When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Is it on your plan to Re-install the forgotten bumper, ? I am compelled to say, if you are not going to use it, you may want to check with your auto insurance co, to see if that effects your coverage of a rear end hit,,, sometimes removeing safety related parts void coverage,,might be good to know ahead of a claim, , ( which likely will never hapoen, bit Murphy's Law shows up at the worst times, , )
I am compelled to say , the "safety related equipment" you are referring to has virtually nothing to do with safety. it has everything to do with minimizing body damage , auto body damage , not human body damage. why do you think it was covered with a flexible cover...to minimize AUTO body damage. something else that seems to be overlooked is that for all intents and purposes everything behind that conglomeration is essentially a mid sixties frame. once you get past the 5mph perfectly square hit by a car of equal or lesser mass , or a angled hit of 2 1/2 mph its all out the window anyway. my dad was involved with the development and testing of these devices so i'm not blowing smoke , they started developing these things in 68 or so and he was involved from the beginning , yes he worked for gm.
during his years of developing and testing these things one of the things they discovered was that a properly inflated and stored spare tire was by far the best rear crash protection you could get in a c3 corvette. i fully expect the safety patrol to start squealing about the dangers of removing your spare next , and one final though , all the brake and steering "upgrades" installed by amateurs in their driveways or garages would probably be of more interest to an insurance company than the removal of this stuff. when in doubt read the legal stuff that mandated this whole thing and get the facts
Sorry, it does not take an engineer to understand that the large metal bumper and mount system, as well as the fire shield over the gas tank, are valid and real crash protection improvements, far beyond the 5 mph requirement. Without the bumper, NOTHING stops the Camry with girl texting from crashing straight into the gas tank, erupting in flames, and since the shield is not there, nothing stops the sudden and fast burning spread of fire through everything forward......so hope you or your passenger were not knocked out in the rear end crash. (Note: reference your own pictures of back of car....that's what is exposed)
Look, I know our C3 Corvette are unsafe in many ways, I am not trying to be an *** about it. We all have to accept those risks in driving old cars. But in this forum, where people can learn many things, good and bad, I think it is a useful contribution, and important to make sure people understand both sides of their decision, and that is why I write this. Its not to slam the fiberglass mod the OP is trying to do, but it is a "compromise" one has to consider in doing it. I considered it too on my 77, and decided to keep the majority of the substantial bumper protection....the rubber and plastic pieces, i.e. the 5 mph stuff, I didn't bother with.
While many could say that chrome bumper cars ALL have little protection compared to this mod, I suggest that this mod has even LESS crash protection than a chrome bumper car. Not much less, but less.
Last edited by Torqued Off; 06-26-2018 at 06:57 AM.
When I do mine I am leaving as much steel under that tail panel as I can. Mebbe even add some 1/4 inch structural iron back there. The 5 mph egg crates? Those are a joke. But then NO car but 74 Impalas had true 5 mph no-damage bumpers.
Last edited by derekderek; 06-26-2018 at 06:57 AM.
Yes, good coment from dtamustang,, I guess what I'm thinking, is , how easy will it be for me to convince the insurance companie's loss prevention lawyer that these parts I removed really not doing anything anyway???
Life is about choices. I have chosen to make my wildly unsafe vintage car/toy that much more unsafe. I’ve deleted all of the original rear bumper crash safety equipment and sheet metal fuel tank covering along with installing a beautifully made custom fiberglass end cap.
I made my choices for me and me only. I’m happy I did and I would make the same decisions without hesitation. Whether or not my personal choices are proper for someone else I cannot say.
I did make a compromise to structural integrity though and put some heavy steel back in there.
Rear bumper weight addition Exhibit A:
Repurposed 1981 jdm Toyota Starlet horn bracket. Now my license plate area does not vibrate. Completely worth the 1/4 pound penalty.
Life is about choices. I have chosen to make my wildly unsafe vintage car/toy that much more unsafe. I’ve deleted all of the original rear bumper crash safety equipment and sheet metal fuel tank covering along with installing a beautifully made custom fiberglass end cap.
I made my choices for me and me only. I’m happy I did and I would make the same decisions without hesitation. Whether or not my personal choices are proper for someone else I cannot say.
I did make a compromise to structural integrity though and put some heavy steel back in there.
Thanks 60 Shark. This is my first all-out domestic build after countless euro/japanese cars/bikes over the last 3 decades. I’m having the absolute best time in no small part due to this forum.
