Ok. This should get everyone fired up for Monday.
I submit the following picture from Australia.
Here is the submitters comment:
guys i am assuming that the ARB's you are talking about are the "Airbag Compatible versions?
over in the land rover world many folks that have the airbag compatible ARB bumpers complain that the crush cans allow the bumper to severly rotate and the wings of the arb bumper end up digging into the fender. it isn't from winching, generally it's from digging the front end into the dirt when you are past your approach angle
now ARB also makes a "non-airbag compatible" version without the crush cans. it is quite strong and wont rotate as long as you use all three bolts and upgrade to a bigger bolt size so that there is no slop for it to move. it is however not avalible for the new discovery 2 only the disco1.
some of the disco2 guys have welded the crush cans ridged so it is more like the "non-airbag" version.
have any of you heard of this problem with Xterra arb's? any comments?
---------------------------------------------------------
Ok, this enters into the realm of making judements about a picture and information provided from one person, but.....
Isn't this the argument that has been going on for 2 years now about how ARB (the USA Xterra bar) extends past the crumple zones of the frame and uses (3 bolts) to strengthen the bumper?
Wouldn't a bumper that attaches in front of the crumple zones be a weaker design?
So my take on it is this. The ARB bull bar that is currently shipped to the USA extends past the crumple zones and therefore is not subject to the terrible result pictured above. However there is another bumper currently being promoted for the Xterra that only uses two bolts in front of the crumple zone. Wouldn't the two bolt design suffer the same fate as the air-bag compliant ARB?
