 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Jeep / December 2004SUVs and Rollovers
Here's an article in this morning's Washington Post about the danger of SUV rollover accidents (especially involving teens.) There's a gruesome picture of a Ford Explorer with its passenger compartment completely mashed in: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6760241/ Now, here's my dumb question: Wouldn't a single CJ-size roll bar inside the passenger compartment of most SUVs dramatically reduce the likelihood of a fatality or horrible injury from a rollover crash? Looking at the Ford Explorer photo, it's easy to picture the passenger compartment staying intact if it had been supported by a single bar of thick steel between the front and second row of seats. I've been lucky enough never to roll, but I've either directly seen or observed the aftermath of several CJ, YJ, and TJ rollovers, and in every case, the driver was fine, except for some minor bruising and scratches. Admittedly this was at low off-road speeds, but it was also over much nastier terrain than you find on the road (big, sharp boulders, 30+ degree inclines, etc.) I see lots of folks shelling out thousands of dollars for gizmos like side curtain airbags, dynamic stability control, ABS, etc., in their expensive luxury SUVs. Wouldn't $600 worth of steel and welding work be a much better investment? I can't believe that the SUV manufacturers with the sterling safety records, such as Volvo and BMW, haven't put a simple roll bar in their passenger compartments. Ok, sure, an interior roll bar would be a bit unsightly in your $40,000 luxury ego-feeding chariot. So wrap the damn thing in leather and wood paneling and call it an "elegant interior appointment." A J**P is NOT a suvee. Snow... > Here's an article in this morning's Washington Post about the danger of > SUV rollover accidents (especially involving teens.) There's a [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > luxury ego-feeding chariot. So wrap the damn thing in leather and wood > paneling and call it an "elegant interior appointment." >I've been lucky enough never to roll, but I've either directly seen or >observed the aftermath of several CJ, YJ, and TJ rollovers, and in >every case, the driver was fine, except for some minor bruising and >scratches. Admittedly this was at low off-road speeds, but it was >also over much nastier terrain than you find on the road (big, sharp >boulders, 30+ degree inclines, etc.) http://www.wcelectric.com/images/jan04sale12.jpg http://www.wcelectric.com/images/jan04sale12.jpg I wouldn't rely on any stock Jeep CJ, YJ, or TJ roll bars to protect me in a highspeed rollover... >>I've been lucky enough never to roll, but I've either directly seen or >>observed the aftermath of several CJ, YJ, and TJ rollovers, and in [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >http://www.wcelectric.com/images/jan04sale12.jpg >http://www.wcelectric.com/images/jan04sale12.jpg er opps second link should have been: http://www.wcelectric.com/images/jan04sale14.jpg >I wouldn't rely on any stock Jeep CJ, YJ, or TJ roll bars to protect >me in a highspeed rollover... It would probably cut the fatal and serious injury count by quite a high margin though. Rollbars are a wonderful thing. > >I wouldn't rely on any stock Jeep CJ, YJ, or TJ roll bars to protect > >me in a highspeed rollover... >It would probably cut the fatal and serious injury count by quite a high >margin though. Rollbars are a wonderful thing. With the stock bars I have serious doubts... That's why we ALL add full cages: http://www.stu-offroad.com/rollcage/roll-4.htm God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:LWHughes3rd@aol.com http://www.billhughes.com/ > >It would probably cut the fatal and serious injury count by quite a high > >margin though. Rollbars are a wonderful thing. > > With the stock bars I have serious doubts... Now THAT is a well-built cage. Either way, any properly mounted rollbar is better than no rollbar, especially given the relatively low cost of install. Thanks for the link, Bill ...when I get my welder I might take on a job like that. > That's why we ALL add full cages: > http://www.stu-offroad.com/rollcage/roll-4.htm > God Bless America, ?ill O|||||||O > mailto:LWHughes3rd@aol.com http://www.billhughes.com/ Did you click on the video of that roll? God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:LWHughes3rd@aol.com http://www.billhughes.com/ > Now THAT is a well-built cage. Either way, any properly mounted rollbar is > better than no rollbar, especially given the relatively low cost of install. > > Thanks for the link, Bill ...when I get my welder I might take on a job like > that. Ya, that's pretty intense. Another reason I mud and don't rockcrawl ... > Did you click on the video of that roll? > God Bless America, ?ill O|||||||O [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Thanks for the link, Bill ...when I get my welder I might take on a job like > > that. I would point out that the pix of the Explorer shows that the roof structure behind the driver is intact. This is the same area that would have the rollbar protecting you in the Jeep. Cliff pulled up a pix of a flattened Jeep, it has the same characteristic flattened windshield area as the Explorer. Both are typical of a rollover. My point is that unless you have the full front windshield rollbar and proper diagonal bracing, you are still at high risk in a rollover. > Here's an article in this morning's Washington Post about the danger of > SUV rollover accidents (especially involving teens.) There's a [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > luxury ego-feeding chariot. So wrap the damn thing in leather and wood > paneling and call it an "elegant interior appointment." You are very correct!! I am quite sure that without the