This is my usual mode of personal transport. The forged aluminum wheels it came with were not light enough so I ditched them for plastic (carbon fiber) hoops. Safety not first I always say haha.
i will continue to go with the conclusions of the engineers , designers and the guys who actually tested it over the opinions of guys that are working strictly on theory. crash a few dozen ( or 40 or 50) of them in various configurations and various speeds and if your results are different i'll be happy to admit i was dead wrong,
iwasme , did you have a discussion with your insurance agent when you intentionaly disabled your headlights , wipers and hvac system ( that includes a defrost ) while living in a state that requires headlights on in the rain and is well known for off the charts humidity ? litigation has been mentioned in other threads and can you imagine the lawyers salivating when they find that little tidbit out. the opinions on safety from someone that thinks that is a good idea are worth less than nothing. i know my first thought was "what else was butchered , hacked together or left off completely " on this guys car .sorry but its my opinion. and we all know how you feel about people "badgering you about your opinions" i have no comment about how insurance companies lawyers are to deal with , but with all the highly modified cars on the road , with god knows what for modifications my guess is that there would be a very , very small chance of and serious problems coming from this modification. my guess is they would have more of a problem with off the chart horsepower gains than this , remember that is where all the horsepower rating changes came from. i will also stand by my opinion that if safety is a concern , put your spare tire back where its supposed to be , mine is.
i will continue to go with the conclusions of the engineers , designers and the guys who actually tested it over the opinions of guys that are working strictly on theory. crash a few dozen ( or 40 or 50) of them in various configurations and various speeds and if your results are different i'll be happy to admit i was dead wrong,
iwasme , did you have a discussion with your insurance agent when you intentionaly disabled your headlights , wipers and hvac system ( that includes a defrost ) while living in a state that requires headlights on in the rain and is well known for off the charts humidity ? litigation has been mentioned in other threads and can you imagine the lawyers salivating when they find that little tidbit out. the opinions on safety from someone that thinks that is a good idea are worth less than nothing. i know my first thought was "what else was butchered , hacked together or left off completely " on this guys car .sorry but its my opinion. and we all know how you feel about people "badgering you about your opinions" i have no comment about how insurance companies lawyers are to deal with , but with all the highly modified cars on the road , with god knows what for modifications my guess is that there would be a very , very small chance of and serious problems coming from this modification. my guess is they would have more of a problem with off the chart horsepower gains than this , remember that is where all the horsepower rating changes came from. i will also stand by my opinion that if safety is a concern , put your spare tire back where its supposed to be , mine is.
... I put out information for all poster to read, and ignore. You have your love for the bumper, and nothing, including logic, is going to sway you. You and anyone else is perfectly free to do what you want. All your side comments about my wiper, which work, and my headlights, which work, and my heater, which I have never once needed on any drive I have went on......and that is 6000 miles a year....how many do you drive? All of this is irrelevant to the removal of major structural bumpers and the dangers it creates. So, you can throw out BS all day long.....and if you believe that rear and front bumper structure is NOT a significant structural improvement in a collision, then remove them. But, others, who might not have an agenda supporting this mod, might want to have information to make their own common sense decisions. That's what a forum is about.
I doubt seriously that you have a direct line to the designers of the Corvette chassis. Its all BS word of mouth opinion, and a total disregard for obvious physics.
Last edited by vettebuyer6369; 06-26-2018 at 10:37 PM.
Guys, I made a couple minor edits to posts on this page to remove minor unnecessary uses of language so I don’t have to deal with them. No changes were made to anything related to opinions or content.
This is a reasonable conversation and debate and I’d prefer to leave the thread open. If everyone would agree to leave the personal exchanges out of future posts and not speculate on what moderation may or may not do, the thread will stay open.
before i had retirement stuffed down my throat i drove this to work almost daily , about the only time it wasn't my commuter was when i had errands to run after work. i even let a few coworkers take it to lunch from time to time. it was about a 45 mile round trip so yeah i drove it . for what its worth everything functioned as it should with the exception of the clock , the ac blows cold the heat is hot and the defroster was used quite a bit due to the humidity.
it is currently in the garage on the back burner waiting for the full body off treatment , and for full disclosure i don't drive it much these days.
