| Home  Blogs Help Search Login Register  
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Side intrusion Bars  (Read 1921 times)
murramor
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 123


« on: July 20, 2019, 01:30:20 am »

One of the more onerous requirements imposed by Australian Design Rules is that the occupants have to be adequately protected in an accident from the side.  This is interpreted as the need for side intrusion bars being built into the doors.  I have been worried by this as a Bagheera owner in another state is having all sorts of problems getting his car registered for road use.  I was feeling around inside the doors and the good news is that there appears to be a square bar near the top of the door.  This seems to run from the area of the top hinge to just above the door lock.  Can anyone confirm that the Murena does have side impact protection?  Better still, if anyone has a door, without the skin, a photo would be a great way to satisfy the inspector.  If there is any literature or diagrams anywhere that would also be gratefully accepted!
regards
Ron
Sydney, Australia
Logged

Ron Murrell
Sydney, Australia
TELBOY
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 382



« Reply #1 on: July 20, 2019, 08:51:33 am »

Hi Ron, Hope all is good.
You are correct their is an intrusion bar. the photos have not come out too well but I hope they are good enough!
If you need better ones let me know and I will see what I can do.

Tel
« Last Edit: July 20, 2019, 08:55:57 am by TELBOY » Logged
murramor
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 123


« Reply #2 on: July 20, 2019, 11:42:43 pm »

Thanks Tel.  It is indeed difficult to get a decent photo but yours are much better than mine which have all the window mechanism and rubbers in the way.  I have saved them in my Matra folder and hope they will be of help when the inspection time comes.  Like you, I am working on the last details before getting my car on the road but progress is a bit slow.  After I posted my query, I found a photo of a fire damaged Murena on this forum and the bar was clear in that photo.  The only problem is that there is so little remaining metal in the door photo that I wasn't sure whether the photo would help or hinder my case!
regards
Ron
Logged

Ron Murrell
Sydney, Australia
murramor
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 123


« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2019, 11:48:19 pm »

Here is a photo of a fire damaged Murena referred to in my previous post.
Logged

Ron Murrell
Sydney, Australia
roy4matra
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1056



« Reply #4 on: July 21, 2019, 01:41:13 pm »

One of the more onerous requirements imposed by Australian Design Rules is that the occupants have to be adequately protected in an accident from the side.  This is interpreted as the need for side intrusion bars being built into the doors.  I have been worried by this as a Bagheera owner in another state is having all sorts of problems getting his car registered for road use.

Are you saying that the Australian authorities are trying to impose modern car standards on older cars?  If that is the case then they are plain stupid.  You cannot do that without a total redesign of the whole car!  Neither a Bagheera nor Murena was ever designed with side intrusion bars and if you managed to fit something, the places it would attach to would not take the required loading anyway.  It is like seat belts, you can't fit them in old cars such as pre-1960s as there are no mountings to take the loading that would be imposed.

This is why we have different standards for different age cars.  The car should comply with the standards it was designed for, but not later ones.  And if they try to impose these ridiculous rules you will end up with people thinking they are safer than they really are.  They might as well simply ban all old cars if that is their attitude.  The side impact protection didn't start until 1992 and the Murena is 10 years older than that, and the Bagheera 20 years older (give or take a year).

The Murena does not have side intrusion bars as they were not required at that time.  A proper side intrusion bar would have to mount to the door hinge mountings at the front and the door lock mechanism at the back and the bar would go across the door roughly half way down between the window ledge and the bottom and it would have to be substantial to resist a side impact. (See photo)

From the photos I've seen the bar in the door near the window ledge is purely part of the design for the door construction and is both too high and too flimsy to be a side intrusion bar.  A side intrusion bar is so hefty to be strong enough that it would probably weigh as much as our whole door! (less glass of course)

The Murena safety comes from the design of the shell with the front and rear bulkheads and the roll over bar just behind the occupants (where the internal glass is fitted) but the doors do not have any side intrusion bars like modern cars.  As I said they didn't even come into being until 10 years after the Murena was designed!

As for the Bagheera, we know how the shell on those corrode with age which weakens it, so can you imaging the strength of a nearly 50 year old shell and trying to attach modern side impact bars!  It's simply laughable, sorry.

