Those Mongrel Bull Bars

Yep, did you hear about the NSW RTA study that found that 4WDs were under represented in MVAs and we could get a discount on our 3rd party premiums.

Not holding my breath mind you!

Sand Man
Mate there is more intelligence in the Watermelons .Somewhere I heard yesterday there is a court case about a death caused by a truck Bullbar [of course the silly pedestrian would not have been killed by the T R U C K if it had no bullbar],this has been going on for 8 years .Now I thought roads were made for vehicles not pedestrians, we're dealing with bloody horse and carts now ,in fact i do believe many would have been killed by those means of conveyance too and i wonder did they have BAN the horse lobby groups, I just wish people would enjoy what life they have instead of bitchin all the time on issues just to inflate their ego ,Anti bullbar,anti smoking,anti war, Daylight saving pests,Anti smacking kids, Anti hoons,and on and on it goes,....sorry i got all fired up then

That’s why it’s called a bull bar and not a pedestrian bar. Duh

I think these people need to go and get
1. A Life
2. A real Job

And who actually gives a toss about what they say or recommend.

Yeah, I read that in today's 'Tiser, and my first thought was that the article was less than credible and not worth responding to. Certainly a scientific analysis or mention of the study parameters was omitted from the report.

Shoddy journalism? That just happened this week to the ABC Investigative unit in Adelaide, & to Channels 7 & 9 in Papua, so may be we should not be surprised?

Maybe I'm wrong, and those of us who require what a bar offers need to defend our position. Maybe opinions without support of evidence, or balance is enough?

Still, it appears that a bar would need to be put in a situation with another party where the potential for damage exists. In other words, it takes a driver to get a bar on a vehicle moving, and it takes an error of judgement to produce a negative outcome.

Perhaps we should redefine the bar not as a roo or bull bar, but as a metal or synthetic frontal/rear device. Although I have hit cattle with a bar I have never hit a bull, so perhaps I don't have a requirement for a bull bar.

When deciding on which type of bar, I did evaluate a synthetic construction. Let's just say that a metal bar fitted my needs better.

What I am attempting to say politely is that bars alone are not the issue. I never heard of a bar in the ARB showroom injuring someone, did you?

Let's also think for a moment about the practical nature of a ban of vehicle bars.
Defence Corps - get rid of bars on their vehicles.
Trucks & semis - get rid of bars on their vehicles.
tradies vans - get rid of bars on them.
Vehicles with support systems that have an integral part attached to the very front or rear - e.g. a rack to house celing panels on a trade veicle - get rid of that, too.
rear of Telstra vans with big step bars - get rid of them.
My Patrol - get rid of its bar. I'd much rather injure someone with an error of judgement without a bar, now I come to think of it. Sorry, no call for sarcasm.

A few other scenarios:
Live in the city? - you can't have a bar, even if you drive that vehicle 95 % in rural regions..
Live in the rural regions? - drive to the edge of a metro region & leave that vehicle to enter the suburbs with a non bar vehicle. But what defines the edge?

Live in the city and have heavy duty tyres on? Get them off because they are not made for that environment.

Is'n't this starting to sound ridiculous and impractical?

Yeah, that was my thought when I read the article also.

Cheers

It is breathless stuff by the media and some relativity is needed.

For example, I read recently that the Asthma Foundation in Queensland claimed that more people died (3,000+) in Queensland from smoking related disease and this was higher than the total number of people killed in the 9/11 disaster).

Equally more people die from alcohol related illness.

So when the SA media is talking about such small numbers of pedestrians killed in car accidents one really needs to remember that:
- the number is small (though still tragic);
- quite probably the persons would still have died whether there was a front protection bar or not; and
- what options are there to reduce pedestrian behaviour that causes/contributes to such deaths?

However as fourby drivers we should still remember that kids under 15 years feature in pedestrian/car accidents and we always need to be on the lookout for them (as should other drivers).

I wonder what the SA governemt would say if you counteracted with a lawsuit against stobie poles? I mean come on, these bloody channel-steel and concrete things have got to be more of a danger to cars than bullbars to pedestrians. Where's the rounded edge on them?

And to top it off the croweaters proudly admire them as a piece of "Adelaide's Own"

I have seen a plastic (polymer) bull bar, i think it was a 'smart bar' brand, on a Rodeo. Didn't look too bad either. But there is no provision for a winch. And if you happened to hit a roo on an outback road i cant see it was give much resistance.
Why don't we secure an old mattress to the front of our cars, then it would be nice and soft for the 'city slickers' we all try to run over with our 4WD's with bull bars. I think that is what the 'experts' think we do.
And if we aren't allowed to have frontal protection in the city, who draws the line where the city ends and the country starts?

Why doesn't the SA government just exterminate all the roos in their state????? Wouldn't that cause an uproar. Then we could get rid of the roo bars

When will they grow up!!!
Dont walk in front of cars and they dont hurt you!!!!

Instead of banning roo/bull bars maybe they could do a feasability study on installing hand rails on footpaths and autounlocking gates at pedestrian crossings (perhaps tied in with the red signal for the traffic lights).
What a joke.
What constitutes a city ? 5000, 10000, 100000 ?
Aren't most deaths from pedestrian/vehicle accidents (tragic) occurring in the country anyway ? I know of at least one up here in the Pilbara. Roo bar not involved in this one though (hope they took that stat out of the equation).

