Several points to make here.
1. These cars shown above don't have bumpers. They have a section of the nose and tail which are safety zones for pedestrians. They're filled with nerf material and covered in flexy/brittle plastic so soccer moms can continue taking prozacs, ignoring their kids, and letting them run around in and out of the roadways like little crack-head godzillas.
2. They could make solid steel/rubber bumpers that protruded through or sat flush with the match-painted flexy bodywork ... it would protect the expensive paint job and body, and headlights, but it would violate that whole "safe to hit pedestrians" thing - see point #1.
3. Someone earlier mentioned that only trucks and SUVs have real bumpers. Wrong. Most of the new (since 2000) trucks have a "bumper" (in quotes) which actually consists of a double-layer of aluminum foil which is chromed and sold for well in excess of $600. The get dinged and dented and warped so easily that it really is meaningless to have them (one particularly good example is the 1999 onward Ford Super-duty hunk-o-foil). The newest trucks have chromed tinfoil... and most SUVs (since the word was invented by marketingtards in the early 90's) also don't have bumpers at all (see point #1).
4. Older convertible sports cars (Porsches, Triumphs, MGs, Alfas, etc...) all had chromed steel or steel and rubber bumpers which the owners/customizers were quick to trim, shave, paint or frequently remove... the end result was that a bump would cause a ding or a scrape or a crunch and a large amount of bodywork, but that was the price to pay for a better looking car. A perfect example is the AC Ace versus the Shelby Cobra. One had bumperettes, one didn't.
I live in the city where most people have to street park on a daily basis. Almost everyone gets their bumpers chipped and scraped and it just makes the cars look sad.
Who is going to buy these cars and not have full coverage insurance on them? I think that's why people don't really care about this stuff. Nobody is going to go into a dealership and pay cash for ANY of these cars. The bank will require full coverage insurance. When it's paid off, it will get traded in.
What I'm trying to figure out is how it is that the two domestic cars are so much more expensive to repair than the foreign ones.
And the Maxima, which I'd say has the heaviest damage by far somehow manages to be so cheap? I find it hard to believe that the parts alone are going to be that cheap. Headlights alone run $600+ easily.
But assuming these figures are legitimate either Americans are trying to make up for losses by charging more for parts or there's structural damage not visible in these photos.
@MaWeiTao:
I got rear ended in my Audi TT a few years back. It appeared to be "but a scratch", but when they took the bumper cover off the underlying structure was also damaged.
And sorry all you retro bumper people...the TT is one car that would look hideous with oldschool bumpers, IMHO.
@Shadowguitar: Well, they are - above about 15 mph. I'd still take my 20-year-old Volvo over almost anything not built in the past ten years, and many vehicles since.
And I'd definitely prefer it in a sub-20-mph collision.
Maybe we don't need to go back to '70s-style 5-MPH bumpers, but I think it'd help if the "bumpers" were less integrated into the bodywork. The bumper should be separate from the grille and the rest of the front clip, so when it gets hit, the whole front end doesn't flex, crack and give way like this.
If FromaBuick6 has to watch one more Chevy commercial, he's going to punch Howie Long in the face was starred
If FromaBuick6 has to watch one more Chevy commercial, he's going to punch Howie Long in the face was unstarred
@FromaBuick6 Misses the Banned: I hope we will have a come back of the non integrated bumpers; besides the practical sides, they also help make cars look less like blobs.
Beyond the lack of rebars and bumper shocks is also that corner lights are fully integrated into headlights nowadays. Instead of a $50 replacement, it's a $450 replacement.
A while back, my dad got rear ended in his Volvo 940. Damage to the Civic that hit him included the bumper, grill, lights, fenders, and hood. Damage to the 940 ... replace the cover. $490, paid by the other guy, with just over half of that going to paint and labor.
That said, it's all a matter of where it hit too. I was rear offset hit by an Accord a few years back in my 745, and that was over $2800 in damage (aluminum tailgate + rear quarter panel damage). I was OK with used parts, and the body shop worked with their insurance company, so the bill was just over $2300 instead. That said, I loved his excuse for hitting me. "I thought you were going to run the red light."
How is the Accord "marginal"? I had to induce a cornea-bursting squint for like 30 seconds, which is the longest amount of time I've ever looked at a new Accord on purpose, just to find the little discolored strip. I reckon that fix involves five bucks and a trip to Auto Zone for some Dupli-Color.
