BA and AU a bull bar that would give them a chance against roos and such.
Also because you can't fit a bar to a car without it being tested for airbag deployment.

Splatt,

Yes I agree with your comment that bullbars should be sloping forward.
I would think that a bullbar has two main design objectives:
1. Prevent damage to the lights, grill etc and the leading edge of the bonnet.
2. Prevent an animal from going over the bonnet and possibly going through the windscreen.
And to best achieve both these requirements I would think that a bullbar should be sloping forward.

When I recently queried ARB on this, (via e-mail) this is part of the reply I got from them:

"Our own experience and feedback from customers tells us that, in most cases, when struck by a four wheel drive vehicle fitted with a correctly designed ARB bull bar, an animal will most likely bounce off the front of the bar, glance of the side of the bar or go under the vehicle. It is unusual for an animal to go over the bonnet."

This left me wondering if that was the case then why were all bullbars until recent times designed sloping forwards?

Interestly when I asked ARB this very question I got no reply from them!

If the rear sloping bullbar is designed to allow a person to go over the bonnet then doesn't it stand to reason that a kangaroo would also go over the bonnet? I find it hard to believe that a kangaroo will be deflected totally different to a person.

One can only assume that pedestrian safety is far more important than occupants of a vehicle.

People have stated that they think a person being pushed forward and downwards is dangerous and maybe it is. But I also question how safe is it, for a vehicle design that allows a struck person to go over the vehicle and then possibly land in the path of the following vehicle?

This is exactly why we are fightting to have the rules stay the way they are for safety of occupant in the vechile especially in rural areas.
Thank you for your response