Govt considering new Bull Bar rules

[svo supporter]

Then we can go with the idea of having bullbars in the city to help protect the front of our stationary cars, from dimwits reversing into the front of our cars.

To me, the Gov't is doing their usual thing of blowing hot air our their asses.

[DJR-351]

***** this i want some credible statistics!!!!!

I have had bull bars on all my cars/4wds since 77 and do not know of any one incident that has been conclusively proven that "not having a Bull Bar" would have lessened the damage...

If you have some credible evidence “for or against” then put it up, otherwise pi$$ in someone else’s ear.......

anyone seen that bag of 357mag rounds i had ?????

oohh, that was yesterday huh..................!***** i need a pi$$

[302 XC]

Yeah facts to conclude a bullbar was the major cause of the death or injury

Is that like asking for facts what was the actuall cause of the road death

Or will we get the same sugar coated BS type answer

"Speed was the contributing factor"

[Kingsley]

Originally Posted by nstg8a

except when its something like this...



i notice a lot here come back to the "if your silly enough to walk in front of a bullbar equipped 4wd then its gonna hurt anyway", but what about when its on the other side... said bull bar equipped 4wd fails to stop at pedestrian crossing, dosnt see a cyclist in the evening gloom, doesnt stop at a giveway and t-bones the granny driving her nissan tiida...

Simple logic. It's still going to hurt and the moron responsible will have to live with it for the rest of his life. Roads rules are designed to allow the lowest common denominator who some how passed the licence test the freedom to drive. Bullbar or not, that same clown plowing through a light is still going to cause damage. Just look at the amount of people who can't indicate, get lost on a roundabout, can't read simple signage on the roadside that tells them the best speed to approach a corner or even keep left unless overtaking.
If your going to ban bullbars what's next? Sorry sir, you've lowered your car and fitted mags therefore your car looks like a race or sports car and race cars are not permissible to drive on public roads because some yank sounding princess has deemed your choice of lifestyle as 'dangerous' to fellow motorists, pedestrians, bike owners and the rare and endangered two toned green tree frogs which are in plague proportions.

[Nikked]

Its the same as anything, a few spoil it for the rest. Bull bars wouldn't be a problem if there was people trying to make there utes look like a truck with un-nessasary monseterous bull bars like the one above.

[FgNewbie]

I'd swear I posted this about 3.50am today but can't see it.

DJR-351 made me wonder how much longer it takes to stop with a heavy bar. To state the obvious, 1 metre could make a humungus difference.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by FgNewbie

I'd swear I posted this about 3.50am today but can't see it.

DJR-351 made me wonder how much longer it takes to stop with a heavy bar. To state the obvious, 1 metre could make a humungus difference.

These utes arnt the problem as I see it. These types of utes live in the bush, heck look in the background whenever you see these pics.

They are not suburban 4wd shopping trolleys constantly encountering pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.

[FgNewbie]

Brazen, regardless of their location, I'm still curious about the added stopping distance.

Having said that, I deliberately used bush photos. They may live in the bush but I have seen similar in suburbia. Unfortunately they are part of the equation.

[BENT_8]

Wow, 4 pages of knee jerk reactions from a small % of AFF members who feel they are having their rights taken away...who'd have thought.
Good job this weeks topic wasnt about raising the age of learner drivers or we'd have 4 pages from that group.

Lets allow a little common sense to sneak in here.
The way i see it the Governnment is considering how a rule implemented overseas can be worked into our system.
I dont think we'll see a blanket ban on every situation, obviously people who register their vehicle in a rural area would be entitled to apply for the right to wear a bullbar.
If you insist on owning an urban tractor which never see's the outside of suburbia apart from the 1 a year pilgrimage, it would be hard to support an argument for 1.

There is no doubt bullbars save lives in rural areas, speed is somewhat greater on most rural roads and the ability to avoid a collision with an animal is greatly reduced, however, when using the same argument in suburban settings you are taking it to an extreme.
There is no doubt someone who steps out infront of a 2 1/2 tonne vehicle travelling at 60, giving no chace for driver reaction will in most cases be fatal, but what about when said 4wd driver does get the chance to react, slow to a survivable impact speed only to have the pedestrian still die as a result of being collected by the steel bar in a place which could have been avoided had the bar not been there?

This is where common sense needs to be brought into the argument, bullbars on urban tractors ARE an unnecessary evil.

Having said that, obviously there will be times when rural living 4wd owners carrying a bullbar will need to venture into the city, however, the number of bullbars in the city on any given day will be significantly less than the current trend.