@Rockford_Brodie: Without reading the report, I'm assuming deformation of the foam within, compromising the effectiveness of the bumper (like how if you even drop a helmet, you should replace it).
@jp182: Well, the matter there is how much a replacement bumper cover costs, and those are getting more expensive (from my minimal experience, it's difficult to have a front-end collision in a Chevy Equinox cost less than $10,000)
@CaptMatt15 is high on 9000 rpm: Coming from a world of malaise specials, I assumed that gap was normal. I also didn't know about the inner foam. Thanks (you too Maymar) for the pontification.
Edited by Rockford Brodie and the Masters of the Hooniverse at 08/06/09 11:56 AM
Rockford Brodie and the Masters of the Hooniverse was starred
Rockford Brodie and the Masters of the Hooniverse was unstarred
Listen the reason it's costing an arm and a leg and your first born child isn't because the cars get more damaged than before, it's because the manufacturers charge the living hell out of you for the replacement parts
I work in a parts dept and the price of bumper cover for a Crown Vic went from around $400 to about $800 in the past four years! A design that hasn't changed for the longest time gets doubled for no apparent reason. I could see it if they quit breaking and were made of some amazing material but they haven't changed it at all, I know, I've compared the old to the new.
I understand that every one is out there to make money, but some of it is just stupid.
Is it too much to expect that bumpers actually do their job, which is to protect the rest of the car from the kind of minor bumps that are kind of inevitable? If not, why bother putting them on cars at all?
And whose brilliant idea was it to paint the damn things? Now you can't even breathe on them without scratching them. The old kind with chrome or rubber might have been uglier, but at least they worked.
once again the gm product came in last. the damage on the fusion, 6, accord, and sonata really don't look that bad. i'd probably just leave it or look for a spare bumper from a junkyard a few years down the line
Bring back real BUMPERS!
The battering rams of the 1960s, 70s, and early 80s might have been a little ugly, but they worked! Appliance cars such as these especially need real bumpers. The only cars that should be built without bumpers are sports cars. This was the case for the most part until the late 1980s. I actually liked the diving boards on my 1987 E30, great for driving in traffic.
@P161911 now with M POWER!: They weren't really monsters until the 70's/early 80's, and honestly, I kinda like 'em.
With the metal bumper on the '85 RWD Fleetwood I used to drive, in a bona-fide tap, the idiot Oregonion stopped on a green light, making a right-hand turn, to let someone turning left from the opposite direction go first, I managed to do $600 in damage to her Civic's painted bumper.
The dime-sized spot of paint left on mine came off with a fingernail.
Edited by that ain't the way to have fun, son at 08/06/09 11:06 AM
that ain't the way to have fun, son was starred
that ain't the way to have fun, son was unstarred
I don't get it. I was backed into in a parking garage in Royal Oak. I was in a demo 2008 Chevy Malibu. The guy was drunk and backed up close to what the police believe to be 10mph, maybe a little faster and it cost.... wait for it... $471.36 to replace at a Chevy body shop. Not $3,400 Whats the deal?
Al Navarro promoted this comment
Prawo Jazdy and The Velocity Trumpets: I miss Deartháir II was starred
Prawo Jazdy and The Velocity Trumpets: I miss Deartháir II was unstarred
It's doubtful you can have a front end that's easy to fix AND pretty. The big protruding rubber bumpers of yore got the job done, but I can't imagine them looking good on anything modern, unless of course it's a truck or SUV.
Clearly front and rear designs - particularly those of high-volume mainstream sedans and wagons - are determined by occupant and pedestrian safety first, followed by the amount of money automakers need to throw at collision repair industry so they have a reliable stream of business. That latter bit keeps noses and butts nice and pretty...and ridiculously expensive to fix if busted up even at the lowest of speeds.
The best advice I can give is drive defensively, brake early, and avoid close proximity with other vehicles whenever possible. Not easy in cities, but not impossible either.
@bmoreDLJ: I would settle for bumper covers that are less prone to scratching than the fragile things found on most cars nowadays. "Why bother" bumpers, I call 'em.
08/06/09
1. These cars shown above don't have bumpers. They have a section of the nose and tail which are safety zones for pedestrians. They're filled with nerf material and covered in flexy/brittle plastic so soccer moms can continue taking prozacs, ignoring their kids, and letting them run around in and out of the roadways like little crack-head godzillas.
2. They could make solid steel/rubber bumpers that protruded through or sat flush with the match-painted flexy bodywork ... it would protect the expensive paint job and body, and headlights, but it would violate that whole "safe to hit pedestrians" thing - see point #1.
