Notices
Evo General Discuss any generalized technical Evo related topics that may not fit into the other forums. Please do not post tech and rumor threads here.
Sponsored by: RavSpec - JDM Wheels Central

Downsides of not having a front crash beam?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 11:22 AM
  #31  
mdsevo06's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (41)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 1
From: San Diego
Claim adjusters are not stupid, they know what to look for. And if they did miss it, the body shop would catch it. There better ways to save weight, without sacrificing safety.
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 11:46 AM
  #32  
sleeper3's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte, NC
While we're at it, let's just take out the airbags and seat belts to save weight, both of those are overrated anyway.
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 11:48 AM
  #33  
sleeper3's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte, NC
Originally Posted by EVO316
this may be a stooopid question, but why. lets say you hit a pole straight on, wouldn't it be the same if you were at stock height or lowered. now hitting an object that would have been level at stock height compared to being higher when lowered then yes it would be useless. am i just not getting it???
It has more to do with situations like a head on collision. If you want a SUV to climb your hood and into your windshield, by all means, lower your Evo.
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 12:06 PM
  #34  
WongFu's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
From: Ft. Jackson/Columbia
The crush beam is totaly usless. Its been rated to take a hit at 12 mph thats it. Did you know its only on USDM Evo's? Here in germany they dont come with them at all. The 12 mph thing was told to me by a mitsu tech guy.
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 12:18 PM
  #35  
A-Zimm's Avatar
Newbie
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
From: South Carolina
What if you don't have comprehensive insurance (I drive a lancer...no point)? Would the other person's insurance (assuming they are at fault) not pay for it either? Just wondering, mine is still on the car BTW.
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 12:27 PM
  #36  
V.8MR's Avatar
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,246
Likes: 233
From: STL
DEATH.
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 12:30 PM
  #37  
Aikido's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
From: HBG, PA
americas highway safety regs are alot different from other parts of the world so you make ur point. But the point being made here is that if you don't have it no insurance coverage after an accident. I would love to see your arguement about germany cars with your claims representive when they deny you coverage.
Originally Posted by WongFu
The crush beam is totaly usless. Its been rated to take a hit at 12 mph thats it. Did you know its only on USDM Evo's? Here in germany they dont come with them at all. The 12 mph thing was told to me by a mitsu tech guy.
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 01:18 PM
  #38  
EVOEMS's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
From: Saint Louis, MO. USA
If someone hits you, it is their repsponsibility to make your car as it was prior to the accident, wether it is stock/legal or not. If the other guy is at fault his insurance will have to fix the car. (former claims adjuster)
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 01:25 PM
  #39  
PHDoc19's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
From: The Firing Range
Originally Posted by EVOEMS
If someone hits you, it is their repsponsibility to make your car as it was prior to the accident, wether it is stock/legal or not. If the other guy is at fault his insurance will have to fix the car. (former claims adjuster)
It really helps to have receipts for everything that you have added also. Then there is little room for argument from the other guy's adjuster.
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 02:02 PM
  #40  
letMeIn's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,148
Likes: 4
From: Crooklyn, Ny / Old Bridge, Nj
Isn't crash been only there to protect from low speed crahes ?? Just like rear crash beam. For example while you are parked and someone hits yoi while backing.

I just don't see how it protects the safety of the driver as some of you have suggested.

If your Evo is a daily driver, I wouldn't take it off, but if its a weekend car I would to save weight. I am keeping my rear crash beam, but I'm taking off the front, as well as the AC unit and replacing stock battery to a 3lb battery. Its not a daily driven car tho
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 03:19 PM
  #41  
WongFu's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
From: Ft. Jackson/Columbia
Originally Posted by Aikido
americas highway safety regs are alot different from other parts of the world so you make ur point. But the point being made here is that if you don't have it no insurance coverage after an accident. I would love to see your arguement about germany cars with your claims representive when they deny you coverage.
Well not a problem cause my car is in the shop with 13k worth of front end damage at the moment. with an american insurance. Road and track mag did a report about the evo many years ago stating that any front end damage will cost tons. And also it said the crush beam was nonfunctional over 20mph.
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 04:00 PM
  #42  
Jeff_Jeske's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (66)
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,358
Likes: 6
From: On the track
I was stupid and took mine off my 2003 EVO. Later that year I clobbered the back side of a track corner curb with the drivers side front wheel. The impact wasn't even that great but I still ended up with small stress dents around my moon roof. I believe keeping a front bar would have prevented this.

Rolling around without the front bar causes more side to side flex. It has to be as functinal if not more functional then the FSTB or tie bars.

I know everyone claims those thing are only rated for 5-15mph but when you see serious crashes... endos and flips that front bar alwayes seems to stay attached. I wouldn't call distributing impact forces worthless.

I'm also pretty sure it would prevent quite a bit of damage if you happened to lose control and tag a object of some kind: Road reflector, mail box, light pole, small tree, bump the rear bumper of another car, or simply nose planting in a ditch or snow bank.

Funny how you guys are willing to spend money on a big **** FMIC (not needed) and yet remove a functional shoring device that came free with the car.
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 04:52 PM
  #43  
binarysleep's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
From: Igloo
The "bumper" is what is designed to withstand a low speed impact. The bumper only protects the crash beam and car internals.

As stated earlier, the crash beam distributes crash force across the entire front of your car, minimizing cabin protrusion in catastrophic accidents. Removing the crash beam might also make your SRS system more likely to prematurely deploy in low speed accidents. So a fender bender might force you to replace both airbags

If you don't mind the idea of loosing your legs, then remove the crash beam.
Old Jan 15, 2008 | 07:07 PM
  #44  
ImJoey's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (20)
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 681
Likes: 0
From: South Florida
Whats the actual weight of the front crash beam anyway? I plan on leaving mine on for awhile
Old Jan 16, 2008 | 04:23 PM
  #45  
bluebyu36's Avatar
Evolved Member
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,669
Likes: 0
From: new york
Originally Posted by Solo II Evo
1-800-947-AUTO. Ask the Gecko and let us know how that conversation goes.

You will simply not get a check for the damage to your car. Period.
lol, when i crashed my evo,once and they came to inspect it this guy did not know his *** from his elbow,he asked me why i have a rad,in the front of my bumper,why the hell would i call my insurance company and snitch on myself and tell them i have no front crashbar ...by the way geico sucks thats your problem wright there



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:28 PM.