PSA For you folks that are removing / modifying the crash bars to install bigger tires.....

[AdamHarris]

well shit...wasn't it you who kept calling me a troll because i'm on the other side of the debate?

I could be wrong but I don’t think that was me. I’ve called you a lot of things but not sure trolls was one of them.

Sponsored

 

[AdamHarris]

well shit...wasn't it you who kept calling me a troll because i'm on the other side of the debate?

And if I did call you a troll I wasn’t using an inter-web wordanym, I was calling you an actual troll, who probably lives under a bridge.

 

[D Fresh]

Lol like me? No one even knows me. With very few exceptions we are all really just words on the phone or computer screen to each other. Take you for example; you and I would probably be friends if we actually knew each other because there’s no possible way you could be as arrogant and condescending in-person as you come off here. Maybe I’m wrong.

I learned a while back from RP that a person better have some hard data and real examples to support their argument on here. Somehow those core RP principles don’t seem to apply with THIS topic. That’s all I’m asking for from y’all is…just 1 example..

You simply don't get it.

I've tried explaining it to you. I can't understand it for you.

 

[AdamHarris]

You simply don't get it.

I've tried explaining it to you. I can't understand it for you.

Like I said arrogant and condescending.

 

[AzScorpion]

that hard data just doesn't exist yet in the free world. Ford likely has some. perhaps the crash test people have something. there's likely accidents out there to prove one way or another, but it just hasn't found the internet world yet....I can google with the best of them, and I have spent hours looking. I'm confident something will eventually pop up to shut you up.

But if you have to look that hard (and still can't find anything) it seems like it's not all that big of an issue, right? ?

I do see both sides of this discussion and me personally I only went up one size to 265/70/17 so I didn't have to mess with the crash bars. Yes there's aftermarket ones and if I was going up even more I would've installed those. 1: for protection and 2: I have to much to lose to be taken to court if something were to happen if they were removed, never mind feeling guilty if something did.

No one knows how Ford got away with deleting these on the Bronco SAS and the Raptor. I'm guessing they have much deeper pockets than any of us and their lawyers have this all worked out.

 

[puckdodger]

Wow, 11 pages and still no agreement among internet people? Shocking.

Let me start by saying I don't care what y'all do with your crash bars or whatever you want to call them: cut them off, leave them in, paint them the colors of the rainbow. IDGAF, they are your crash bars.

Ford, and for that matter all OEM will never spend a penny more than they are required to spend on anything other than executive compensation, and the legal department. I worked at GM for 35 years and can testify to this.

If they include these bars on our truck, specifically the Ranger and never mind Broncos or F-150, in this market, that tells me there is a legislative reason behind it. Not a chance in hell would they pay to engineer, source the parts, and hire a worker to install these parts on this particular vehicle if there was no legal requirement for them. Hell, they wouldn't even put a windshield in if they thought they could get away with it. I for one wouldn't want to take on the legal experts that these corporations and insurance companies have on staff.

But like I said, have at 'er boys...

 

[D Fresh]

No one know how Ford got away with deleting these on the Bronco SAS and the Raptor. I'm guessing they have much deeper pockets than any of us and their lawyers have this all worked out.

Everything I've read leads me to believe that the performance versions are not tested.

 

[AzScorpion]

I have to concede that may be the case.
but it definitely goes both ways
I found quite a few offset crashes of our rangers on Copart. problem is, they don't show clearly if the vehicles had bars or not. and some were literally obliterated. those would have been ideal candidates for discussion. but unless i laid on my back under the carnage, i cant tell one way or another on some. the variables in these crashes could be debated ad nauseum, since we neither know the details nor the circumstances.

the two pics below show real world offset crashes, one looks survivable, the other doesn't.

sorry...cant really tell myself but it leaves the door open to both sides I'm sure you will agree.

I do agree (who said that ) and like in my previous post there really is nothing online we can find to refute this as of yet. By looking at those pictures I would guess the bars are still on as they both have the factory tires/wheels. No real reason to take them off otherwise.

