General Vehicle Related Topics (Non Year Related) If topic doesn't apply to Toyotas whatsoever, it should be in Off Topic

Possible Brush Guard Ban (NY State)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-28-2006, 12:47 PM
  #1  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Oscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Possible Brush Guard Ban (NY State)

I hope this doesn't go through because once others states catch wind they may follow suit and then it would only be a mtatter of time for it to trickle north of the border. Get out and voice your opinion.

http://www.autoblog.com/2006/03/28/n...brush-bar-ban/
Old 03-28-2006, 12:55 PM
  #2  
Registered User
 
ChickenLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NV
Posts: 2,583
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Ridiculous...

Last edited by ChickenLover; 03-28-2006 at 12:59 PM.
Old 03-28-2006, 01:03 PM
  #3  
Registered User
 
Bob_98SR5's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 10,036
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
obviously, 99% of the respondents are not off roaders. they talk as if a brush guard is the difference between surviving and instantaneous death. getting hit by any vehicle is not in your favor, but these anti-suv people have taken this to the hilt.

whose the idiot politician behind this one? i have my guesses, but i'll refrain from researching and posting the name(s) so as to not turn this into a political battle

bob
Old 03-28-2006, 01:55 PM
  #4  
Contributing Member
 
ecchamberlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If given the choice of being hit by my TJM or a F-StuperDuty with a 12" lift and 40" tires. I would take my TJM any day.

Seems obvious that there are bigger fish to go after than those with bumpers that are actually at a reasonable height.

But like they say: "Common sense is not so common"
Old 03-28-2006, 02:41 PM
  #5  
Registered User
 
da_bigg_wigg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Halifax, NS
Posts: 1,245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I like how one of the responses goes on to state that getting hit by a bush bar at 10mph will cause more harm to a pedestrian than a stock bumper. Lemme know if i'm wrong, but getting hit by either isn't exactly a good feeling. Also on a side note, what's up with all these pedestrians getting hit? I'm not anywhere near NY nor do I ever want to be, but those posts make it seem like getting hit by a car while on foot there is a daily event. Sounds to me like a lot of people forgot the whole "look both ways" lesson from when they were kids...
Old 03-28-2006, 07:06 PM
  #6  
Registered User
 
Dr.Feelgood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N43*27.220', W76*30.330'
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Dear Friends,

I have just read and signed the online petition:

"Bill to Ban the Use of Grille/Brush Guards"

hosted on the web by PetitionOnline.com, the free online petition
service, at:

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/brushban/

I personally agree with what this petition says, and I think you might
agree, too. If you can spare a moment, please take a look, and consider
signing yourself.
Old 03-28-2006, 07:26 PM
  #7  
Contributing Member
 
ecchamberlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just read it and no thanks about signing it.

Should we also ban garbage trucks and semi's? They have front bumpers of nearly unbelievable strength. I have actually witnessed a semi hit a deer at 70mph and sustain no damage at all, while the deer was sort of pulverized.

The airbag sensor article of this is extremely questionable because most sensors are frame mounted and not bumper mounted. So it seems that the shock of an impact would me transmitted through the bumper and to the frame quicker and with more force because a section of the manufacturers crumple zone has been removed.
Old 03-28-2006, 07:31 PM
  #8  
Registered User
 
surf4runner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: so.cal
Posts: 4,476
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
pedestrians have the right of way.

even if they play frogger in traffic in the middle of a busy intersection against 3000lb metal hunks flying at them. open yer eyes and look. cross at green lights at the intersesction.

time to remove the brush gaurd and mount the steer horns as a hood ornament so they stop gettin away
Old 03-28-2006, 07:33 PM
  #9  
Registered User
 
Jimmeh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Montana USA
Posts: 2,276
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I know that brush gaurds have actually saved lives here in Montana, and it is a lot safer to hit a deer with your rig if you have a brush gaurd rather then stock bumper. Besides, there are so many reasons why Montana wouldn't, and so many reasons why they would ban them. I can see it now....

