New bumpers knocked


By Harry Stoffer
Automotive News / September 08, 2003

WASHINGTON -- Some automakers are putting worse bumpers on redesigned vehicles than they did on earlier versions of the models, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says.

According to results of the group's study, the 2004 Nissan Quest sustained more than $4,500 in damage in four 5-mph bumper tests and got the institute's "poor" rating. The 1999 Quest's damage was less than $1,500. Repair costs were all adjusted for inflation.

The institute says the 2003 Saab 9-3 ($3,013 in damage) was worse than the 1999 model ($2,362) and earned the "marginal" rating. The 2004 Toyota Sienna ($3,207) was worse than the 1998 ($2,441) and also was rated marginal.

The Infiniti G35 sustained the most damage, an average of $1,481 in each of four crash tests on the front and rear bumpers to simulate common mishaps in commuter traffic and parking lots.

"The G35's bumpers are a disaster," Adrian Lund, chief operating officer for the Institute, said in a release. In one test backing the luxury car into a pole, "there was extensive damage to body panels including a crushed trunk lid and floor pan," Lund said.

Only the Mazda6 sedan performed reasonably well, earning an "acceptable" rating with an average of $342 in each of the four crashes.

The bumpers on the Mazda6 was designed to absorb energy and keep it away from the body, the Institute said.

The institute conducts the tests and publicizes the results to pressure automakers into making stronger bumpers.

 

Who needs better bumpers anyway, less people have accidents now then they used too............................................... .............................

 

lol riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

There is honestly something not solid looking about the Nissan cars, I guess this is it.

 

i had an accident in my dad oldsmobile alero...was at a light and a chick slammed into my rear...shock was hard...but i had just a few scratchs...really fuking solid...just about the only good quality of that POS

 

Horseshit ... They publicize those results because the insurance companies hate having to pay out $4k because someone taps a G35's bumper.

The guy that wrote that article should spend more than 30 seconds considering the source of those "facts" and what motive the IIHS has for doing it and publishing them.

Definitely not hating on you Gav ... This kind of blatantly biased crap posing as objective testing pisses me off.

 

word heard about it disgrace

 

Nissan is making nice new designs but cutting hella costs. This is not surprising at all.

 

Shit, im going ot buy a G35 coupe... that sux for my insurnace

 

the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

The institute conducts the tests and publicizes the results to pressure automakers into making stronger bumpers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Uhm isn't the point of pressuring the automakers to make stronger bumpers so they will be able to withstand crashes and therefore not need such costly repairs?

Think he has his facts straight.

 

Not when the premise is "safety" but the real reason is because they are a consortium of insurance companies that are trying to make a bigger profit.

 

didnt i say this before the car even came out? its fucking stupid the way they designed the rear bumper on that car.

 

From http://www.acura-cl.com/forums/showt...335#post897335


I posted a pic highlighting what i meant to... i'll find it when i get home and repost.

 

YUP…. I remember that and was going to post it, but you beat me.

The design of that rear bumper is horrible and you can see just by looking at it what will happen in light bump.
A 5MPH bump in a parking lot with a PLASTIC bumper should NOT bend the side body panels, but it does on the G35.

Shawn S

 

HA...HA...

It looks like my opinion hasn't changed much in the last year.

 

interior is as.


that whole bending of the rear quarters thing makes me really wary of that car.... those are the single most expensive pieces of the car to fix.

the front quarters are one thing... but the rear is a whole other story... ESPECIALLY on a coupe.

 

lol you guys are being stupid... "sucks for my insurance"


IT SUCKS FOR YOU...

First of all... the all to common place bump on the rear end (someone trying to parallel park behind you for instance) could easily destroy your rear body panels.

This means more than HALF of your cars body will have to be painted and fixed or bondod depending on what your insurance company will cover.

That sucks FOR YOU.

 

HA...HA... I KILL ME....

 

Not to mention that once the insurance claims start coming in, the collision premiums for this car will go up-up-up to compensate for their losses.

 

this is what im takling bout...s ee this pic:



see how the rear bumper cuts up and runs a vertical parallel to the rear quarter?

the bumper has nowhere to go horizontally without BENDING METAL.


NOW... look at how much metal were talking about here

 

ok here...

here is where the problem occurs. a TAP on the bumper will bend metal here:



if the bending in that area is bad enough (3mph+ collision id guess) you will PROBABLY need to have the panel replaced and you will definately have to have it painted even if it is fixable.

look at how much metal has to be changed here:



now... if your car is anything but black (and even if it is as i can attest) they will definately need to blend the paint into unchanged panels... this means EACH HALF SIDE OF YOUR CAR WILL BE SPRAYED WITH NEW PAINT.

if your car is say... silver... or white pearl... or blue... your gonna have a fuck of a time getting the paint to match or be anywhere close to factory.



the yellow area would be new paint and new panel... the green would be where paint is blended with old.

and this would be on BOTH SIDES of your car.


sounds like fun eh? I think its a much bigger problem for the owner than yall chalk it up to be

 

oh and dont forget this rear end collision might just fuck your bumper too... and if it doesn they will sitll blend it a bti....

so essentially your talking about painting the ENTIRE back 3/4 of the car for what would have been nothing to cry over.

