David James Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Following on from Jeff's to modify or not I would say go for it. My question is that I would like to remove the heavy front and rear bumpers. Does anyone know whether this causes structural or driving/handling issues? I am happy to fix a lighter member between the mountings if necessary. I cannot imagine that racing 7s maintain them. Apologies if this has been discussed before. David Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Alec Pringle Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 " Does anyone know whether this causes structural or driving/handling issues? " Yes, on both counts . . . . . . car manufacturers don't spend good money without good reason . . . . " I cannot imagine that racing 7s maintain them. " Back in the day, Production Sports race regs required that the bumper armatures be retained, as you would expect in any production category. You can't just rip out big chunks of structure like the TR7/8 bumper armatures, cores if you prefer, without making appropriate efforts elsewhere to restore the structural integrity . . . . be that by seam welding, adding a rollover bar or cage, adding alternative strengthening members, whatever. Cheers, Alec Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Alec Pringle Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 There is of course the argument that bumpers were provided for a good reason when the cars were built, and what has changed subsequently to render the original equipment bumpers now irrelevant ? The usual answer is that nothing has changed, not in the car, not in road conditions, nor in the regulatory framework. It's simply that the owner has a brainwave, and prefers the look of his car sans bumpers . . . . that they might be there for good reasons doesn't generally seem to come into consideration. Before rushing to effect radical change, bearing in mind that the more modern the classic the more likely the bumpers are to be structural rather than merely cosmetic component, think through the modifications carefully . . . . and don't forget to advise your insurer. Cheers, Alec Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TR 2100 Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Interesting insurance point - if the original bumpers would have restricted accident damage to £xxx, but actual damage is £yyy, then would the insurance company pay (unless, as Alec points out) you have advised them. AlanR Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Alec Pringle Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Hi Alan, I investigated this very point in some detail in the mid-1990s as Tech Ed of TR Action. The attitudes of the insurers to whom I spoke was equivocal, and inconsistent. There was less concern about TR2-6 models, the chrome bumpers offer but modest protection after all, but it seemed likely that a downward adjustment to an accidental damage claim was likely if the lack of bumper contributed to additional repair cost . . . . . and that might be regardless of whether the modification had been declared. Declaring the mod simply ensured that one remained covered in terms of legal requirements, rather than insurers dismissing a claim on the grounds of non-declaration of relevant facts. The Wedges were viewed quite differently, insurers recognised the contribution of the bumpers to overall structural integrity - and the TR7 was one of the first mass production cars to incorporate this kind of safety engineering. The reaction to bumper removal was one of " and . . . . . what exactly are you going to replace them with, that maintains the safety aspect to other road users and similarly limits potential damage to the insured vehicle " ? You cannot expect to modify any vehicle in such a way as to increase potential risk to insurers, be that risk actual or perceived, without incurring an appropriate financial penalty in terms of premium increase and/or restriction in cover. Cheers, Alec Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jeff Eatough Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Re Alec's comments . I thought these bumpers were necessary to meet the 5mph, no damage collision, requirement in the US. Now presumably long gone. Re David's comment and racing TR7's. I raced a TR7V8 in the TR register series where a 870kg minimum weight applied. I kept the original bumpers but cut away as much as possible of the steel frame and left just enough to keep the outer cover in place. Doubt would have achieved 870 kg without doing this. Would Tony Ponds TR7V8 have been carrying around all that weight ? No major impact on the driving/handling but ,without all that weight , the ride height will be somewhat higher ! The insurance aspect is just a minefield . Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Alec Pringle Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Hi Jeff, the works rally cars ran in Group 4 - the modifications allowed were, of course, far in excess of those permitted in Group 3 'production' spec. Hence removal of the steel bumper armatures wasn't a problem in terms of the rules, nor in terms of function given all the additional strength incorporated in the rally car bodyshells and their cages ! The US '5mph collision' requirements were only part of the story, Triumph did their best to ensure that the bumpers achieved more than just that - and to a much greater extent in the convertible, which has a slightly heavier bumper designed to reduce potential scuttle shake, for example. Cheers Alec Quote Link to post Share on other sites
David James Posted December 10, 2017 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2017 Thanks for your replies chaps.Most interesting. The insurance would probably be my biggest issue. I hadn't considered that. I have always notified them of any changes. They cannot come back later and claim i was not covered for any claims due to any non disclosure. TR7s being of relatively low value in the classic car scene my greatest concern would be regards insurance payouts to third [parties.. I will need to speak to them perhaps. Structurally I would think something could always be engineered to replace an original part.Where would we be if all cars still had chassis like my TR2! Happy motoring. Cheers David Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.