[Full Noise]

I just thought of something.

Bullbars on 4WDs might be a lot safer than the government think.

Going by the TAC statistics for 2009, there were 50 pedestrian fatalities. There’s no mention of whether the vehicles involved were fitted with bullbars so, in my opinion, pedestrians may be safer around vehicles fitted with bullbars.

If they were really such a problem, the TAC would have statistics to back up claims that they contribute to road trauma. So, where’s the statistics?

Originally Posted by TAC website

A total of 50 pedestrians were killed on Victorian roads in 2009, which represents 17% of all fatalities.



Three pedestrian groups are particularly vulnerable: the young, the elderly and the intoxicated.
Of the pedestrian deaths in 2009:
80% were in the Melbourne metropolitan area,
66% were on roads signposted at 50km/h or 60km/h.
26% had a BAC of at least 0.05g/100ml
Common types of crashes resulting in pedestrian deaths in 2009 involved a pedestrian:
crossing the road and being struck from the near side (30%),
crossing the road and being struck from the far side (20%), and
being struck while playing, working, lying or standing on the road (18%).

http://www.tac.vic.gov.au/jsp/conten...ull&pageID=149

So, if more people had bullbars fitted and we get rid of all the old, young, stupid and drunk people from walking off our footpaths without looking, there would be a greatly reduced risk of being hit by a motor vehicle.

Edit: * There were 39 pedestrian deaths across the state throughout the year (2010) - 11 fewer than 2009 (50).

And quite obviously more new vehicles fitted with bullbars, so there you go. Going by the TAC, we are safer with bullbars because they cut the road toll.

Geez, I should be an advisor for the government.

[vanman_75]

Originally Posted by FgNewbie

Brazen, regardless of their location, I'm still curious about the added stopping distance.

Having said that, I deliberately used bush photos. They may live in the bush but I have seen similar in suburbia. Unfortunately they are part of the equation.

and a fully loaded hiace/ izuzu/ courier warrior with his flat front has better brakes and better pedestrian protection ... wake up no facts , and the bar on my car would not affect it any more than having a half full tank .

[bigsta]

ARB are getting stats together to fight the adoption of the euro standard into Oz

for those interested the survey is here http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/317270...s-Under-Threat

[Ben73]

What about cars registered in the city but drive in the bush often? Would they allow an exception to these cars?

[Keepleft]

http://www.boostcruising.com/forums/...owtopic=474940

WA Police and skippy.

The discussion relates to a UN rule, NOT a European one, since most countries have an input into the global technical regulations for land transport.

True, that some rules are derived from ECE (Europe) via the UN, hence they become UNECE, but many regulations are derived from other countries and each rule is assessed by 'working parties' before gaining UNECE status.

Australia works and contracts at UN level, the UNECE, not at EU.

Can't see these being banned here, or at UN level, as any future regulation will allow a states parties 'opt-out' clause, or variation.

We WILL see more harmonization with the worlds vehicle regs, and with amendments to the UN Road Traffic Convention, another story.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

http://www.boostcruising.com/forums/...owtopic=474940

WA Police and skippy.

The discussion relates to a UN rule, NOT a European one, since most countries have an input into the global technical regulations for land transport.

True, that some rules are derived from ECE (Europe) via the UN, hence they become UNECE, but many regulations are derived from other countries and each rule is assessed by 'working parties' before aging UNECE status.

Australia works and contracts at UN level, the UNECE, not at EU.

Can't see these being banned here, or at UN level, as any future regulation will allow states parties 'opt-out' clause, or variation.

Im still suprised they dont option bull bars on the highway patrol cars.. All the VE SS ones I see along the Barrier Highway should have them I think. I suspect resale value on a SS with a bull bar is the big issue.

[04redxr8]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

http://www.boostcruising.com/forums/...owtopic=474940

WA Police and skippy.

The discussion relates to a UN rule, NOT a European one, since most countries have an input into the global technical regulations for land transport.

True, that some rules are derived from ECE (Europe) via the UN, hence they become UNECE, but many regulations are derived from other countries and each rule is assessed by 'working parties' before gaining UNECE status.

Australia works and contracts at UN level, the UNECE, not at EU.

Can't see these being banned here, or at UN level, as any future regulation will allow a states parties 'opt-out' clause, or variation.

We WILL see more harmonization with the worlds vehicle regs, and with amendments to the UN Road Traffic Convention, another story.

All I got out of that was a One World Government.

