Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.
Follow the Audi Mileage Marathon starting Monday morning
Paris 2008: MINI Crossover Concept
Paris 2008: Aston Martin One-77 (partially) revealed
Paris 2008: The GT by Citroen. No, the whole thing this time
Paris 2008: Lamborghini Estoque LIVE
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Chevy Corvette Z06
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
Paris 2008: Le Day 1 Wrapup
Knight Rider: The Liveblog -- Season 1, Episode 2
By the Numbers - September 2008: Nobody Wins Edition
Reader Comments for
Subscribe to this threadIIHS reports that bumpers aren't up to the task
(Page 1 of 1)
DriftPunch @ Mar 2nd 2007 12:22PM
I was given a wrecked '78 malibu as a kid. My challenge was to get it roadworthy. I was astonished at the mass of the bumper and associated structures. It wasn't just the bumper itself, but the reinforcements and the shock absorbers (yes, the bumper had shock absorbers).
While it's a great idea to have such sturdy components to shrug off damage from minor accidents. I wonder what that solid face would to to the 'crumple zone' concept of safety. Also I wonder if any group has done a study on the insurance negatives, to the less material/fuel and occupant safety positives.
I also wonder how well a unibody car could take a 6 mph hit even if a meaty steel bumper was anchored to a 'strong point'.
Life is full of trade offs...