Ford F-150 rates 'poor' in bumper tests Cheap Bumpers

 

"These tests by the IIHS are conducted to determine cost estimates to repair damage incurred in low speed bumper impact tests and are not related to occupant safety."

let's be clear that this is not a safety test, but a cost of repairs test. of course that is what insurance companies care about. but if you back your truck into a pole and smash the tailgate, you have to expect to pay a few bucks to replace it. i wonder if they'll give me a discount since i have a reverse sensing system. i doubt it...

 

The truck is worth more..that's why the cost is higher.

 

The pole test is by far the worse test on a bumper... the simple fact that the bumper is steel and hitting a solid object with no give (such as the pole) it's going to cause some kind of damage. I don't see people constantly backing up into poles so the majority of us don't need to worry.

I saw the video of the test and the bumper does exactly what it was supposed to. The brackets are designed to bend and the bumper swings under the rear box. My sister owns a Ranger with the exact same set-up. She was parked in the lot at school and somone backed into her truck. The bumper swung down and it saved both the bumper and box from any damage. 20 bucks for 2 brackets and it was fixed.

If they were testing for 40mph crash worthness and it did poor then I'd worry. For something like a 5mph test there really isn't anything to worry about.

 

This is in line with freddy40's post about his wife's minor hit. I thought at that time he listed too much damage for a low speed hit. I'll venture a guess that had he not fixed it himself that the cost would be way up for repairs.

It's one thing to make is gracefully crumple in an accident to save stress on the occupants, and another to do major damage in a low speed hit.

 

Many newer vehicles are deliberately designed with body parts that "crush", the purpose being to sacrifice parts to save people.

A Toyota salesman showed me how the new Tacoma has "breakaway" motor mounts. That lets the motor drop down on the highway in a frontal crash - instead of slamming through the firewall onto the driver. If the motor drops out in a crash where the airbag would have been enough - it's really gonna cost ya.

I have seen posts from people that had to pay tow bills after minor accidents because of the airbags deploying and the seatbelts locking. The result is a much higher repair for a relatively minor accident.

Manufacturers aren't engineering these things into vehicles to save money, it costs a lot of money for them to do it. We, the consumer, have let them know that safety is important. We will have to pay the price in increased costs for the accidents we have.

 

I don't know about Ya'll but I expect more from a bumper. I have a 1995 F150 and my bumpers withstand much more than the new model appears to. I've hit plenty of stationary objects and I have nothing more than a couple good sized dents in the bumper. Mine are tough and I would think they all should be.

 

I think $1500 for backing into a pole at 5 mph is excessive.

Maybe Ford should have made that tailgate emblem bigger.

 

"The F-150 is all new, but its bumpers are just as flimsy as before and even a little bit worse,"

I had an accident about two months ago where someone pulled out in front of me trying to make a left before I cleared the signal. I hit him going 45 MPH and it did $3800 damage. I do not consider this excessive damage. If I would have been in a passenger car it would have been totalled. I know this is not the same test but they do run the offset crash test and here is what my '98 looked like. No frame damage, no damage to anything inside the engine compartment.

I needed a new hood, bumper, fender, grill and headlight.

 

... and quarterpanel.

EDIT:
Disregard... I noticed you put fender in there.

 

By the way, here is what it looks like after the repairs!

 

These are the actually repair costs for specific impacts: IIHA Report. Disgraceful

I think it's pretty pitiful and so is Ford's response.

The purpose of a bumper is to protect the more fragile and expensive cosmetics of the body during low speed impacts. Having to actually replace the bumper and more after a 5 mph crash, to me, indicates a very poor design; that the bumper itself is just there for cosmetic purposes. It's supposed to be a truck!!!

We're not just talking about backing into poles here either. These tests included barriers, which are real world collisions. Also: Since the reverse sensing system is optional rather than standard, there are going to be quite a few of these little accidents. The report also points out that after each of the tests, the bumper had to be replaced. I'm beginning to wonder if Ford designed these bumpers to fail 0.1 mph above to the 2.5 mph impact standards required by law just so they could sell more bumpers.

If you're in a parking lot fender bender with each vehicle traveling 2.5 mph, you should not suffer $1,478 in damage. The ****in' minivan is tougher than the truck in these tests.

 

I must say, this does have me a little bit concerned. Although, the 35-40mph crash test is what I am really waiting anxiously to see. Hopefully it will be done before my truck is built (beginning of Feb or so) so I will have peace of mind.

I am hoping and trusting that ford is true to their word that this truck is the best built and safest they have ever made.


We'll see

 

if you read the article closely you will notice that the 2.5 mph standards do not apply to trucks.

 

THe bumpers are crush zones.
Would you rather the bumper hold up, but damage other hidden components?