Hard to drive a car with the bumper jammed into the tire.
Repairs for that type of design would total the car because the unit body would be racked from the forces input 9-15 inches from the mounting point. The corner is designed to crush the replaceable parts without destroying the structure of the car.
No it ends up smashing the upper fender support requiring a whole piece to be cut and welded in from a doner vehicle. That costs thousands. Proper bumper mounts are designed to deform before the unibody frame is damaged. The end of the bumper will bend before enough force is put on the unibody frame to damage it if it’s done correctly.
They did factor suspension in. Honestly, it seems like the labor was what they didn’t factor in correctly…thankfully, I did a lot of research on the shop I took it to. The conversation once they took a look was “we work for you, not your insurance.” They let me know they will make sure repairs are done correctly and it just made me feel better knowing they’re here to help and that their testimonials online are true.
The labor of which will end up totaling the vehicle anyway. Body shops do not cut scrap cars down for parts. They order the proper piece from their suppliers.
Poppycock. Yeah, it is already done correctly as designed. Cars are designed to crumple to protect the passengers. The bumper is connected to the frame rail which is designed to collapse in an impact. If it crumples, it must be cut out and replaced. A 9 inch moment arm makes this more likely to happen. I’ll put the automaker’s degreed engineers and finite element analysis up against your swags any time.
I’m not sure if it’s totaled. But you can’t tell from the pics. A vehicle hit that hard to do that much damage to the parts you can see - could easily have caused much more damage underneath to the parts you CAN’T see? Did the airbags deploy? That’ll ad $3k per airbag. Engine damage? Suspension parts? Unibody need straightening? Engine cradle damage? All those things you can’t see from pics and will need further inspection.
That’s the issue. A traditional car with a wide bumper would have to be hit hard to do that much damage. On this car, all that is there is a plastic bumper cover and a thin metal fender. The only strong part that got hit that indicates that this happend with any significant amount of speed is the wheel. This could be an 8 MPH crash.
From the picture, I can’t tell at all the extent of the damage. The hood is not shown, or under the hood, and we don’t know if the hit was sideways or straight on. The other car drove away so there is that.
The controversy though is talking about two different design criteria. In the past car bumpers were designed to take a hit with minimal damage. Current design is to collapse the car to absorb the hit. One will cause more damage to the passenger and the other will cause more damage to the car.
You can argue the wisdom of both all day long with no resolution. I do think this has gone a little too far though. I had $3000 damage from a car backing into me in the parking lot. In the old days, there would have just been a bumper scrape.
Not a single poster on this thread thinks it is totaled. There are those that correctly post that it is difficult or impossible to tell if it is totaled.
Of course, there is always the alternative situation. That big stiff bumper becomes a liability in a higher speed crash. So have large stiff bumpers to reduce damage in low speed impacts or modern approach of crush zones that result in more expensive low speed impacts but present a more survivable scenario for high speed crashes?
Everything seems to have gone way up in price in the last decade, or so it seems. Both materials and labor. Look at the price just for paint today as just one example.