3. Someone earlier mentioned that only trucks and SUVs have real bumpers. Wrong. Most of the new (since 2000) trucks have a "bumper" (in quotes) which actually consists of a double-layer of aluminum foil which is chromed and sold for well in excess of $600. The get dinged and dented and warped so easily that it really is meaningless to have them (one particularly good example is the 1999 onward Ford Super-duty hunk-o-foil). The newest trucks have chromed tinfoil... and most SUVs (since the word was invented by marketingtards in the early 90's) also don't have bumpers at all (see point #1).
4. Older convertible sports cars (Porsches, Triumphs, MGs, Alfas, etc...) all had chromed steel or steel and rubber bumpers which the owners/customizers were quick to trim, shave, paint or frequently remove... the end result was that a bump would cause a ding or a scrape or a crunch and a large amount of bodywork, but that was the price to pay for a better looking car. A perfect example is the AC Ace versus the Shelby Cobra. One had bumperettes, one didn't.
08/06/09
08/06/09
And bravo.
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
And the Maxima, which I'd say has the heaviest damage by far somehow manages to be so cheap? I find it hard to believe that the parts alone are going to be that cheap. Headlights alone run $600+ easily.
But assuming these figures are legitimate either Americans are trying to make up for losses by charging more for parts or there's structural damage not visible in these photos.
08/06/09
I got rear ended in my Audi TT a few years back. It appeared to be "but a scratch", but when they took the bumper cover off the underlying structure was also damaged.
And sorry all you retro bumper people...the TT is one car that would look hideous with oldschool bumpers, IMHO.
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
And I'd definitely prefer it in a sub-20-mph collision.
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
A while back, my dad got rear ended in his Volvo 940. Damage to the Civic that hit him included the bumper, grill, lights, fenders, and hood. Damage to the 940 ... replace the cover. $490, paid by the other guy, with just over half of that going to paint and labor.
That said, it's all a matter of where it hit too. I was rear offset hit by an Accord a few years back in my 745, and that was over $2800 in damage (aluminum tailgate + rear quarter panel damage). I was OK with used parts, and the body shop worked with their insurance company, so the bill was just over $2300 instead. That said, I loved his excuse for hitting me. "I thought you were going to run the red light."
08/06/09
How is the Accord "marginal"? I had to induce a cornea-bursting squint for like 30 seconds, which is the longest amount of time I've ever looked at a new Accord on purpose, just to find the little discolored strip. I reckon that fix involves five bucks and a trip to Auto Zone for some Dupli-Color.
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
I work in a parts dept and the price of bumper cover for a Crown Vic went from around $400 to about $800 in the past four years! A design that hasn't changed for the longest time gets doubled for no apparent reason. I could see it if they quit breaking and were made of some amazing material but they haven't changed it at all, I know, I've compared the old to the new.
I understand that every one is out there to make money, but some of it is just stupid.
08/06/09
And whose brilliant idea was it to paint the damn things? Now you can't even breathe on them without scratching them. The old kind with chrome or rubber might have been uglier, but at least they worked.
08/06/09
You're right. They shouldn't even call them bumpers. They should just call them Crumple Zones and remove any pretense.
08/06/09
08/06/09
The battering rams of the 1960s, 70s, and early 80s might have been a little ugly, but they worked! Appliance cars such as these especially need real bumpers. The only cars that should be built without bumpers are sports cars. This was the case for the most part until the late 1980s. I actually liked the diving boards on my 1987 E30, great for driving in traffic.
08/06/09
With the metal bumper on the '85 RWD Fleetwood I used to drive, in a bona-fide tap, the idiot Oregonion stopped on a green light, making a right-hand turn, to let someone turning left from the opposite direction go first, I managed to do $600 in damage to her Civic's painted bumper.
The dime-sized spot of paint left on mine came off with a fingernail.
08/06/09
08/06/09
Clearly front and rear designs - particularly those of high-volume mainstream sedans and wagons - are determined by occupant and pedestrian safety first, followed by the amount of money automakers need to throw at collision repair industry so they have a reliable stream of business. That latter bit keeps noses and butts nice and pretty...and ridiculously expensive to fix if busted up even at the lowest of speeds.
The best advice I can give is drive defensively, brake early, and avoid close proximity with other vehicles whenever possible. Not easy in cities, but not impossible either.
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
[OMBUDSMAN'S NOTE: I fixed it for ya.]
08/07/09