"Brush gaurds should be banned because they are the leading factor to the death of deers on our highways." Again, I side with the people against this. They should ban Semis and other big rigs if they ban the bumpers.
Old 03-28-2006, 07:47 PM
  #10  
Contributing Member
 
ecchamberlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The leading cause of deer/vehicle accidents is urban sprall which limits their natural habitat and also some, not all, animal rights activists who have made it seem "wrong" to hunt which controls the deer populations. Not because of a brush guard. As long as the hunting trend continues to decline and suburban America is "developed" the deer/vehicle accidents will continue to rise.
Old 03-28-2006, 07:54 PM
  #11  
Contributing Member
 
shazaam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
another dumb law soon to be on the books
Old 03-28-2006, 07:55 PM
  #12  
Registered User
 
CoedNaked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
This is just like the concept of banning hand guns to stop murder. It is people who kill people, not hand guns, nor brush guards.
Old 03-28-2006, 08:03 PM
  #13  
Registered User
 
kyle_22r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lacey, WA
Posts: 3,981
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
speaking of which, aren't handguns banned in NYC?
Old 03-28-2006, 09:01 PM
  #14  
Contributing Member
iTrader: (1)
 
rocket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 4,683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
* A.B. 10116 relies on unsubstantiated claims that these grille guards create the potential of greater harm to other vehicles in the event of a collision

Lets say a drunk driver hits you. Whats wrong with adding protection to our vehicles to help save innocent lives...such as your own!?

* A.B. 10116 relies on unsubstantiated claims that grille guards obstruct airbag sensors, rendering the airbags useless in an accident.

FALSE

* A.B. 10116 would require owners of vehicles currently equipped with grille guards (including those purchased with this equipment from a dealership) to remove these guards.

Don't the government have enough control already?
Old 03-29-2006, 03:26 AM
  #15  
Registered User
 
kvanderploeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Minooka, IL
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sounds to me like the people of NYC should only get to ride around on Segway's with bubble-wrap suits and helmets on. I'll even duct tape a pillow to their behind's, as it seems that's where their brain is.

What is the difference between the severity of being hit with a brush guard on a SUV/Truck versus being hit by the front bumper of a FedEx truck? I used to drive one of those, and let me tell you it's a whole bunch of steel tied directly to the frame. Not much forgiveness there.

The whole body suffers for what the dumb mind does.
Old 03-29-2006, 07:12 AM
  #16  
Registered User
 
InternetRoadkill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
I think banning grill gaurds is a waste of time. But around here, we do have a problem with people putting 'battering rams' on the front of their lifted vehicles. These generally consist of 4 to 6 inch heavy-wall pipe (sometimes doubled) reinforced with 1/8 steel plate. These bumbers have no energy absorbtion at all and represent a death sentence to just about anything it hits. I'm all for being able to customize one's vehicle, but I have some reservations about mods that create hazards for other drivers.

Personally, I don't thing brush gaurds are heavy enough to create a hazard.
Old 03-29-2006, 07:17 AM
  #17  
Banned
 
bamachem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by ecchamberlin
Just read it and no thanks about signing it.
the petition is in OPPOSITION to the proposed law. the law wants to ban them, so the petition is in support of allowing the brush guards and bumpers to remail legal.

why would you NOT be in favor of the petition?
Old 03-29-2006, 08:13 AM
  #18  
Contributing Member
 
WATRD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Duvall, WA
Posts: 5,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Official comment from ARB:

MEMORANDUM
TO: ALL ARB SALES STAFF
COPIES OF THIS MEMO MAY BE PROVIDED TO INTERESTED CUSTOMERS
FROM: GREG J. MILTON
SUBJECT: ARB BULL BARS AND NUDGE BARS TO SUIT VEHICLES FITTED WITH “SRS” AIR BAGS
DATE: February 2005 Update
This memorandum is intended to address queries from sales staff and customers regarding ARB’s design and testing process for bull bars and winch mount bull bars to suit “SRS” equipped vehicles.
OVERVIEW
ARB’s range of SRS air bag compatible bull bars, winch bars and nudge bars are:-
• Uniquely designed for each vehicle.
• Legal fitments in all states of Australia.
• Designed, tested and approved so as not to affect the ADR compliance of the vehicle.
• Covered by a full warranty and do not affect vehicle manufacturer’s warranty responsibilities.
• Demonstrably the best value for money product of their type available.
BACKGROUND
A great deal of discussion and argument has been evident on the subject of air bag compatible bull bars and nudge bars since air bags first appeared on 4x4 vehicles. The argument continues today and is potentially quite confusing to not only owners of such vehicles but even to people within the 4x4 vehicle and aftermarket industries.
Essentially, the concern from vehicle engineers, is as follows:-
The air bag triggering system is designed to work in harmony with frontal crush characteristics of a vehicle. These frontal crush characteristics include the design of the bumper assembly, its mounting system, and other components of the vehicle.
On 4x4 vehicles with independent ladder chassis, the manufacturers often also add “crush cans” to the front of the chassis members to ensure that minor impacts (such as hitting a kangaroo) are not read by the air bag sensors as major impacts, prematurely deploying the air bag(s).
Such a premature triggering of the air bag is potentially quite dangerous, and may in fact cause a more severe accident or an injury that would have otherwise occurred.
Likewise, the air bag deploying later than intended by the manufacturer could also endanger life.
It is with these dangers in mind, that engineers approach the subject of fitting bull bars to such vehicles, with the concern being that fitting a rigid structure, not behaving the same as the original frontal characteristics of the vehicle, may change the deployment timing of the air bag.
From early on, ARB took a very careful approach to the subject and initiated some in-depth research on several fronts to ensure that any product that our company produced for these air bag equipped vehicles was not only up to the expectations of our customers in terms of the traditional protection ARB bar owners have come to expect, but also that such bars would be truly legal and appropriate for the vehicle.
Monash University’s Department of Civil Engineering were contracted by ARB on this project for some years, and their expertise and testing facilities have been used to evaluate, test and approve ARB bars for air bag vehicles. ARB keeps test results and approvals from Monash on file, but we do not publicly release these as they contain commercially sensitive details of our technology and research and development programs.
The essential design criteria ARB uses to ensure compatibility is to evaluate the standard vehicle’s frontal crush characteristics and where necessary to duplicate these characteristics as part of the design of the bar and its mounting system. This results in a design which when correctly installed, ensures that there is no change made to the way the vehicle behaves in a collision and hence there is no change made to the way the air bags deploy.
That is not to say that ARB has developed useless bars that do not offer the vehicle any protection. (It does appear to us that several bull bar manufacturers believe they have overcome the problem this way.) ARB air bag compatible bull bars do provide significant protection for the vehicle whilst also offering functional winching capability on winch mount versions.
ARB Nudge Bars are securely mounted and offer a stable platform for mounting auxiliary lights and antennas, as well as significant protection in car park and light impact situations.
Each ARB airbag compatible bar is designed specifically for the requirements of the individual vehicle model. Several different engineered methods of mounting the bar and providing the required collision performance characteristics are available to our designers. This results in products which are unique according to the vehicle model and that often feature quite different structural features to fulfill their air bag compatibility requirement.
The engineers analyse many factors at the initial design stage including the vehicle’s structural elements in relation to crash performance, the overall requirements for protection of the vehicle, consideration of pedestrian safety, the need for vehicle recovery points including winch mounting systems and the overall aesthetic appeal of the product. Naturally we are also looking for a cost effective, value for money solution as well.