this one was finished up a couple of months after this picture was taken gets driven a little more often , but due to other pressing concerns not too much. when all is said and done this one will be sold because of an error i made when i brought it back from the dead, it turns out that a small block just doesn't do it for me. if it had a big block i would be quite satisfied . and yes everything works on this one too , again in the name of full disclosure the fuel gauge croaked the last time i drove it.
i am currently working on a 78 that will replace the red one , the way i want it , with a big block.
as far as a direct line to the engineers that designed the frame you are correct , i have none. but what i do have ( my father , he just turned 93) who was one of the guys that built a lot of the test fixtures and actually set the cars up for the tests , he went from phoenix in the summer to northern canada in the winter with a fleet of corvettes for testing of all kinds in extreme conditions and the bumper and cover were his responsibility. along with a lot of other guys . i'm not trying to say he was the only guy involved. but he was there from the extremes to the controlled lab tests and even the presentation to the corporate big wigs. i will ask him again and make sure my facts are straight , if they are not i will tell the forum members i screwed up. so i am not just blowing smoke like a lot of internet experts.
(comments removed)
Last edited by vettebuyer6369; 06-28-2018 at 12:30 PM.
Reason: Delete comments, re: my previous post
Love my new bumper. It bolted up to my 43 year old car like it was made for it. Had to crank my ride height down a few turns on the rear coil overs since Jabba the Hut is no longer riding shotgun out back.
Installing all new GM Restoration tail lights later today and we’ll be all done back here. Oh yah I have to decide whether to go with a lighted license plate frame or drill some holes for a separate light.
Many thanks to this forum and the supplier of this product (who was stellar to work with) for showing me the light.
i had a nice discussion with my dad and about his years in corvettes , when i was younger i wish i had paid a bit more attention to what he was doing.
according to his memory ( his logs and notebooks were gm property and he was not able to keep them ) the 73 and 74 front impact assembly was a safety as well as body damage control assembly. once the vaccum tank was moved forward it became all about limiting body damage at "parking lot speeds" his words not mine. the front conversion will not fit on 74's so its a moot point for this discussion. if his memory is correct the vac tank was moved forward in 75 and was essentially a big front crossmember , the impact stuff was hung on the frame horns with bolt on extensions. his memory is that @ 5MPH it worked as designed with no auto body damage as the feds required. however he was very quick to point out that in order for it to work as designed it had to be a dead square hit , almost any side load and the 5 mph went out the window. "once the frame is compromised its just more mass coming your way" his words. the dead square hit was so critical that he had to fab up a track like system to keep the car perfectly square with the impact surface. he said this lesson was learned after a couple of less than perfect hits and either frames or cars needed to be replaced due to damage to the impact system the frame itself or both. he also said there was virtualy no room for error speed wise either , anything much over 5 and it was a "crapshoot" (his words) if it would work as designed. my conclusion from the conversation was that , it may help a little with safety , or maybe it wont. if you are lucky enough to drive dead square in to something , it may , but very very little , as he said , once the frame is compromised its just more mass coming your way.
the whole conversation about the rear was essentially the same , all the impact stuff was bolted to the frame and in a dead square hit it did its job as designed , prevented body damage. and maybe , just maybe it will aid in safety , but once again "once the frame is compromised , its just more mass coming at you".
so i will admit i was wrong , it is possible that there is some safety advantage to having that junk on there. but once the frame is compromised everything is out the window , " everything was hung on the same frame they had used for years" again his words.
he did say that the rear frame horns and gas tank mount crossmenber were " damn spindly" (his words) and for sure needed to be tied together ( i have a piece of 3" channel iron tying mine) together. he also reiterated that a properly inflated and stored spare tire was hands down the best for rear crash protection you will ever get in a c3 corvette
i was wrong , so i will never say again , " the impact system has nothing to do with safety "..... i will say it has ...." damn little to do with safety" i hope that satisfies the forum safety patrol , the critics and trolls in general......you know who you are.
Love my new bumper. It bolted up to my 43 year old car like it was made for it.
Oooooo, a silver interior - Nice!
Originally Posted by dtamustang
during his years of developing and testing these things one of the things they discovered was that a properly inflated and stored spare tire was by far the best rear crash protection you could get in a c3 corvette.
That makes me feel a little better about my conversion and losing all that rear structure.
06-25-2018, 12:19 PM
)
I 100% agree with ya Kie, I like your style,,,, was only pondering the insurance side of our hobby