custom cage I have I wouldnt be here today from my Moab roll. It was neither as long nor as hard as Tracie's was, but I pretty much landed on the top of the nose and the drives side corner of the windsheild frame. Stock roll bar would have bent like anything I am sure. Custom steel cage didnt budge a bit. The frame bent back, hit the cage and stopped. http://jbjeep.terahex.com/Moab03/Damages/images/P4110065.JPG However, the rear of the cage was still stock bars, and it got bent up bad enough that it had to be replaced. In this pic the Jeep is on nearly level ground so you can see how out of whack the rear part of the roll bar is. http://jbjeep.terahex.com/Moab03/Damages/images/P4080103.JPG >>I would point out that the pix of the Explorer shows that the roof >>structure behind the driver is intact. This is the same area that would [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >>My point is that unless you have the full front windshield rollbar and >>proper diagonal bracing, you are still at high risk in a rollover. It is against the law to drive drunk. The roll bar adds weight, the Environmental Protection Agency would rather you get better mileage than protect your life. The ABS on the Explorer releases the axles on turns where the inside wheel comes off the ground, and inertial pushes if over, as with all the Ford rollovers blamed on tire separation caused by low air pressure. God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:LWHughes3rd@aol.com http://www.billhughes.com/ > Here's an article in this morning's Washington Post about the danger of > SUV rollover accidents (especially involving teens.) There's a [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > luxury ego-feeding chariot. So wrap the damn thing in leather and wood > paneling and call it an "elegant interior appointment." I had a machanic tell me the reason the tires seperated on the Explorer was based on tire pressure. Firestone designed the tires for the Explorer and told Ford the tire pressure needed to be around 36 psi but Ford didn't like the ride because it rode like a truck.. Ford knew people wouldn't like the ride.. So Ford decided to change the psi on the tires to 30 to 32 psi which caused the tires to overheat and seperate.. Ben 95 YJ 2.5L > It is against the law to drive drunk. > The roll bar adds weight, the Environmental Protection Agency would [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >> luxury ego-feeding chariot. So wrap the damn thing in leather and wood >> paneling and call it an "elegant interior appointment." They changed the tire pressure after Firestone told them the tire would meet the new pressure specs. Your mechanic must work for Mr Goodwrench.... > I had a machanic tell me the reason the tires seperated on the Explorer was > based on tire pressure. Firestone designed the tires for the Explorer and [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > >> luxury ego-feeding chariot. So wrap the damn thing in leather and wood > >> paneling and call it an "elegant interior appointment." I've never heard Firestone took on the responsibility for the low tire pressure. Have a site? God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:LWHughes3rd@aol.com http://www.billhughes.com/ > They changed the tire pressure after Firestone told them the tire would meet > the new pressure specs. Your mechanic must work for Mr Goodwrench.... I'll google it for you, but I don't have a site offhand. I remember a report on the local news radio station about it. We get a lot of auto news in Detroit. I distinctly remember that it was reported that Firestone assured Ford that the tires would meet the pressure specs. > I've never heard Firestone took on the responsibility for the low > tire pressure. Have a site? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > They changed the tire pressure after Firestone told them the tire would meet > > the new pressure specs. Your mechanic must work for Mr Goodwrench.... http://www.car-accidents.com/pages/9_firestone/firestone_overview.html > I'll google it for you, but I don't have a site offhand. I remember a report > on the local news radio station about it. We get a lot of auto news in [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > meet > > > the new pressure specs. Your mechanic must work for Mr Goodwrench.... "Bridgestone argued that under inflated tires may have played a role in the accidents and stated that a tire pressure of 30 psi was needed." God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:LWHughes3rd@aol.com http://www.billhughes.com/ > http://www.car-accidents.com/pages/9_firestone/firestone_overview.html "Ford pointed out from 1995 to 1997, a rival company Goodyear also supplied two million tires using the same specifications Firestone was using. Nearly 500,000 were equipped on Ford Explorers with any evidence of failure, according to Ford officials." > "Bridgestone argued that under inflated tires may have played a > role in the accidents and stated that a tire pressure of 30 psi was [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > http://www.car-accidents.com/pages/9_firestone/firestone_overview.html That's Goodyear's recommendation. As far as I know Bridgestone/Firestone never went along with Ford's door jam sticker recommendation. "Ford recommended 26 psi for Explorer tires": http://www.e-z.net/~ts/Firestone.htm I use forty pounds on my full sized Bronco, which is lighter than your TJ. God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:LWHughes3rd@aol.com http://www.billhughes.com/ > "Ford pointed out from 1995 to 1997, a rival company Goodyear also supplied > two million tires using the same specifications Firestone was using. Nearly > 500,000 were equipped on Ford Explorers with any evidence of failure, > according to Ford officials." The report I heard