Pedestrian safety vs bullbars
 

This got me thinking: Cars have been designed to increase pedestrian safety, yet bullbars are legal? Driving with one is like screaming: "I hate pedestrians!"
http://b.cdnbrm.com/images/prm/homep...bull-bar-3.jpg
http://mylicence.sa.gov.au/__data/as...bull-bar-1.jpg

Sorry if I'm ranting, but I see a lot of cars with shiny chrome pedestrian killers on their front bumper, not only on off-road vehicles, but even on econoboxes which never leave the city. I see absolutely no reason for them, except to inflict as much damage as possible in case of a collision. Or maybe it's part of the macho compensating-for-something image?

bring it to the attention of the insurance companies. They would like any excuse to increase liability costs.

the nih seems to agree w/you
Bull bars and vulnerable road users. - PubMed - NCBI

I personally like the look. My little brother and I were going to design one for my insight, until we remembered the frame is aluminum and we don't have the equipment necessary go weld to aluminum.

This topic comes up in the local media from time to time, but given the chances of hitting a Kangaroo (even in the city limits) vs hitting a pedestrian, there will always be demand for them. Most of the smaller bars won't do anything to protect you from an animal impact any way, there's often made from extremely thin steel. I took the bar off my first van and it was amazingly light probably less than 0.5mm tube, it's probably a softer collision than with the vehicle bumper.

There's also a move toward composite bars that work better at protecting the vehicle than alloy bars, while being pedestrian safety tested:

Pedestrian and Occupant Safety

That website also shows that vehicles fitted with steel/alloy front bars increase the risk of occupant injury.

These aren't generally welded to the frame, they use existing mounting points.

There will be a narrow range of cases between the pedestrian bouncing off and going splat like a bug. A bull bar will pull down the top of the range a little. At a lower speed they offer a hand-hold, so you don't slide under the wheels.

Most of the ones i see are just for looks. Thin metal, crappy welds, no upper mount points, no consideration for rigidity, etc.

They scream, "look at me, i bought cheap chinese crap and think im a hardass!"

Correct, but when you have to design one for a car that never had one, th let frame is the best spot to go to.

Knowing that they are a factor in inflicting needless damage to people, and are %99.9999999999 percent completely useless otherwise, personally I think they look like the mark of a complete cretin.

@freebeard, ok, lets try hitting you with one of these and see how that handhold theory works out...

this is a no-brainer guys.

I like impulsion-bumpers, they do look cool in a 4WD rig, and are actually useful in certain circumstances not just restricted to off-roading but also clearing a road from obstacles (no wonder they're widely used in American police cars). But it actually bothers me when I see a random econobox fitted with them just for the "urban cowboy" looks. BTW they might interfere in the deployment of airbags.

P-hack -- I'd failed to notice you were in the thread. I will refrain from sarcasm for the remainder...

I hope that's not A-B-A testing

...starting now.