Elle <honda.lioness@gmail.com> wrote in news:a337a8ab-374f-4a4f-bb12-
4bf9217e4d1c@y17g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:

Around the mid-'60s, automakers started turning their bumpers into what
might be more accurately termed "decorative chrome bars". Insurance claims
for minor body damage began escalating about that time. Tired of the
claims, and alarmed by the sleek, form-fitting "bumpers" installed on cars
by the late '60s, insurance companies lobbied the federal government for
impact standards in order to limit minor damage claims.

From what I understand, the nascent safety zealots jumped in at the same
time, claiming that safety was being undermined by lots of people driving
around with broken headlights on account of the poor bumpers.

The result of their combined efforts was the 5-mph bumper impact
regulations, first imposed on the front bumpers of 1973 MY cars (except for
hardtops and convertibles, for some odd reason, which got one more year to
comply).

The first energy-absorbing bumpers were essentially simple "logs" mounted
on cylindrical struts that were filled with fluid of some kind, and were
designed to collapse under impact. These assemblies were bulky and heavy
(and usually ugly).

As the CAFE regulations of 1975 got tighter and tighter over the years,
automakers sought to make the original steel/aluminum battering-ram bumpers
lighter and lighter. This is why we now have hybrid flexible/rigid bumpers:
Light foam simply replaced the old heavy cylindrical struts.
Your rebar -- the original "bumper" prior to 1973 -- is now rigidly mounted
to the body shell, just like a 1972 model, but is now buried under a $400
plastic skin ($800 including paint).

It's my understanding that insurance companies never really did get their
hoped-for claims reductions: Better bumpers meant even /less/ careful
drivers. Minor impact damage went down, but just about every other kind of
collision damage went way up. A mixed blessing, to say the least.

good rule of thumb when stopped, always leave enough space in front of
your car that you can see at least the rear bumper of the car in front
of you, so that a rear impact won't totally squish your car. you might
even be able to duck sideways out of the way. practice in your
driveway at such things helps. stuff you need to know when you drive a
civic in a world of suvs.

   The design is nearly the same. The Golf had, near as I can tell, a
"0.5MPh bumper."

years ago, took my civic in to a local body shop in a big bucks
neighborhood which advertised itself as specializing in mercedes, bmw,
honda, acura, figured they would do a decent job on the front end i
stupidly mangled. I impressed upon him i wanted it done right, even if
it cost, not just patched together to look good for quick sale like
some folks do. last winter, i skid into a dinky little yard sign just
stuck into the dirt, no concrete or anything. it keels right over, of
course, minimal impact, but the front bumper is split apart. Mr.
classy body shop had neglected to replace the styrofoam under the
bumper cover, and without the support the cover had stretched/ripped
under the relatively gentle stress. i'm convinced it would have
survived otherwise. bottom line, the guy's little cheat saved him
probably $15 and cost me $200.

   I got some damage in a 10 or 15mph rear-ending at a yield sign. The
insurance company called a Honda dealership for a price for a
"replacement bumper" and paid me the $600 they quoted. When I went to
pick it up it was just the skin, unpainted, without the collapsible
supports. I ended up buying the supports and just repainting the
scratches on the original "bumper." We need to get some redefinitions of
what constitutes a "bumper."