[FgNewbie]

Originally Posted by vanman_75

and a fully loaded hiace/ izuzu/ courier warrior with his flat front has better brakes and better pedestrian protection ... wake up no facts , and the bar on my car would not affect it any more than having a half full tank .

My post made no reference to pedestrians, I don't know what you are trying to point out.

Thanks for offering, when you have the facts let me know

How much longer does it take a vehicle with oversized bar to stop?
How much understeer would an oversized bar cause?

Example of oversized: see the white holden above.

[davez104]

A ute with an oversized bullbar or a ute with no bullbar and half a tonne of fence posts in the tray, which one has the biggest effect on stopping distance? Maybe we should ban the transport of cargo in vehicles as well due to the adverse effects of the extra weight, hell lets go all the way and ban extra passengers, the weight might add a metre to our stopping distance. Christ, you're gonna kill someone with mum and grandpa affecting the handling of your ride, ditch em and leave em at home!

The weight is really not an issue when you consider how variable the weights of our vehicles are to begin with. Banning bullbars is just another attempt to wrap us all in cotton wool and protect us from ourselves. The lowest common denominator continues to drag the rest of us down into the mud.

Let mother nature sort it out, Charles Darwin knew where it was at.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by 04redxr8

All I got out of that was a One World Government.

Yeah.

Kinda like the EU parliament sending aligned member countries (nation states) to the dustbin of history under one big, centralist umbrella.

Won't happen, (nationalisim will see to that) but bolshies like the EU model; big centralist government that controls 'everything' - its tentacles reaching deep into every citizens life and ursurping sovereign government legislative power, from light bulb performance to surgical standards.

Enjoy this video:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KAWXC5Z0wU

I'll let this get back on topic.

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by davez104

A ute with an oversized bullbar or a ute with no bullbar and half a tonne of fence posts in the tray, which one has the biggest effect on stopping distance? Maybe we should ban the transport of cargo in vehicles as well due to the adverse effects of the extra weight, hell lets go all the way and ban extra passengers, the weight might add a metre to our stopping distance. Christ, you're gonna kill someone with mum and grandpa affecting the handling of your ride, ditch em and leave em at home!

The weight is really not an issue when you consider how variable the weights of our vehicles are to begin with. Banning bullbars is just another attempt to wrap us all in cotton wool and protect us from ourselves. The lowest common denominator continues to drag the rest of us down into the mud.
.

The issue is the extra weight over the front wheels, which a car was never designed for, unlike weight in the back of the car (which was allowed for when the car was designed and tested).
Massive bullbars like those shown add a huge amount of weight to the front of the car... this is what fgnewbie was referring to..

[302 XC]

IF this new law gets inplimented,itll be for new cars from a manufactured date ???
Airbags ,ABS ect are a step forward but the older cars dont have them
My tray back patrol ute wieghs 2 tonne empty,yep heavier than the XC
I can put a tonne on the back , that makes it 3 tonne,then i can whack near 2 tonne of the back (5 Tonne total)
Ill tell ya the stoppin distance between full and empty will be worse than IF just a bullbar was fitted

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Lets allow a little common sense to sneak in here.
I dont think we'll see a blanket ban on every situation, obviously people who register their vehicle in a rural area would be entitled to apply for the right to wear a bullbar.
If you insist on owning an urban tractor which never see's the outside of suburbia apart from the 1 a year pilgrimage, it would be hard to support an argument for 1.


This is where common sense needs to be brought into the argument, bullbars on urban tractors ARE an unnecessary evil.

.

Why should bullbars be only put on rural registered cars and not urban cars?

I happen to be one of these urban folk, that has a bullbar fitted to one of his cars. it's not one of these monsterious units either. it's just an alloy one, fitted to protect the front of the car, from knuckleheads.

It has already saved me or at least some moron a few extra dollas. I was parked and some moron decided to back into the bullbar. Left a beautiful dint in the back of their car. Mine, moved the bullbar on it's mounts.

My car is a commodore with a GS bonnet grafted into the original one. The guards have VZ flutes grafted. The paint work is a mix up a mate and I did, by throwing different colours all together and stirring up. (Yes I have plenty left over after the re-spray).

If I didn't have a bullbar fitted, firstly the bonnet and guards would have to be re-done. Then I would have had the problem with negioating paint costs with the panel beater. Or should working out with the panel beater how much my paint is worth and getting the money for it.

So I say why should bullbars be limited to just the rural folk. Us city slickers don't just use them intimidation. They are there for a purpose and mine is to save me a lot of headaches, with moronic drivers.