Roy
« Last Edit: July 21, 2019, 02:10:03 pm by roy4matra » Logged

murramor
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 123


« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2019, 03:27:47 pm »

Roy.  Cars only have to meet the design standards applicable to the year they were manufactured.  I think Australian Design Rules (ADR's) started around 1972 so my 1970 Lotus has no standards applicable.  Early standards covered only things like lighting and seatbelts but they have gradually become more onerous.  The situation is more complicated because individual states had to ratify the Federal rules and they didn't all do so at the same time and some lagged by years in some cases.  Side intrusion protection became mandatory somewhere around late 70's to early 80's but I can't find the exact date for NSW.  Many old imported cars such as the 911 have to have something retro fitted and I find it surprising that Australia obviously had the requirement before a country such as Germany.   There was talk of needing side intrusion bars when I registered my Bagheera but I got around that by first registering my car in a country town where there were no engineers available so my papers were marked 'Compliance Conceded'.  I find most testers agree with you that the requirement is nonsense for a 37 year old classic so, as long as one can point to something, the tester will probably wave it through.  (Or at least that is what I hope)!
regards
Ron
Logged

Ron Murrell
Sydney, Australia
roy4matra
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1056



« Reply #6 on: July 22, 2019, 12:45:27 am »

Roy.  Cars only have to meet the design standards applicable to the year they were manufactured...

No, that wording is not technically accurate.  Because it also has to take into account the market for which it was built.  If the design standard in Europe (for which the Bagheera and Murena were built) did not come up to the standard that applied in Australia in the year they were manufactured, then strictly the cars could never be sold there, and should never have been allowed in to the country.  To let them in and now attempt to impose a standard for which they were never designed, will only lead to problems because as I've said retro fitting something will impose loads in places that were never designed to cope with those forces.

A car should only ever have to meet the design standard TO WHICH IT WAS DESIGNED & BUILT as well as the years it was manufactured.  When authorities decide to change some regulations, then there has to be a lag before they can be implemented, so the manufacturers have time to change the design to meet those newer regulations.  So a car built in say 1981 or 1982 like the Murena, to the standard that applied in 1980 when it was designed, is fully acceptable.

Hence the wording that says 'in the year they were manufactured' and no more cannot be strictly correct.

Now if Australia had a side impact regulation in the seventies (which I find hard to believe but will accept) then the Bagheera and Murena which were only built for Europe, and only had to meet the European regulations that applied at that time, will not meet your regulations.

The original question was did the Murena have side impact intrusion bars in the doors and the answer is 'No'.  It was never designed for them.

Quote
I find most testers agree with you that the requirement is nonsense for a 37 year old classic so, as long as one can point to something, the tester will probably wave it through.  (Or at least that is what I hope)!
regards
Ron

The problem as I see it, is that they have allowed various old cars to be imported, that were never built to the Australian standard of the day, and now some time later they are trying to impose a regulation that the car was not designed for, and should never have been allowed in, but were.  Good luck in trying to get the car passed for the road.

Roy
« Last Edit: July 22, 2019, 12:50:25 am by roy4matra » Logged

murramor
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 123


« Reply #7 on: July 22, 2019, 04:24:22 am »

There are so many things that are illogical in our car testing situation.  For instance, it is perfectly easy to register a GoGomobile or other microcar and to drive it anywhere on the road but it could be deemed unsafe (to the occupants) to do the same with a Murena, early Porsche or any number of 'foreign' cars.  Clearly, this is nonsense but, sadly, Australia is over-governed and politicians are not known for their commonsense.
Logged

Ron Murrell
Sydney, Australia
TELBOY
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 382



« Reply #8 on: July 22, 2019, 07:54:38 am »

If it helps in any way here are some better pictures!
Logged
murramor
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 123


« Reply #9 on: July 22, 2019, 09:27:00 am »

Thanks Tel.  Those are good.  I think that if I can find a reasonable engineer, that will be sufficient for him to allow me to pass while assuaging his conscience!
Logged

Ron Murrell
Sydney, Australia
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to: