Downsides of not having a front crash beam?
#33
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???
#34
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.
#35
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.
#37
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.
#38
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)
#39
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.
#40
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
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
#41
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.
#42
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.
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.
#43
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.
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.
#45
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