Front bumper idea

[iank]

Been thinking about a front bumper.

Current plan is to ask Dave how much it would be to make an adapted rear bumper, so I put my rear bumper up against the front of the buggy to see what would need to be done.

So the mods would be (I think)
1. spin the mounting brackets on the bottom mounts 180 degrees.
2. move in the top mount tubes to the same width as the bottoms, extend the top them up to the top plate (as shown by the bit of wood in the second pic) to and use another set of mounting brackets.
3. Probably (as I've not got the front suspension on yet (yes, I know I know I've been very slow)) shorten the actual bumper somewhat - it looks very long. I'd expect it to be roughly long enough to cover half of each tyre. Alan: how long is your bumper?

While I realise it's going to be quite high and will require a fair bit of thought about the front panel I think it will look pretty good, and provide a good 'floor' to reduce contact problems.

Any suggestions, problems with my plan?

 

[Phaeton]

Alan: how long is your bumper?

Bit personal Ian LOL anyway it's 49 inches OOOeeeeeeeerr which I think is 10 inches shorter than the rear one. My front only comes 1/2 way across the front tyres. I did speak to Dave about doing a single bar one some time ago before I made mine & he wasn't convinced it would look right, I think he prefers a bare front.

Alan...

 

[R1FREESTYLE]

Probably a silly question, but is a front bumper a requirement for the SVA, or does it just make things easier because it stops the inspector getting at the front wish, bones calipers, hubs ect with the dreaded balley thing?

Paul

 

[iank]

Probably a silly question, but is a front bumper a requirement for the SVA, or does it just make things easier because it stops the inspector getting at the front wish, bones calipers, hubs ect with the dreaded balley thing?

Paul

No a bumper isn't a requirement. But if you've got the SVA manual look at section 13 Annex 2. You will see it raises the 'floor line'.

Anything below the floor line (and above 2m FWIW) isn't tested for sharp bits which includes most of the front suspension.

 

[Phaeton]

On my SVA the tester said that the suspension components themselves were exempt therefore edges didn't matter. Although he wanted nut covers on the tops of the ball joints even though they are clearly suspension parts.There was quite a discussion as to whether the part on the right hi-lighted in red was suspension or not http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j81/g ... /SVA17.jpg I put some edging on just to be safe for the retest.

What was also interesting was they took the top rail of my bumper as the floor line & not the bottom rail, however had they been able to get between the rails then it woulsd have been the bottom one.

I also personally think it looks better with one fitted

Alan...

 

[iank]

Interesting comments Alan, amazing how they interpret the rules - I'd be interested in which part of the manual exempts suspension components, I know the seven boys have to cover loads of their suspension parts (coil over spring seats, every nut and bolt head, etc) to get through.

There is a big cone they are supposed to use to define the floor line (see the diagram I referenced above) which I would have thought would take the bottom tube. But hey, if they want to make it easier

I also think a front bumper will look rather dapper.

 

[Phaeton]

We saw the cone, but luckily it stayed in the corner, he did however use a spirit level off the top to decide whether the bit in red came into play or not. Hmalan is currently having one made by a friend & is having it about an inch higher to try to eliminate that issue.

He was going to fail it on the edges of the top suspension arm pivot where the shockabsorber attaches as he was testing it with the nose cone removed, once that was replaced they are covered but still suspension components to me, so I have no idea really.

Alan...