[monley]

Thanks for your email.

Yes we are the makers of the Xrox bars and the Jimny is on our list of vehicle to do but it will only be happening in the new year. We have been designing them as quickly as we can and have done the most popular vehicle first but as we have had requests for the Suzuki we will be tackling it asap.



We do not sell to the public, so you will need to contact your local stockist at the time but I will keep your email address and let you know when they are released in 2011.

[Chop]

you need to harass opposite lock.

[monley]

mtbnboy who works at OL has been on to them since the start of the year and gets onto them on a weekly basis about the bar for the zooks.

[alien]

ask smiffkid also - his work used to be an OL store.

[neofitou]

Ive had crash testing done, it wanst too bad as they basically only tested our equipment on a jig with a seat and a centre console and didnt have to crash a whole car or anything. It was about $2k and was people hitting our stuff inside the car type testing, we only had to provide two samples.

[Fatzook]

Well thats not as bad as having to supply a car or something studip like that

[alien]

airbag certification requires a front-cut to smash into to make sure all the airbags still deploy in a crash... its pretty scientific how the mounts are made to collapse on impact to let the bar smash into the front of the car so the airbags still work... but at the same time does leave you questioning why even have a bar on there in the first place (other than to hold some spotties and an antenna).

[Fatzook]

I'd be more inclined to have a rigid bar with a semi-collapsable mount, so that it collapsed far enough to activate the sensor, but stoped at that point, transfering the load to the chassis.

Either way the car is a write when the bags deploy, so its 6 of one.....

[royce]

reckon youll find certification revolves more around still complying to adr's for crumple zones and energy absorption, I reckon a bar will set an airbag off quicker cause its a faster deceleration, though it will beat you up more cause of it

[steak_knife]

Fatzook wrote:

Either way the car is a write when the bags deploy, so its 6 of one.....

Where do you get that from, I have fitted & reprogrammed shit load's of air bag module's & harness's to car that have had FULL deployment & have been fixed..

[Fatzook]

steak_knife wrote:

Fatzook wrote:

Either way the car is a write when the bags deploy, so its 6 of one.....

Where do you get that from, I have fitted & reprogrammed shit load's of air bag module's & harness's to car that have had FULL deployment & have been fixed..

My swift took an impact at 60. The damage to the car was quite heavy, but the assessor said they would have repaired it if it were the base model with only 2 airbags. Cos its had 6, and full deployment, he said there was no chance.

I used to see that shit all the time at the austions. Lightly damaged new(ish) cars with full deployment. Stat writeoffs because the cost of 6 airbags, and module etc, labour was worth 50% of the vehicles value BEFORE the repairs were started.

Airbags are shit.

[steak_knife]

Fatzook wrote:

Airbags are shit.

Couldn't agree more, first few you remove scare the shit out of ya to.( live one's)

Whole harness's have to me replaced just for one wire or connector to.

[alien]

i agree too... i know theres tons of data to show they save lives, but IMO for offroad vehicles the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

[S13RR4]

alien wrote:

i agree too... i know theres tons of data to show they save lives, but IMO for offroad vehicles the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

would be beneficial to design something that can be turned off for offraod purposes and turned on for on road/ when high speed collision likely.

But a system like that would be more complicated and hence more probability of failure

[steak_knife]

S13RR4 wrote:

alien wrote:

i agree too... i know theres tons of data to show they save lives, but IMO for offroad vehicles the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

would be beneficial to design something that can be turned off for offraod purposes and turned on for on road/ when high speed collision likely.

But a system like that would be more complicated and hence more probability of failure

Bingo, some of us still do 100 in the bush, so speed sensor's are out, can't rely on the monkey behind the wheel to turn it back on again, so on they stay..

[ajsr]

be thankfull we have the airbag systems we have.
on some yank shit you could kick the fuck out of the front bar or in the film I saw smack the bar with a piece of 4x4 timber and set them off.
at least the sensor setup we use works.
cars should probably have a speed sensor cut on the bags at say speeds under 30 kmh as there are lot of bag firings are under that speed and your chance of injury are very slim.

[steak_knife]

ajsr wrote:

be thankfull we have the airbag systems we have.
on some yank shit you could kick the fuck out of the front bar or in the film I saw smack the bar with a piece of 4x4 timber and set them off.
at least the sensor setup we use works.
cars should probably have a speed sensor cut on the bags at say speeds under 30 kmh as there are lot of bag firings are under that speed and your chance of injury are very slim.

Do, most will not deploy under 40 .

A lot of factor's go into the lil brain deciding whether or not to deploy, all happens in milli sec's to.

[monley]

Dose it matter where it's hits on the front weather they go off or not?

