Those Bars On The Back Of Semi Trailers Aren’t Always As Strong As You Think: COTD

Tractor-trailers are among the heaviest vehicles you’ll see on your daily commute. So many of the regulations that keep you safe have been written in blood, including the regulation that mandates the use of thick bars on the back of truck trailers to keep you alive. These bars are supposed to save your life in a crash, but they might not always be as sturdy as they appear.

Earlier today, Matt wrote about a Chinese crash test involving 30 cars meeting the business end of a semi-trailer. It’s a spectacular watch, but it’s important, from Matt:

Specifically, the cars are crashed directly into the back of a tractor-trailer equipped with a set of underride guards or Mansfield bars at about 34 mph. The bars are so named for the actress Jane Mansfield, who people think was decapitated in a crash with a tractor-trailer lacking such a device. In reality, Mansfield wasn’t decapitated, though she was killed and did suffer a serious head injury.

Today, every trailer you see on the road is supposed to have a bar that prevents your vehicle from riding under the trailer in a crash. However, not every Mansfield bar is created equal. Last year, ProPublica published an explosive exposé on the dangers of these bars. In short, the publication revealed that for decades, the American government allowed trailer manufacturers to equip trailers with weak bars, leading to fatalities in even relatively low-speed crashes. The government has slowly updated regulations and the bars have gotten better over the years, but many feel the government hasn’t gone far enough. Click here to read the article, it’s worth it.

Here’s an older IIHS video showing how bad things used to be:

Anyway, SoCoFoMoCo points this out:

The problem here isn’t the cars; it’s the underride bars on the trucks. Many are inadequate and will collapse with any significant impact, allowing the vehicle to go under the trailer. It is possible, and much easier, to make the underride bars stronger than to build vehicles that can withstand this sort of crash.

SoCoFoMoCo followed it up with a link to this excellent Frontline documentary:

This morning, Mark gave us a showdown between a Pontiac Grand Prix and a Yugo. But hold on, what shenanigans are going on here? From Matt Sexton:

Dude I clicked on the Yugo ad and it says: “Title status: lien”. Fucking why.

Also, telling us it ran when parked in 2001 is pointless information. The junkyard is full of cars that ran in 2001. That was 23 years ago.

Despite this, I’m picking the Yugo. Even fixed up, the Pontiac is boring as hell, and I say this as a Pontiac guy. Yugos are dirt simple, this one can be cleaned up relatively easy. Drive it around and you will get constant reactions to it, most of them good. Take it to a car show, park it next to a Chevelle and steal all the thunder. I speak from experience. Get a timing belt before you do anything.

Rivers wrote a story pointing out that Hertz wants crazy money for its used rental Shelby GT500s. These cars aren’t a steal, but it’s not like Hertz knows a thing or two about that, from Icouldntfindaclevername:

I’d buy it, but you know Hertz will just report as stolen.

Alexk98 had the same idea:

$150k and they’ll still mark it as stolen after the check clears, what a deal!

Fasterlivingmagazine also got me:

Im sure a rental gt500 was very gently driven by responsible people for those 22k miles, very low chance of finding pieces of innocent bystander stuck in the undercarriage.

Have a great evening, everyone!