This involves the development and testing of several prototypes before the design is approved. This is time consuming, but the patience of our customers is rewarded with a product that is the very best of its type.
LEGALITY
Some customers have expressed concern about the legality of fitting bull bars to SRS equipped vehicles and some vehicle manufacturers and dealers have also demonstrated concern.
The Victorian Government’s VICROADS department spells out the requirements for bull bar manufacturers to follow in order to satisfy that department as to the suitability of such bars. ARB follows these guidelines as a basis for our air bag compatible bull bar development program. No other Government Authority in Australia has any comparable regulations or guidelines, nor is ARB aware of any overseas authority who addresses this issue.
ARB’s engineering team has become a world authority on the design of bull bars, especially for critical applications such as on military and SRS equipped vehicles, and our input on the subject is sought by many government and private organisations around the globe.
AUSTRALIAN DESIGN RULES (ADRs)
Some confusion also exists regarding the ADRs for SRS air bag equipped vehicles. In particular, ADR rule number 69 is often confused as having some content regarding bull bars. This is not the case.
ADR69 is a vehicle occupant safety rule to which many vehicle categories are required to comply. Many vehicle manufacturers have used the fitment of air bags, amongst other engineering methods, to ensure their vehicles comply with this rule. All new vehicles must comply with all of the relevant ADRs at the time of their first registration. After a vehicle is registered, responsibility for the modification (and fitting of most aftermarket accessories is considered a modification) rests with the individual state road authorities (e.g. VICROADS).
As with all aftermarket accessories, the manufacturer of those accessories must be able to demonstrate that the accessories have been tested and evaluated to meet all of the relevant regulations.
ARB has a long history of providing vehicle modifications and accessories and we are experienced in meeting all of the various requirements in such areas. ARB manufactured turbochargers, ARB HiLux V6 conversions and lately our Old Man Emu 3500kg conversion for 70 series LandCruisers have all been tested and approved for full ADR second manufacturer compliance.
ARB has performed full scale crash testing of air bag compatible bull bars both with Monash University and with some vehicle manufacturers and this testing has fully verified our research and development on the subject.
For yours, and your potential customer’s, peace of mind, may I remind you, that in the case of our bull bars and nudge bars for SRS air bag equipped vehicles, every one is fitted with a sticker which reads in part as follows:-
“ This product and its mounting system has been designed, tested and manufactured by ARB to ensure its fitment to a vehicle fitted with SRS air bags does not affect the vehicle’s compliance to ADR69”
Each sticker has individual product part number and vehicle application information on it, and it is manufactured from high quality material with permanent adhesive.
WARRANTY
Consumers are well protected in this country from the aspect of product warranty. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, who administer the Trade Practices Legislation, have comprehensive rules about product warranty to ensure that consumers are protected from faulty products.
Products sold here must also be “Fit for purpose” and this is very important when it comes to manufacturers making claims of bull bars being “Air bag compatible”.
All ARB air bag compatible bull bars are not only covered by a full manufacturers warranty from the standpoint of protecting the consumer from goods with faulty materials or workmanship, but also with respect to the product’s suitability for its intended purpose.
We have heard of vehicle manufacturers and dealers telling their customers that if the customer fits an aftermarket bull bar some aspect of his/her vehicle warranty will be voided. It is neither fair nor legal for manufacturers or dealers to make such rules and consumers are well advised to challenge such statements.
Naturally, if an aftermarket product is proven to cause a failure of some other vehicle component, the aftermarket supplier may be held accountable, but the customer is protected by the consumer laws and therefore the vehicle manufacturer or dealer cannot simply wash their hands of such responsibility.
SUMMARY
ARB has gone to unprecedented lengths to ensure that our air bag compatible bull bars and nudge bars are the best available and legal accessories, and customers may have full confidence that these products are truly “fit for purpose”.
Further information, if required, can be obtained from the ARB office in your state or by contacting the writer.
Thanks and Kind Regards
Greg J Milton
National Sales and
Operations Manager

Last edited by WATRD; 03-29-2006 at 08:16 AM.
Old 03-29-2006, 11:01 AM
  #19  
Registered User
 
Dr.Feelgood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N43*27.220', W76*30.330'
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A lot of the active members here seem to be out West where this ban wouldn't immediately affect you, but, as in a lot of instances, once something becomes law in one state, others follow suit. As is the case here, it's usually NY and CA that get the ball rolling. Just because this may pass in NY doesn't mean it won't happen in CA next and then on to other states. There's always a politician somewhere trying to make a name for himself, and if they get the general population thinking he's saving lives or backing a cause for the 'greater good', then the people will back him and believe it without even knowing the true facts behind it. So to the point, if it passes in NY, it can and may in other states as well. Please get behind it and oppose it.
It's not just a case of banning brush guards, it's another step toward governmental control of our lives as well.
Old 03-29-2006, 03:29 PM
  #20  
Registered User
 
CoedNaked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Surely if they will ban bull bars and brush guards for causing deaths or more death than neccessary, they should be looking at banning alcohol for all the accidents due to all the drivers who have killed while driving drunk.

This is rediculous!


Quick Reply: Possible Brush Guard Ban (NY State)



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:42 AM.