 

Good thing I decided on an a4 and not a g35! Any word on how much damage an a4 received?

 

and here we have exhibit no 2

the cl bumper



it is straight cut... a bump on the rear end simply slides the bumper forwards. leaving it free from impact with any other portion of the body.

the only way a rear end collision is going to hurt anything but the bumper is if the other car actually makes impact with your trunk... or if the other vehicle dives under your car pushing your bumper UP.

both of those scenarios could only occur at speed tho. not from a minor collision or even a small bump

 

the A4 looks like it would also be obliterated by a rear end collision



the only thing the A4 has going for it is because it is a sedan, the rear panels cover much less surface area.

 

also since the a4 has that horizontal cut across the bumper where it actually changes to vertical with the rear quarter... its possible that a collision would just push the bottom portion of the bumper down and the upper portion in.

i cant say for sure with the a4.

 

nice job soopa


great clarification

 

Soopa that was awesome. The cheap way out never works in the long run...

 

The article just says G35... I am guessing they tested the Sedan as it went up against the Mazda 6. The G35 sedan and coupe have totally different rear ends.

BTW... Soopa. If the bumper is properly designed it will pop out of the sheet metal creases. Many cars have a design similar to the G35c in the back. My friends A6 has a similar design to the A4 and the plastic popped out when he was rear ended.

All of this hating on the G35c is getting tiring BTW

 

cus: maybe it should... but clearly it doesnt.

the G35 sedan is even worse...

 

My parents have a 99 Maxima - They got rear ended by a 80's Camry on the highway about a year ago. The bumper totally crumpled the rear metal on the side like you pointed out. It only was a 10 mph collision too, and the entire back had to be replaced. The Camry had nothing but a scratch BTW

 

ya know I had a 98 Eclipse GST and the rear bumper attached in a way that is very similar to the way the G35's does with the vertical contact area between bumper and bodypanel. I got rear ended in that car twice...hard..and it never bent the rear quarters. Not saying this would be the case with the G35, but having this design alone does not always lead to bent quarters on impact. Just a thought.

 

did they change the bumper from 01 to 02, cause mine isn't a straight cut around the back. look up at the banner, you can clearly see where the bumper would impact the fender in a collision. It's definitely not as bad as the G35 though.

 

danny it only has a slight curve where it goes up to meet trunk lid... the angle is still close to horizontal and the bumper slides horizontally. i can testify to that several time sover.

 

scroll up and you can see it more clearly on the banner

 

defend it all you want. but here you have the evidence from the INS companies...

and there you have the details as to why it sucks.

 

yeah I saw that on mine, but the way you drew the yellow line on yours looked different, and I couldn't make out the curve on your black car. I was just curious.

 

Did Nissan even test this out while they were designing the car?? If this is true i can't believe they let it out like that.

 

The only thing I saw from their report was a high cost for repair...where do they say the cost is due to rear quarter panel replacement?

I'm not defending, I'm just seeing conclusions being drawn without any factual foundation to back the conclusions up. If there is info from that report that I am missing here, please post it. I only read from the posts in this thread that the cost was high to fix the bumper, so therefore it must be because the quarter panels were damaged. This cannot be assumed...facts needed.

 

For all we know there are guides underneath the vertical area where the bumper attaches that could push the bumper out and over the quarter panels on impact.

Honestly the reason I end up questioning stuff like this is because no one else here does. Everyone's so hell bent on trashing the G35 around here, they pounce on anything they can get their paws on that will make it look like a lesser alternative to the CL. Take DarrinB for example with his 'pisses on Nissan's' over his avatar....and ShawnS making outrageous and exaggerated statements regarding the car's interior. These guys have a chip on their shoulder about Nissan and when threads like this pop up they're on it like flies on shit...usually checking reason at the door... I find it entertaining to swat at them now and then.

 

Carlos Ghosen was CLEAR when he made Nissan profitable. Share platforms and parts, make exciting looking cars, screw everything else. And his plan has worked, Nissan is profitable, people are buying nice looking cars that are no better quality wise than previous models. Sell, Sell, Sell lots of new cars and trucks.

From my understanding Phase II of the plan is to improve quality and sell more expensive, profit making cars. They are hoping to keep Nissan people from jumping to Lexus and BMW and instead to Infintiti.