[PHATXR8]

Originally Posted by mcnews

Perhaps you should instead look where you are going?

I've ridden across Australia a dozen times, around Australia in 15 days and managed not to hit anything... Amazing what not having a bullbar does for your concentration... Perhaps we need to get rid of them so people don't drive with the false sense of security that provide, as if it is okay to be so completely unaware to your surroundings as to hit a cow at 100km/h...

Some people drive in animal-riddled country areas every day & night of the week, not just for 15 days a year. Pull your head out of your bum and at least try to understand what situation some others find themselves in. Surely you can't be so ignorant or brain-dead to suggest that all animal/vehicle collisions can be avoided by just looking where you are going.....

[JaguarDave]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Wow, 4 pages of knee jerk reactions from a small % of AFF members who feel they are having their rights taken away...who'd have thought.

This is where common sense needs to be brought into the argument, bullbars on urban tractors ARE an unnecessary evil.

yep, there go those minorities again, whinging about their rights. Damned minorities, why can't they stay quietly inconsequential and let the majority do what it wants without getting in the way.

Some people in society think bullbars are a problem and can provide clear reasoning to back some of their claims, so let's slowly legislate them out of existence.

Plenty of others in society think V8's are a petrol guzzling problem bringing society's resources to harm and can provide clear reasoning to back some of their claims, so let's slowly legislate them out of existence.

Others think big diameter aftermarket wheels enourage young drivers to act out race fantasies on the road and can provide some clear evidence linking some young driver accidents and burnouts to cars with large wheels so let's slowly legislate them out of existence.

Yet another group find loud exhausts impinge upon their right to peaceful enjoyment of their roadside homes and there's plenty of self evident reasoning for that one so let's slowly legislate them out of existence.

We'll have to look at loud stereos, dark coloured cars, lowering, performance modifications et al. All completely unnecessary "evils" and I guess that the majority should have the right to expunge them from society's roads though I hope they stick to cars and roads and not start looking at other unecessary evils held dear by "minorities".

Soon all we'll have to choose from is a nice little bog stock prius or a bicycle. I better go have a bowl of lentils to prepare myself.

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

This is where common sense needs to be brought into the argument, bullbars on urban tractors ARE an unnecessary evil.

i'd have thought if a 4wd hit you hard enough to kill you it wouldn't matter if it had a bull bar or not (at least, not to the pedestrian).

[302 XC]

Yep as said brace ya self lads
Were all heading to the land of prius driving do gooders

Just wondering is there an evironmentally friendly prius i can get that can,
Handle head on collisions with random livestock
Pull my 2 tonne trailer ,and at the designated speed limit
Ensure it can keep to the designated speed limit,hills or not
Can over take at speed,but not beyond speed of course
Can get thru my driveway when it rains

All you do gooders out there,
Lets open your closet ill bet theres a few skeletons in there
It wont be full of halos,that ill bet

[pottery beige]

be a lot less cute fury animals being outright slaughtered on our highways without bullbars....

[FgNewbie]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

The issue is the extra weight over the front wheels, which a car was never designed for, unlike weight in the back of the car (which was allowed for when the car was designed and tested).
Massive bullbars like those shown add a huge amount of weight to the front of the car... this is what fgnewbie was referring to..

Thank you.

[302 XC]

The overhung front chassis wieght is certainly an issue
But the alloy bullbars are way lighter than the old steel bullbars
Who makes steel bullbars nowadays ???
Most of the 4x4s have largish chassis rails from front to back
Id be more worried about the effects on the chassis from overloading ect

[davez104]

Most of the oversize bars you see on utes are alloy, after removing factory bumpers to fit them they wouldn't add a "huge" amount of weight. Yes it would have some effect, but not a massive increase in stopping distance.

If you discount the ridiculously oversized bars (which could easily be legislated against through protrusion limits, which may already exist) most bars as fitted to 4x4's would have a negligible effect on stopping distances. I can fit dual batteries, roof racks, extra fuel tanks, water tanks, extra spare tyres, storage draws etc and nobody bats an eyelid, throw a few extra kilos out front and suddenly it's going to turn the car into an unstoppable, poor handling POS?

Why don't we just introduce a nationwide 20km/h speed limit in built up areas with automatic jail time for anyone who exceeds the limit? That should stop almost all pedestrian fatalities, that's gotta be a win doesn't it?

Seriously over these desk jockeys thinking they need to outlaw anything that has the potential to cause them to break a nail.