american 116 style

[nim205]

All the answers regarding American bumpers, can be found here:

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/studies/Bumper/Index.html

I think the main reason against them, is the pedestrian safety issues they cause. Modern cars are designed with energy absorbing areas in the front, in case you do run into a child, and not only kangaroos 

Style-wise, I think they are neat. A period-specific icon, that goes well with the car. They are certainly not ugly....well, just a little bit.

About the American influence on our lives, as mentioned before, we are living in an era that will be known in history as "the American empire". Being a member of a nation that was under the rule of The Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Byzantine, Mameluke, Ottoman, and British empires, the Americans are not all-bad.

Nim

[macatron]

I, too, want to keep this thread on track.  However, I think it began to stray in a couple posts, which generalized American car styling as pretty awful mainly since the 1950s.  I understand and respect that opinion, though I don't completely agree.  I think we can get back on track if we remember that the W116 of the 1970s represented German styling for requirements of the US government.

The bumpers and headlights of this car were Mercedes' response to US law.  Those laws were eventually shown to be of dubious value, like many laws historically worldwide.  I'm not sure if people read my earlier post (it was rather lengthy) but I did some reasonably extensive research into American auto legislation history and summarized it in that post.

Let's also not forget that a lot of the American members are here because they fell in love with the American W116.  I, for one, didn't even know what the "other version" looked like.     I do like it, though!

I don't want this forum to become divided by an "us versus them" mentality.  We're all here to share our collective wisdom.

[nim205]

We are talking about car design....
Let's not lose track... 

we're talking about American cultural influence in general:

Unfortunately, the emulation of Americana is global.

American style is the most copied in the world?  i think not my friend!

But, keeping with the subject, I can think of a few examples of cars that really got a raw deal from the 5MPH bumper law:

little tank:


Big tank:


Nice and stylish:


Obscene:


Pininfarina probably gained a coronary from this one:



Not to forget the french:



on second thought, in context, the US 116 doesn't look that bad now. Some cars suffered a much worse conversion.

[michaeld]

I am of the opinion that no one is going to turn off his computer crying and crawl into his bed and assume the fetal position whilst sucking his thumb and sobbing over someone expressing their opinion that they find US w116 bumpers ugly (or,to put it another way, if I DO do that tonight, I was going to anyway! ).

I never mind disagreeing with people and arguing over facts, theories, or values as long as everyone gets a chance to state their views and their reasons for holding their views.  I prefer clarity to agreement every single time.

Whether one finds the US bumper "ugly" is a fairly subjective call (although there actually ARE objective criteria for beauty); I think the real issue comes down to whether the US bumpers perform better, and - assuming for the sake of discussion that they DO perform better - whether one personally desires superior protection to what may (or may not?) look the best.

On my view, there is beauty in function.

I heard a couple of testimonials (Ozbenz's was one) of the fact that the Euro bumpers aren't wimps.  And, as I said earlier, I'm not surprised.  Mercedes-Benz engineers in the halcion days of the w116 weren't generally given to underbuilding automobiles or their respective parts.

My response to those testimonials was essentially to say that, while the Euro bumpers perform well at their mission of protecting the car, the US bumpers nevertheless perform better.

They are larger, heavier, and met performance criterion that the Euro bumpers (apparently) failed.  The very thing that makes them less attractive is therefore the thing that makes them better bumpers.  The question, therefore is, do you prefer more beautiful bumpers or better protecting bumpers? [I say "more beautiful" because I am admitting for the sake of argument that the Euro bumpers are such; I haven't heard anyone say they think the US bumpers are better looking!].

I clicked on Nim's "Nhtsa link" and found a couple interesting points.  I underlined what I thought was particularly relevant.

2) What is the purpose of bumpers?
The car bumper is designed to prevent or reduce physical damage to the front and rear ends of passenger motor vehicles in low-speed collisions. Automobile bumpers are not typically designed to be structural components that would significantly contribute to vehicle crashworthiness or occupant protection during front or rear collisions. It is not a safety feature intended to prevent or mitigate injury severity to occupants in the passenger cars. Bumpers are designed to protect the hood, trunk, grille, fuel, exhaust and cooling system as well as safety related equipment such as parking lights, headlamps and taillights in low speed collisions.


So, the purpose of bumpers ultimately is to protect the car; not to look nice.  I'm sure we all agree that a US w116 with its big bumpers would look more beautiful than a Euro car with front or rear end damage!  The question is whether US bumpers protect better, which - prima facia - they would seem to do.



9) How does the U.S. the bumper standard compare to the Canadian and European standards?
Under the Canadian bumper standard, the vehicle is impacted into a fixed-collision barrier that is perpendicular to its line of travel while the vehicle is traveling longitudinally forward at 8 km/h (5 mph) and longitudinally backward at 8 km/h (5 mph), with its engine operating at idle speed. Every vehicle is impacted twice on the front and rear surfaces and once on each front and rear corner with the impact line at any height between 500mm (20 inches) and 400mm (16 inches). While the impact speed in the Canadian standard is higher than that in the U.S. standard, the Canadian standard has less stringent protective criteria. Specifically, the protective criteria for the Canadian standard requires that the vehicle does not touch the test device, except on the impact ridge with a force that exceeds 2000 lbs. on the combined surface of the test device.