IMHO I believe they should stay on as they're there for a reason. But in certain vehicles Ford found a way to remove them without any liability which I'm sure they have their butts covered. We can speculate all we want but really that's all we're doing and getting nowhere with it. lol

 

[AzScorpion]

Everything I've read leads me to believe that the performance versions are not tested.

It's possible but wouldn't this open them (Ford) up to more scrutiny if something were to happen in a crash? I can see the lawyers being all over that if all others were tested and these two weren't. Again, hard to know as non of us were there when these decisions were made. ?‍

 

[Msfitoy]

I have to concede that may be the case.
but it definitely goes both ways
I found quite a few offset crashes of our rangers on Copart. problem is, they don't show clearly if the vehicles had bars or not. and some were literally obliterated. those would have been ideal candidates for discussion. but unless i laid on my back under the carnage, i cant tell one way or another on some. the variables in these crashes could be debated ad nauseum, since we neither know the details nor the circumstances.

the two pics below show real world offset crashes, one looks survivable, the other doesn't.

sorry...cant really tell myself but it leaves the door open to both sides I'm sure you will agree.

I bet bet these two drivers probably never saw it coming because they either didn't anticipate a potential situation or were distracted...driver awareness, skills, and experience plays a large part in whether one safety part could make a survival difference versus not needing them at all...

 

[Fitzmotor]

Wow, ever want to kill some time? just try to keep up with this post ?

I will toss in; I had a Ford factory rep tell me once that;

"Mike, if we save a nickel on every car, that's a million dollars"

This would be because I was bitching at him about something that Ford cheeped out on, but that was during the Jack Nassar days of Ford, he really screwed things up for Ford, the customers and the techs working on them.

Anyways back to regular scheduled programming.

 

[D Fresh]

It's possible but wouldn't this open them (Ford) up to more scrutiny if something were to happen in a crash? I can see the lawyers being all over hat if all others were tested and these two weren't. Again, hard to know as non of us were there when these decisions were made. ?‍

I've been around a few lawyers. Even slept at Holiday Inn once.

Pretty sure their answer would be that their client followed the letter of the law when it comes to testing protocal. And that if any more testing needs done the laws should be changed.

Of course we're all speculating. But that's part of life. We all take different precautions in life. On a daily basis I try to keep myself prepared for multiple events that are very unlikely to happen. Personal liability and potential lawsuits are just one of them.

I may not have much but it's taken me 45 years to get where I am. I'm not trying to put myself out there to lose it all.

 

[AzScorpion]

I've been around a few lawyers. Even slept at Holiday Inn once.

Pretty sure their answer would be that their client followed the letter of the law when it comes to testing protocal. And that if any more testing needs done the laws should be changed.

Of course we're all speculating. But that's part of life. We all take different precautions in life. On a daily basis I try to keep myself prepared for multiple events that are very unlikely to happen. Personal liability and potential lawsuits are just one of them.

I may not have much but it's taken me 45 years to get where I am. I'm not trying to put myself out there to lose it all.

Your last paragraph is what everyone should think about. Just because we cant find any info online doesn't mean we shouldn't use our own common sense. Myself I don't want to take that risk even if it's a slight one. I've danced with the devil in my younger years and was lucky enough to have got away with A LOT of dumb things, I'm sure most of us have. I had a t shirt that said "To be old and wise you must first be young and stupid". Truer words have never been said. ?

 

[D Fresh]

Your last paragraph is what everyone should think about. Just because we cant find any info online doesn't mean we shouldn't use our own common sense. Myself I don't want to take that risk even if it's a slight one. I've danced with the devil in my younger years and was lucky enough to have got away with A LOT of dumb things, I'm sure most of us have. I had a t shirt that said "To be old and wise you must first be young and stupid". Truer words have never been said. ?

Absolutely.

Trying to explain this is really the only reason I've involved myself in this discussion.

I'd hate to see ANY of us have to go through something like that.

Yes, ANY of us. Even Adam.

 

[gwhalin]

Call me a skeptic but I highly doubt that anyone in this thread is arguing to “save lives”. This back and forth is about one thing. Winning an argument on the Internet. I would assume by now that most of have learned that is not possible?!

Sponsored