Under the above photo, (b3's rear bumper after minor collision), vw says, (vw passat b5 self study guide sp 191 pdf):
"Repairing damage to the rear bumpers
previously involved expensive repair and
welding work, even after minor accidents".
But, under this photo, vw says:
"The bumpers on the Passat ‘97 have the
capacity to absorb so much energy during a
low-speed rear collision that only plastic parts
have to be replaced.
Time-consuming welding work is no longer
necessary".
capacity to absorb so much energy during a
low-speed rear collision that only plastic parts
have to be replaced.
Time-consuming welding work is no longer
necessary".
Of course, here, still there is an inaccuracy: the front bumper is exactly equal to the rear, with absolutely the same parts and materials.
So, is this another case of the special speech of the vw's marketing department ? Where there any inner vw b3/b4 haters, as we saw in the case with the Syncro t3?
In the page for the passive safety comparison between the b3 and the b5, will see and other instances of some kind of inconsistency in the data comparison between these two models. (It is coming).
After the abstract, we can see various cases, with some analysis, wherever it is possible.
#1
Renault Kangoo vs b35i Syncro, very low speed collision, (~5-8 km/h).
The model photo.
Kagoo after the accident, the red arrows saw the damage.
The black plastic mask, lying on the road, is collected already by the driver.
Passat after the accident, no damage at all.
The truth is that inside the bumper, except the honeycomp and the metal barrier, lays a hidden Westfalia towing hitch:
The towing hitch, the honeycomp, the bumper, altogether, weighted...
...are 17,7 kgr. of bumper.
07/October/2017