I think that their reporter needs to go out and find some cannibal tribesmen ! Perhaps a quick squiz around the parliament ?

Nothing but a mob of wankers........

The more bleep they throw, eventuallly it will stick....

Election coming up is there... instant election winner on its own.

The actual tests were not performed with water melons - this was just a stunt performed as a demonstration for the media.

The actual tests were performed with properly instrumented devices with accelerometers etc.

All of that aside, it is a worry that somebody - probably the Traffic Accident Commission, commissioned them to do the study.

I hope the manufacturers of Frontal Protection Systems are actively lobbying, but I don't hold my breath - they are stuck in the past, most of them.

Cheers,
Andrew.

"Oh Roo ooh beee
Don't take your bar to town"

''All this because up to 12 pedestrians were killed by bull bars in Australia every year''

Unfortunately there are a lot more motorcyclist killed and injured every year by the humble motor car.

There is talk now about banning the sale of motor cars because of the very real risk to motorcyclists.

Dave

Indeed Sandy - when I get hit by a car, I'll choose one with no bullbar - I expect I'll just hop up, brush off the road dust and toddle off - why I haven't realised this before I don't know.
PS: The driver might have a ding or two - my head is pretty hard.

Gday All

Heard on the ABC radio the other day, don't know if its completely factual (a bit like most of the studies I suppose!) that one of the main drivers behind the anti steel bullbar campaign is..............people affiliated with the manufacture of he plastic ones. It could ring true, the caller on the radio mentioned they had the patent etc, wat a coup it woud be to have your patented product suddenly have a 15 year or so monopoly market in Aus.

Cheers Andrew

Hi all,
If this was the case, (as I live in a Rural Area 140kms north of Adelaide) every time I go to Adelaide it would be illegal. I think it is about time that the people that think of these out landish money making laws get out into the real world.

Stephen

I just thought of something . these anti bullbar mongrels will still be complaining when the sharp spike in insurance claims on country and city 4x4s hits home to the consumer,because the premiums will rise .I would bet my last dollar on that.

Doug

Perhaps we should all suggest that some of these anti bullbar anti 4wd lobbyist be used as crash test dummies instead of watermelons ...that way we can all see the real results....lol....who's for starting a pettition?????........hahaha

i nominate SCRUBBY as No 1 test dummy

Cheers ....Dave

What i want to know is are these people whinging about bars able to tell the difference between getting hit with, and without, a bull bar at 60km/h, or for that matter, any speed?
Can they feel the difference in the molecular structure between steel, alloy ar polymer??
Is getting hit by a 4WD going to be more "pleasureable" when it has no bull bar?
(alas poor Mr X, he was a good looking corpse, simply because the owner of the 4WD in which he stepped in front of didnt have a bull bar!)

The reality is, you will still get Fu@#%D up, with or without a bull bar.

I, as many of you, also fail to see the impact (hee hee) of such a requirement to remove bull bars. Lets face it to achieve acceptable approach angles on a four wheel drive requires a short overhang at the front and due to a fourbies height the nose of a four wheel drive 99 times out of a 100 ends up being a flat squarish surface and as a result does not lend itself to good survival characteristics for duckhead pedestrians. Also with the design the point of impact on most people would be right on the hip area, so instead of falling into the "relative safety" of the car bonnet they either get thrown ahead, broke in half or get thrown underneath and get properly minced.
Even the latest crop of fourbys are no exception (ala Disco3, Jeep Commander) with the all time greatone being the GQ Patrol. Then if the "victim" survives the intial impact theres nice soft things such as radiators, engine blocks to look forward to. About the only difference a bull bar makes is far less worry about broken headlights and crumpled bumpers. I just fail to see what massive bloody difference these boofheads keep whinging about between bullbar or no bullbar equipped 4X4's. The latte swilling, econo-box driving, tabloid reading new age wieners are just probably jealous they dont have a nice big fourby to hang a bit of shapened steel off, because putting a polished steel winch bar on a smart car would just overtly confirm thier social status as tossers.

When sense prevails, we will have the last laugh!. Until oil goes up again......

While I don't disagree with anything in the replies so far, I'm not sure that our interests will be best served by being rude, cynical or slinging off about the parties involved in the issue. No, I am not saying any particular reply above is being rude, disrespectful, crass or unsuitable.

However, it's likely that an impolite response, a poor argument, or unsuitable reply will be the response "they" (the opponents of bars) are expecting.

A well thought out, articulate response will get us much further than any other response.

I wonder if this is a forum where collectively we could write a response that could be used to fax/email/post/reply to parties who raise the issue.

If we take ownership of this issue, we can do several things:

1. Present a credible and supporting case for the retention of vehicle bars.
2. Demonstrate that an alternate view exists.
3. Gain respect for our opinions, both now & in the future.
4. Establish a timeline from which to demonstrate a rebuttal of a case against vehicle bars, rather than act only when driven by an agenda of another party.
5. As an individuals, have a response ready to send to others as we see fit.

If we don't act now, we will have to accept the consequences of this anti vehicle bar case proceeding.

With the best of intent,

Rick Moore

Me too.
Until my inner feelings were expressed about these kind of people in the last few lines, although not probably too far from the truth IMHO.
For further reading I would direct the forums attention to an article in Mays 4X4 monthly which deals with exactly the same misinformation spread by "them" and offers complete rebuttal of their illogical arguements.