A push for bull bars by insurance company's

Submitted: Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 13:47
ThreadID: 7084 Views:3236 Replies:6 FollowUps:11
This Thread has been Archived
The nations roads are becoming the scene of kangaroo carnage.The marauding marsupials are costing insurance companies millions of dollars in claims by motorists who have mown them down on remote roads,Australia'slargest insurer said today.Motorists filed $21 million worth of insurance claims during 2002 for car accidents involving animals,according to research by NRMA Insurance.
Kangaroos were by far the main culprit,accounting for nearly 8000 of the 11,000 damage claims,the company said.
A higher rate of animal collisions occurs in winter or during drought when animals come to the roadside in search of food and water only to freeze in their tracks at the sight of car headlights.
Claims had been lodged for collisions with roos,wombats,emu's,cattle, sheep and horses.
Bullbars not only reduced property damage but also offered further protection to the occupants of these vehicles.
It appears one sector of the community does not want bullbars banned. mark
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: diamond (bendigo) - Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 15:07

Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 15:07
gday marcus.
thats the way. you can imagine getting an insurance quote.
do you have a bull bar no. ok do you live in the city no.
ok then with bull bar $400. if you live in the country
$600 with out a bull bar if you live in the country.but you will have to pay an excess if you have an accident in the city.
and for city drivers $600 with $400 with out and pay an excess if you leave the city.
dont laugh to loud it wouldnt suprise me if they did something stupid like that.šqUC3<BuIL
AnswerID: 30332

Reply By: dp - Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 15:07

Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 15:07
However the story in Sundays Sydney Sun Herald today will get far more attention. large spread on case of Mother in 4wd running over someone elses kid at school. I don't know what the answer is but that sort of emotive story is the sort of thing that will evnntually lead to them being banned no matter how much safer they make driving in the bush. Remember facts are not allowed to get in the way of a good story. You must all remember the contoversy about reversing over kids in 4WD's. The fact they ignored was many cars have worse reversing view than 4WD The worst tested being the ubiquitous Holden Commodore Wagon
Maybe someone out there can come up with a detachable Bullbar? Or perhaps more of us need to make the decision to go without them if we spend the majority of our time in places we DONT REALLY need them.
I once heard it suggested that as a safety device they should all have to be painted lime green and Orange!!! So as less people would have them just because they think they looked good!. Would be interesting to see if suddenly a lot of the "Paddington/Carlton/Beaumont/Nedlands" (pick yr state) 4WD brigade suddenly decided that they wern't entirely neccesary?........ Or would they just paint their vehicles to match or get thier kids to spread mud on em on the weekends?????

AnswerID: 30333

Follow Up By: marcus - Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 15:17

Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 15:17
Hmmm,A detachable bullbar i wouldn't mind a patent on that the way that legislation seems to be heading.
FollowupID: 21366

Follow Up By: GaryInOz (Vic) - Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 17:57

Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 17:57
Re Sun Hearald story: You can't really blame the bullbar or the 4WD for that. It is the driver, pure and simple......
FollowupID: 21374

Follow Up By: dp - Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 18:42

Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 18:42
Agree Whole heartedly you cannot protect others from driver stupidity. I used to ride a motorcycle in Sydney and the biggest threat was actually Mums with lots of kids in people movers.... Kids making lots of noise / Mum distracted etc etc. Can imagine something similar occured in this case. Though even as a 4wd owner I think there should be some limits. How many times have you seen a P plater driving Mum or Dads 2.5 tonne 4by with a bar on the front???? Do you remember how invincible and indestructable you were at 17?
FollowupID: 21384

Reply By: Member - Al Symers (SA) - Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 20:17

Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 20:17
Doesn't matter what legislation is passed, can't legislate for stupidity. Work just provided me with a new series11 Dunnydoor and that has sensors mounted in the rear bumper(read cheap plastic crap) that beeps when reversing near any object and gets faster and louder the nearer you get. Maybe essential for those kid transporters. At least is saves you reversing by braille.Al Symers
AnswerID: 30367

Reply By: Old Jack - Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 21:18

Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 21:18
Bigget problem with the Bull bar as we know it now is how aggesive it is to another vehical or person you hit with it!
The car insurance company are in a quarndry over this one as they can see that the vehcials fitted with bars suffer less damage in minor accident, on the other hand what they hit with the bull bar suffers more damage. if it's a person that gets hit by a vehical then insurance company could end up paying out millions for one persons injuryies!

In a major accident the bull bar does Nothing at all to protect the occupants of the car & if poorly designedwill increase the chances of them & the occupants of anything that they hit being killed.(starts crumpling the cars chassis/sub frame before bodywork gets to absorb impact energy)

If they where to introduce a law requireing that bull bars be painted up in fluro colours & reflective striped like an ambulance or tow vehical, I would do it to my bull bar to keep it on, the w*nkers that fit them as a Status symbol probably would look for something else to pose with.... I think a lot of people would feel this way. you are dammed if you do & dammed if you don't on this one! anyone got any experence with a SHOOROOO ?????

AnswerID: 30380

Follow Up By: Slammin - Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 22:09

Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 22:09
The Shooroo makes a great whistle for the kids.

I think it's close to a Hiclone in it's popularity and usefulness. It only takes a bit of bug guts and it's useless anyway - as to what pitch and at what speed , it emits is hard to say.
I''ve been tempted but not bothered..............yet, unless someone can prove to me that it works.
From my experience you can hear a 4wd over a k away and yet here comes skippy to the rescue!
I'd say Trucksters train horn might be bit more effective.