was, Bridgestone/Firestone claimed their tires met the specifications as required by Ford, including operating tire pressures. Until, of course, their tires started coming apart. > That's Goodyear's recommendation. As far as I know > Bridgestone/Firestone never went along with Ford's door jam sticker [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > 500,000 were equipped on Ford Explorers with any evidence of failure, > > according to Ford officials." Yes this is true except Ford did not like the harsh ride of so they took it upon themselves to reduce the tire pressure recommended by B/S. The majority of all the tire failures were on Fords a very small percentage were on other Manufacturers vehicles and the probable failure in those cases was due to low tire pressure. B/S had hundreds of thousands of their tires on every make and model so why did Ford have the majority of the problems. The real issue was Ford lowering the tire pressure standards for a softer ride and in several court cases Ford was found at fault not B/F. Do a survey some time and find out how many people actually check their tire pressure. I read an article in Motor Week some years ago and they said it is the least checked maintenance item for all Autos and if I was a betting man I would lay odds that some of the blame for Fords muck-up is due to operator error. My 2 Cents HarryS > The report I heard was, Bridgestone/Firestone claimed their tires met the > specifications as required by Ford, including operating tire pressures. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> > 500,000 were equipped on Ford Explorers with any evidence of failure, >> > according to Ford officials." > Yes this is true except Ford did not like the harsh ride of so they took it > upon themselves to reduce the tire pressure recommended by B/S. The > majority of all the tire failures were on Fords a very small percentage were > on other Manufacturers vehicles and the probable failure in those cases was > due to low tire pressure. B/S had hundreds of thousands of their tires on > every make and model so why did Ford have the majority of the problems. You misread...it wasn't simply a case of Ford lowering the recommended pressures without Firestone's approval or knowledge. Manufacturers provide the specs required of a supplier's product, and the supplier tells the manufacturer if X product will meet those specs. B/S told Ford that the lower pressures Ford wanted were within the operational specs of the Firestone tires in question. The > real issue was Ford lowering the tire pressure standards for a softer ride > and in several court cases Ford was found at fault not B/F. Please cite? > Do a survey some time and find out how many people actually check their tire > pressure. I read an article in Motor Week some years ago and they said it > is the least checked maintenance item for all Autos and if I was a betting > man I would lay odds that some of the blame for Fords muck-up is due to > operator error. Some? How about "most?" > Now, here's my dumb question: Wouldn't a single CJ-size roll bar > inside the passenger compartment of most SUVs dramatically reduce the > likelihood of a fatality or horrible injury from a rollover crash? Not as much as not being an inexperienced and drunk teenager behind the wheel. Rollbars add weight. This would only ADD to the stability problems, especially when combined with inexperienced drivers and alcohol. Rollbars added to existing vehicles also loses interior space and, potentially, increases the risk of head injury due to intruding on that space. A vehicle designed with a better rollover cage would of course be better but would raise the top-heavy aspects of it. > Looking at the Ford Explorer photo, Without appreciating the actual accident conditions it's rather pointless to speculate. The flip-over in that case was made worse by an embankment and then sliding INTO the rear of another stopped vehicle. I happen to live in this area and have seen the site. An inexperienced drunk teenager overcorrected and lost control. Overengineering a vehicle is pointless if parents aren't going to avoid setting their children up to die. > I've been lucky enough never to roll, but I've either directly seen or > observed the aftermath of several CJ, YJ, and TJ rollovers, and in > every case, the driver was fine, except for some minor bruising and > scratches. Admittedly this was at low off-road speeds, but it was > also over much nastier terrain than you find on the road (big, sharp > boulders, 30+ degree inclines, etc.) Which have nothing in comparison to the accident in question. > I see lots of folks shelling out thousands of dollars for gizmos like > side curtain airbags, dynamic stability control, ABS, etc., in their > expensive luxury SUVs. Wouldn't $600 worth of steel and welding work > be a much better investment? I can't believe that the SUV > manufacturers with the sterling safety records, such as Volvo and BMW, > haven't put a simple roll bar in their passenger compartments. It's all about balance, quite literally, both financial and gravitational. > Ok, sure, an interior roll bar would be a bit unsightly in your $40,000 > luxury ego-feeding chariot. So wrap the damn thing in leather and wood > paneling and call it an "elegant interior appointment." Or stop driving things you can't be responsible enough to control. Jeeps don't have roll bars, they have sport bars. How very true, in this litigious society the roll bar manufacturer would have to guarantee their bar would not collapse after driving off a thousand foot cliff, not whether the sudden stop would have kill them, anyway. God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O mailto:LWHughes3rd@aol.com http://www.billhughes.com/ > Jeeps don't have roll bars, they have sport bars. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.