The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) regulation No. 42 requires that a car's safety systems continue to operate normally after the car has been impacted by a pendulum or moving barrier on the front or rear longitudinally at 4 kilometers per hour (about 2.5 mph) and on the front and rear corner at 2.5 kilometers per hour (about 1.5 mph) at 455 mm (about 18 inches) above the ground under loaded and unloaded conditions.


If you click on Nim's link and read #8, you will realize that the impact speed for both US and Canadian vehicles USED to be the same - at 5 mph - and that the US recently changed the impact speed to 2.5 mph.  We then find that, although the US impact speed is (now) lower, they continue to have a more stringent protective criteria than the Canadians.  And both the US and Canadian standards are higher than Euro standards.

The Americans have been downgrading their protective criteria from the past because insurance industry data revealed that the additional cost that people were paying for the higher standard bumpers was not being saved in terms of the overall actual accident damage (given the fact that most accidents occur at higher speeds, etc.).  And, given the fact that bumpers are intended to protect the car, and NOT people, the added cost was deemed unncecessary, and that the market ought to be freed to decide what level of protetion bumpers ought to have.

I certainly personally think that the Euro bumpers have a more streamlined, and more modern, appearance than the US bumpers.  I think the Euro bumpers are better looking.  But I don't intend to change my heavier US bumpers for Euros, because 1) I've already got a set of bumpers, thank you and 2) I like having that extra bit of protection.

[John Hubertz]

Hmmmmph.

So much has been said... and most accurate by my lights.

Beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder.  I celebrate one thing that I think is incredible about both Euro and US bumpers...  the "Batman Suit" rubber!  That stuff is incredible!

Re American styling, to my eyes the early to mid 1970s were the golden age.  My favorites include:\

[macatron]

John, those are great pics.  I'm not much for resto rods but Jay Leno made one out of a Toronado.  It's an unsung great car.

[OzBenzHead]

The last American cars that appealed aesthetically to me were the '50s Raymond Loewy Studebakers (Champion, Commander, Hawk, etc.) - and particularly the early '50s models without the big fins.  They had lines that flowed, they were balanced, and they were graceful.

[500eguy]

Not many American cars are very Appealing, they build cars and they cut so many corners. If you got into a new Chrysler you could pull off a lot of interior Materials by hand. I have seen countless Late Model American Cars With Head gasket problems, motor problems, etc. i think the only American Cars that are appealing have to be the older ones, but back on topic.... I am not convinced that the U.S bumpers perform better than the Euro Ones.

[kenny]

I just removed my American bumpers and had rest-of-the-world bumpers installed. I hand carried the Euros to the shop and hand carried the Americans home to the garage.

They are both stout, but the American ones with the big honkin struts were really heavy.

At least the 116s don't look as bad as what they did to E-type Jaguars.

Everybody who wants to sell a Jag is very careful to try and conceal in the photographs just exactly how very ugly those two big rubber warts are on the front of the car. When they first raised the bumpers it was bad enough, but the cars at the end of the run were real hideous.

[editjunk]

That Peugeot 504 with Federal bumps is an atrocity.

OPnly three words to say about this topic:

Ugly, ugly, ugly.

You may come back at me with "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder".

But you would have to be talking about MY eye, because universalims are uncouth.

I'll just repeat those three words re: US 116 bumpers, in case you didn't get them the first time:

SERIOUSLY FREAKING UGLY!

'Nuff said.

[500eguy]

yes, those e-type bumpers are very bad....

[el-cid]

Re American styling, to my eyes the early to mid 1970s were the golden age.  My favorites include:\

Actually, those are a '69, '67, '65, and a pair of '66s, respectively.  No 70's in the bunch.  I've got a restored '64 T-Bird that looks an awful lot like #4 there at home.

[michaeld]

You're absolutely right...

Nothing like 50s and 60s American Car styling for me

There are truly beautiful cars all over the world, and one can legitimately prefer offerings by the Germans, the Italians, or the English (as primary examples).  But I don't see how one can disdain the style of American autos.

I have pointed out before (so will be brief here) in arguing that - in many ways - the 1970s represented a time of many triumphs for the American auto industry.  They had to overcome so many technical - and styling - obstacles that were thrown at them one after another in rapid succession.  First, they had to overcome the removal of leaded fuels (which increased the energy output of gas); then they had to overcome increasingly harsh smog regulations and design engines capable of passing stringent requirements; then they had to figure out how to jump through the "5 mph bumper" hoops.

On the other hand, I believe that the act of jumping through these hoops ultimately dispirited the American automakers - particularly due to the fact that makers of small, cheap economy cars from Japan suddenly were handed all the cards and allowed to leapfrog over them.  The Americans have been repeatedly criticized for failing to make clearly visible adjustments; but they were in a tough spot, as they had built their market and their reputation on large V8-powered cars.  The little Japanese didn't plan wisely by offering their cheap little 4 bangers; rather that was all they had to offer, and all they had ever offered up to that time.  The OPEC embargo, the shocking inflation, and the economic recession that followed were ALL incredibly fortuitious for the Japanese - and devastating for the Americans.

One interesting thought:
Europe: sports cars; salon cars.

USA: musclecars; massive luxury cars.

Through the 1980s, such incredibly different approaches.