Some friggin' moron (read: ******* driver) backed into my van apparently while I was working on a friends computer. I didn't hear anything nor did I actually see anything. But here's the deal. My bumper was one of them sporty looking ones. It chipped the paint off pretty good, and it scarred the bumper pretty bad. The cover itself was moved back about 3/8s of an inch. What should I look for as far as problems from being backed into? I mean, yes it's cosmetic and I'll get over it. But I'm looking for mainly mechanical problems. But so help me god, if I ever find that sucker I'll drive a stake thru his head.

 

I think the bumpers on an Aerostar are totally cosmetic. I recently repaired mine just because it was threatening to fall off. It really provides no protection at all above about 2 mph, and there is no real structure underneath to absorb shock, like the older 5 mph bumpers.

If you don't have wrinkled sheetmetal, I don't think you have any major damage. Was this the front or the back? Make sure all your lights are still working. You can get a ticket for a broken light. I would look underneath to see the structures that hold the bumper onto the car to see if any of them are about to break. You don't want it falling off while you're driving.

Odd, but I don't think you're required to actually have a bumper on your car. But if you have one and it falls off on the road, you can get a ticket for that.

 

i backed into a post doing maybe 2mph and broke my bumper all to hell on my 91 shorty. I know they are fragile.

why would someone make such a frail part, especially a bumper for heavens sake.

thank heaven the rest of the van is tough as nails.

 

First, trucks and vans never had the same requriements for bumper durability as passenger cars. So if a manufacturer can classify his vehicle as a truck, then he would have to spend less on certifying their vehicles. This is kind of bogus, since they know full well that the types of vehicles were quickly replacing the traditional family car in the early to mid 80s. In fact, Toyota shipped many of their pickup trucks with back covers, like predecessors to the modern SUV, with back seats uninstalled so they can be contninued to be classified as trucks. At the dealership, the seats are installed just before delivery to the customers. Consequently, a lot of these trucks and vans did not protect passengers very well in collisions. A lot of them still do not.

You can also thank the Reagan administration for the "Regulatory Relief Act" designed to help bail out American automobile manufacturers. One provision allowed the regulations on bumpers to be relaxed, from a 5 mph hit with no damage, to 2.5 mph hit with no damage. The irony is that the first companies that took advantage of the Act were the Japanese car makers, partly because American makers were so slow to act. In a profane twist of events, American car makers exploited this fact in their advertisements. I still have an ad copy from Ford claiming the superiority of their bumpers compared to Hondas': "...our bumpers can absorb 4 times as much energy without damage as theirs..." It was not by intention, but by inertia; Ford just could not change their designs quickly enough to take advantage of the Act. On the other hand, it was also true that Honda bumpers at the time were like paper; one little bump, and it costs over $1200 to replace.

I'm not sure how these regs have evolved or translated to 1990's vintage vans, but it's obvious that the Aerostar bumpers provide no protection at all.