As to animals don't forget the wedgtails and goats.
FollowupID: 21417

Follow Up By: Member -BJ (Sydney) - Monday, Sep 08, 2003 at 16:36

Monday, Sep 08, 2003 at 16:36
i put the cheap $20.00 stickon one's on my bullbar & i recon they work ,saved me more than once. Don't work on eagles though.Regards Bob
Where to next
FollowupID: 21493

Follow Up By: Old Jack - Monday, Sep 08, 2003 at 16:41

Monday, Sep 08, 2003 at 16:41
Ive seen a lot of interstate trucks without bull bars lately fitted with them,(the electroninc ones) dosn't mean they work but just interested in feed back from anyone who owns one. the plastic whistle type would be limmited in the volume achived ,where as the elctronic one is suposed to be very loud but outside human hearing range.
FollowupID: 21494

Follow Up By: Tim - Monday, Sep 08, 2003 at 17:22

Monday, Sep 08, 2003 at 17:22
I have an electronic shoo roo mounted on my jack and I haven't hit anything since installing it, its kind of hard to prove if they are or are not effective.
I do a fair bit of driving around central NSW probably half of it at night on back roads.
I have hit a roo before I put it on and it did $3500 damage so I thought it would be a fair gamble for the $300 for the unit.
FollowupID: 21498

Follow Up By: Coops (Pilbara) - Tuesday, Sep 09, 2003 at 01:46

Tuesday, Sep 09, 2003 at 01:46
isn't it your 3rd party insurance (paid via registration) that covers injuries to people whereas your comprehensive vehicle insurance covers vehicle damage?
FollowupID: 21564

Follow Up By: Old Jack - Tuesday, Sep 09, 2003 at 20:31

Tuesday, Sep 09, 2003 at 20:31
yes 3rd part covers injury to people but read the fine print & it will say that if you do something with intent, on purpose or neglegent you are not covered. If for instance you have a set of rod holders mounted on the bull bar and the front edge protudes, you hit someone & kill/mame them they can take you personally to court because you have done something that is making the vehical more dangerous and the insurance has an exit clause because of this. only take some one with enough money to prove that the bull bar on a vehical causes more personal injury than the standard front of a to set up abig show down. it's a fact that they increase the severity of injury(ever hit a few roo's with one & you will know what I mean) as they are designed not to disapate energy unlike the body panels of a vehical. would only take one Peaved off pedestrian that gets a permanent disability & a team of lawyers to make life a missery!

safe travelling
FollowupID: 21665

Reply By: Troopyboy-vk3hsc - Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 23:45

Sunday, Sep 07, 2003 at 23:45
Too true about the Wedgies.... I nearly hit one on the silver city Hwy, snacking on a fresh road kill Skippy, sure would have not liked that to come flying thru the windscreen!!!!!

Old Ambulance Saying (which applies to drivers mentioned in The Paper article on Bullbars) You cant cure Stupid!

IF you dont want your child to be injured by me in my fourby driving within the speedlimit, on teh correct side of the road, and a 0.00 blood alcohol, teach them not to run onto the road. I know you cant watch the billy lids for every second, but we need to take some responsibility for our own actions and stop trying to blame others for every thing that goes wrong in our lives (like the Spetics do, I break my finger nail on your table, I'll sue ya!)

There, I'll get down off my soap box now


PS what about rear steps then, someone runs into that at a rate or knots, no crumple zone there, just like running into a bull bar
AnswerID: 30408

Follow Up By: David N. - Monday, Sep 08, 2003 at 09:53

Monday, Sep 08, 2003 at 09:53
Couldn't agree more, I'm afraid. At the school near here, the kids (teenagers) walk out in front of your car as you drive along the road. They do it INTENTIONALLY! You can see the smirk on their face as they make you hit the brakes. It all a game- as far as they are concerned. While this is all happening the younger ones see it all and guess what- they copy their older sisters and brothers. (surprise- surprise!!)

Shock/horror if one day by chance, some poor old bloke comes along and does not have quite the reflexes or eyesight of the younger drivers, and should actually hit them. The whole thing is totally out of control, as usual driven by lawyers. ( my favourite people- NOT)
My 'roo bar has saved my life- I'm sure of that- it's that simple- but you won't see that in any bloody statistics.
FollowupID: 21460

Follow Up By: Coops (Pilbara) - Tuesday, Sep 09, 2003 at 01:53

Tuesday, Sep 09, 2003 at 01:53
Bottom line is though that it's man's god given right to walk wherever he pleases and us people who drive cars etc are supposed to look out for all traffic, be it pedestrian or vehicular. That's the lawyers angle.
I vividly remember traffic in New York being as busy as anywhere I've ever seen in the world, yet a car could stop on a 10 cent bit in an instant in order to avoid hitting anyone and being sued.

My roo bar has saved me a dozen times over and I'll always have one but when I move to the city again I'm not so sure as to why I would really need one other than to hold a winch in place.
FollowupID: 21565

Reply By: Peter L - Monday, Sep 08, 2003 at 16:05

Monday, Sep 08, 2003 at 16:05
In refererance to kids walking out in front of you ------ was browsing the net yesterday and came across updated fines for various traffic offences here in Vic.

eg Running a red light in a car $ 165
Running a red light on a bicycle $ 20
Running a red light on foot (Pedestrian Crossing) $ 15

Makes you wonder

Peter L
AnswerID: 30451

Sponsored Links