[ajsr]

monkey wrote:

Dose it matter where it's hits on the front weather they go off or not?

yep
ive seen cars that look like they have been hit by a train that the bags never went off

[shep]

i hit a donkey at 90ish kph a few years ago and it mushed the donkey and
the bags didn't go off. they should only go off if the collision is hard enough
that there is a chance of a injury.

[royce]

alien wrote:

i agree too... i know theres tons of data to show they save lives, but IMO for offroad vehicles the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

Fuck yeah cause brain damage is heaps better than a beat up plastic bar

[monley]

Yeh
Probably better to have a rigid bar so the sensors will go off and not just crumble like a stock bumper would!

[S13RR4]

steak_knife wrote:

S13RR4 wrote:

alien wrote:

i agree too... i know theres tons of data to show they save lives, but IMO for offroad vehicles the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

would be beneficial to design something that can be turned off for offraod purposes and turned on for on road/ when high speed collision likely.

But a system like that would be more complicated and hence more probability of failure

Bingo, some of us still do 100 in the bush, so speed sensor's are out, can't rely on the monkey behind the wheel to turn it back on again, so on they stay..

what about auto switch off when 4wd is engaged?

that still doesnt help for beach driving or 100k/h bush drivers...

[steak_knife]

S13RR4 wrote:

what about auto switch off when 4wd is engaged?

that still doesnt help for beach driving or 100k/h bush drivers...

& if the switch on the selector fail??

What's wrong with a fuse puller??

[alien]

royce wrote:

alien wrote:

i agree too... i know theres tons of data to show they save lives, but IMO for offroad vehicles the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

Fuck yeah cause brain damage is heaps better than a beat up plastic bar

it could be argued some of us on this earth are already brain damaged =P

[monley]

The reason i say a soild bar is better is it will ensure that the airbags will go off no matter where you hit something on the bar.

[ajsr]

monkey wrote:

The reason i say a soild bar is better is it will ensure that the airbags will go off no matter where you hit something on the bar.

only if it doesnt transfer the impact to somewhere else beside the area its suposed to.
what if your bar then reneders the factory crumple zone in the chassis useless then the sensors may not fire and you have transfered a much larger impact into the rest of the vehicle.

go crash an HQ holden with no bags and crumple zones and then a new VY commodore into the same brick wall at 60 km hr
yes the HQ will be far less damaged but trust me YOU will have felt the impact difference

soild is nearly never good when it comes to hittng shit
hence why car makes engineer engines to drop out under the car in large impacts , so you dont end up sitting next to your shiney 1.6 after a decent stack
when I worked for toyota a long time ago 80 series were new and corolla's passed crash testing better than a full chassis 80 cruiser

[monley]

ajsr wrote:

monkey wrote:

The reason i say a soild bar is better is it will ensure that the airbags will go off no matter where you hit something on the bar.

only if it doesnt transfer the impact to somewhere else beside the area its suposed to.
what if your bar then reneders the factory crumple zone in the chassis useless then the sensors may not fire and you have transfered a much larger impact into the rest of the vehicle.

go crash an HQ holden with no bags and crumple zones and then a new VY commodore into the same brick wall at 60 km hr
yes the HQ will be far less damaged but trust me YOU will have felt the impact difference

soild is nearly never good when it comes to hittng shit
hence why car makes engineer engines to drop out under the car in large impacts , so you dont end up sitting next to your shiney 1.6 after a decent stack
when I worked for toyota a long time ago 80 series were new and corolla's passed crash testing better than a full chassis 80 cruiser

Ok that's for clearing that up.

P.s. I wouldn;t end up next to my shiney 1.6 it would be my dirt coverd 1.3
LOL

[zukenutter]

ajsr wrote:

when I worked for toyota a long time ago 80 series were new and corolla's passed crash testing better than a full chassis 80 cruiser

Yeah but it's not often you have a frontal impact with a lump of solid concrete. My father had a 60 series back in the late 80s with a PTO winch and huge ARB bar that protruded about 50cm past the front of the truck. He was stationary in some traffic when a corolla (or similar) coming from the opposite direction hit him almost front on. The Corolla became his crumple zone.
End result, corolla "0", LandCrusher "1".

[2stroker]

I have to agree with you Zukenutter, crash testing is basicly flawed. In 90% of real life cases a vehicle hits something that is moveable to some degree not an immovable concrete wall in a direct 90 degree line. With side impact testing they have steel girders on a pull rail hitting a stationary test car, no crumple zone or give whatsoeveron the ramming device, about the only thing on the road that simulates this is a a train with the biggest ARB bar in history.

All of you that are so concerned about the safety aspect just go and buy yourself a volvo and leave the Suzuki's to us foolhardy daredevils. I wonder how my LJ soft doors would go for side impact............