| Author | Topic |
|---|
Location:
Hobart, Tas
Registered:
May 2002
|
 Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 06:11
|
 |
|
Just a thought - are fibreglass body panels (i.e. bonnet, or guards) more dangerious to pedestrians or occupants in an accident? I'm thinking along the lines of it cracking rather than bending like metal panels do.
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
February 2003
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 06:38
|
|
|
AFAIK that's why they are illegal in QLD.
|
|
|
Location:
brisbane
Registered:
December 2004
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 06:45
|
|
|
yer probably but i really dont see much of a difference although there must be a reason weather u get hit by metal or glass at 60k's an hour ur in big trouble
|
|
|
Location:
Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Japan
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 06:46
|
|
carbon fibre bad
fibreglass not so bad, but..
cars are designed (especially those that had to pass crash tests) with the bending panels absorbing a lot of energy and increasing rigidity in an accident. changing them to easily breakable fibreglass reduces YOUR safety.
|
|
|
Location:
Hobart, Tas
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 06:51
|
|
| oldcorollas wrote on Mon, 08 August 2005 16:46 |
carbon fibre bad
fibreglass not so bad, but..
cars are designed (especially those that had to pass crash tests) with the bending panels absorbing a lot of energy and increasing rigidity in an accident. changing them to easily breakable fibreglass reduces YOUR safety.
|
Exactly my thoughts, thanks.
|
|
|
Location:
Wodonga
Registered:
May 2005
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 07:52
|
|
FRP stands for fibre reinforced plastic. The fibre can be glass, carbon, kevlar, boron, hessian, hemp or even hair. The plastic can be any type of plastic resin. The plastic is purely to orientate the fibres and to provide things like colour, waterproof object and bulk. The plastic resin has little effect on the final strength of the finished product.
Carbon-low impact strength, high tensile strength, will shatter on impact which makes it dangerous to pedestrians
Fiberglass-will flex a bit more wont shatter as easily, but can still be dangerous to pedestrians
Kevlar-very good impact strength, they make bullet proof vest out of this stuff, however, the tensile strength not as good as carbon.
Then we have a range of different resins that can be used-polyester, vinyl ester and epoxy resin. There is also lots of different way of curing these resins which also affects the final characteristics of the finished product.
The problem the authorities have with FRP panels is there is no quality control in the panels which can result in a huge variation in strengths between different manufacturers.
Another problem is that a lot of panels are welded in and are stressed members. When people replace stressed steel panels with FRP, it creates a whole new set of problems that cannot be predicted. This also affects the rigidity of the entire vehicle.
Newer vehicles also use their panels as crumple zones, where the properties and shape of the components are designed to provide consistent and predictable rates of deformation and energy absorption. Add a FRP panel into the equation with its different rate of deformation and energy absorption, and the huge differences between manufacturers, and we have a lot of manufacturers and authorities who arent happy and nervous of the effect these aftermarket panels will have on the characteristics of their vehicles.
|
|
|
Location:
Newcastle
Registered:
July 2003
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 08:00
|
|
well put 
simply FRP panels are not illegal as such.. remember many cars come with frp panels from factory.. the issue is that just like any other modification you need to show that it meets appropriate laws and standards. now to show that your aftermaket body panels meet crash saftey standards both for the crashee and crasher you will most likley require destructive testing.. not something most people want to do to their nice new carbon fibre hood 
|
|
|
Location:
Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Japan
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 08:13
|
|
for a start, he did ask for fibreglass
and secondly, they are illegal for any car which must meet crash standards AS A MODIFICATION
very few cars have fibreglass or FRP panels from factory
in fact the only one i can think of quickly is the M3/M5 i saw at the motor show..and maybe the EVO's? some cars have alloy, but not many have FRP...
meh, use em for the track, but not for the road.. the 4 or 5 kg you save (maybe) is 3/5ths of fuckall anyway
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
Location:
Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Japan
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 08:45
|
|
| justcallmefrank wrote on Mon, 08 August 2005 18:17 |
| oldcorollas wrote on Mon, 08 August 2005 16:13 |
in fact the only one i can think of quickly is the M3/M5 i saw at the motor show..and maybe the EVO's? some cars have alloy, but not many have FRP...
|
The roof of the CSL is actually carbon fibre, and some of the panels are aluminium
|
LOL, i could only think of the shiny roof .. and the way the guards wouldn't let us jump in  .. i just assumed the bonnet was also 
so what cars have FRP from factory? EVO?
|
|
|
Location:
Newcastle
Registered:
July 2003
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 09:16
|
|
all corvettes since 1953 and entierly fibreglass they changed over to another composite material during the early 90's but still a plastic type material.
then there are plently of exotics that are carbon fibre body based.
|
|
|
Location:
Toronto, Downtown
Registered:
September 2004
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Banned User
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 09:44
|
|
Actually most older cars, TA up to RA, the AE86 can legally have glass guards as they have nothing to do with crumple.
TA22 and 23 can have glass doors aswell as there was no crumple testing back then.
|
|
|
Location:
Bathurst
Registered:
September 2004
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 11:25
|
|
|
The front guards on the Nissan X-Trail are also plastic.
|
|
|
Location:
Wodonga
Registered:
May 2005
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 11:44
|
|
most of the replies people have posted are spot on.
Most Lotus cars are FRP. I have had to repair at least one of each. Lotus 7, Elan (many different variants), Europa, Elise, exige, Esprit, then we have all the lotus 7 copies from westfield, PRB, etc. Apparently some Volvo had FRP guards, we have all the VW beetle kit cars as well as the celica and datsun bolt on kits. Yes, there is also the Corvettes which were probably the best FRP cars to work with and lots of late model BMW, Porche and Ferraris that use FRP panels in many different places for different reasons.
At the end of the day, if the vehicle needs to meet a particular crash test requirement, then the vehicle needs to remain in that condition. If it is modified, crashed and someone is injured, then the person responsible for the modification will be held liable for damage. That could lead to serious charges if there is a fatality. All this can be avoided if you spend the mega bucks to go through the crash test process.
Technically, an FRP seat that does not have an ADR sticker on it can void any insurance for the vehicle in an accident. So all the seats made in back yards can end up costing a lot more in an accident. I am not suggesting that people who make their own seats dont get it right, (most seats I have seen that are made in back yards are much better than what you can buy, they just havent been certified)
Although this is still a very grey area, a replacement FRP front bar on a car equiped with air bags and crumple zones(most if not all new cars) can void insurance because the air bag sensors and crumple zones may not behave as per the original design of the vehicle.
I suppose any modification that you make on a car, particularly a modern car, can lead to legal ramifications that need to be checked by someone who knows what they are talking about, like an engineer. An engineers signature may be expensive at first, but cheap compared to a court case.
|
|
|
Location:
Melburn!
Registered:
June 2005
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 12:03
|
|
| berad wrote on Mon, 08 August 2005 16:45 |
yer probably but i really dont see much of a difference although there must be a reason weather u get hit by metal or glass at 60k's an hour ur in big trouble
|
Yeah so true... same with bullbars isnt it?
|
|
|
Location:
Gold Coast
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: Fibreglass body panels more dangerious in accidents?
|
Mon, 08 August 2005 15:53
|
|
very good reading hear....! so yeah would my 1998 celica (st162) front and rear bar are plastic (moulded) if i go and add some fibreglass and etc and that to make my own bodykits this should all good....like hardly anyone going to fuck you up for it if it is cause very tom, dick and harry got a fibreglass body fit!...anyways the r34 gt-r v-spec II N1 got a Carbon fibre bonnet as stocko for the N1!
NEzza
|
|
|
