There was a general consensus yesterday, that the 1974 Mercury Comet was cursed with some of the most poorly-integrated bumpers of all time. Among the comments, Dave B suggested a competition for the worst integration of the federally-mandated five mph bumpers.
My nomination still goes for the 1974 Mercury Comet. Among other cars, I feel the 1979 Chrysler R-bodies also wore their bumpers especially poorly. Their partially body-colored extensions and sides looked cheap and were at odds with the surrounding shapes. It’s even sadder considering these cars were designed several years after five mph impact bumpers were required.
The 1973 Oldsmobile Toronado is another one on my list, especially considering how good the it looked prior to gaining the enormous bumpers. So, here is our CC Question Of The Day: What car is your nominee for the most poorly-integrated bumpers of all time?
This, because a car that cost so much in 1974 should have come up with a better bumper design
Americans who wanted the vault-like SL kept buying it anyway, despite Mercedes making zero effort to better integrate those monstrous bumpers for some 15 model years.
They did but it couldnt be fitted to US cars Nobody else got em lookin that bad
I’ve always thought the overly-long bumpers actually suited the R107 pretty well, though that’s probably because I just got used to seeing them.
’74 Pinto
Not as bad as that Comet, tho I admit I am biased. My first car was a ’74 Pinto 😀 .
Over 100 comments and nobody has yet mentioned Paul’s July 2012 essay on the ’74 Pinto’s federalized “shelf butt.”
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cc-capsule-1974-ford-pinto-the-pinto-sprouts-a-shelf-butt-and-more/
I always thought these would be good for tailgate parties: pop the hatch and use that “shelf butt” as a butt shelf. (Because Lord knows the Pinto’s not roomy enough to transport both a cooler and a folding chair.)
I loved the bumpers on my ’74 Pinto, they made for a great seat for my skinny (well, back then anyway) ass…
The ‘coffin-nosed’ ’74 AMC Matador sedan and wagons were pretty bad. As the entire front clip treatment, was questionably integrated. The above Maverick/Comet, would be in the the Top 10.
Virtually any North American Ford passenger car from 1974 to 1978, would qualify.
I never liked the rubber bumper solution on the MG Midget. Much worse than the more integrated MG B.
These bumpers disqualified MG as an entire brand. Must be a winner. Downright catastrophic.
The MG-B didn’t look as bad, but I seem to recall they had to raise the ride height to comply with the bumper regulations which did nothing for handling. It made for an awkward overall look.
To be fair, the ‘cow catchers’ of the mid to late ’70’s were government mandated add-ons on cars never meant to comply with the ruling.
They were all pretty bad, actually.
There are kits to retrofit some MGs back to the chrome bumpers.
It was a stupid idea these ‘energy absorbing’ bumpers. Government run amok!
The rubber bumpers on the MGB would actually have looked reasonably okay if they’d been body-colored. (The bumper treatment is notably less egregious-looking on black cars.) Unfortunately, British Leyland didn’t have the technology for the body-colored flexible bumper covers some U.S. cars had used a few years earlier. BLMC did experiment with both flexible paint and actually molding the bumpers in several different colors, but the former was too fragile for comfort and the latter idea was canceled along with plans for a late facelift.
Doing that wouldn’t have avoided the increased ride height issue, but by then the B’s handling was so far behind the times anyway that there wasn’t much to be done about it, and American buyers didn’t seem to care that much.
Totally agree here.
Any big ’73 Chevy:
We had just bought a 73 caprice classic just before taking a driving vacation across Canada. Received so many looks and SO MANY questions about the car and why the bumpers looked like that.
Any car with a ‘Continental Kit’, IMHO look awful
+1 on Continental kits, the Comet looks the worst so far,though the MG and Jensen come close
Ding ding ding!
The only car that looks good with a continental kit is an original Continental.
The last year of the Jensen-Healey in the U.S. Pretty dire.
E21 320i with the accordion plastic covers on the side of the bumpers.
The Fiat X1/9 started out with almost no bumpers, and eventually ended up with reasonably integrated ones. But in between, it had these:
https://www.google.ca/search?q=images+%22fiat+x19%22&lr=&as_qdr=all&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=KrDZUo_RJceU2wW8gYGwBg&ved=0CDAQsAQ&biw=1282&bih=705#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=mX3AF9J-NWa_cM%253A%3BECzryJF1O0dQ1M%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.productioncars.com%252Fsend_file.php%252Ffiat_x19_brown_1976.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.productioncars.com%252Fgallery.php%253Fcar%253D1353%2526make%253DFiat%2526model%253DX19%3B360%3B197
Sorry for the huge URL.
You never see images of these because every car that had them, has had them taken off.
My vote would have been for these Fiats also. But actually seeing a picture after 40 years … they don’t look so bad compared to the big black rubber things that were coming out of the UK at the same time. But right behind them would be the later Volvo 240 bumpers. IMO the first 140 had some of the cleanest chrome bumpers of the late 60’s. But the 50 pieces of ill -fitting plastic that made up the filler trim on those 240’s (and a lot of the other trim on those cars) was an embarrassment to the reputation of Scandinavian design.
The 1974 Bricklin, with it’s safety bumper. It appeared retractable, like a ‘Bic’ pen.
Another pic of the Bricklin…
Low angle shot…
That’s a strange looking beastie,never seen one despite many years of show going.
They were made in Canada for the US market between 1974 and 1976. Here’s a link to a Car and Driver road test comparison with the then current Corvette.
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/chevrolet-corvette-stingray-vs-bricklin-sv-1-comparison-test
Thanks Daniel,the looks sort of grow on you.It looks very strange from the front with it’s lights open but quite attractive side on
You’re welcome Gem. Malcolm Bricklin wanted to design a safe car. So, it was offered without a cigarette ashtray. And came in a small assortment of bright ‘safety’ colors. Including bright green, orange and white. They were attractive cars on the road… except for that front bumper.
I can’t name a worst, there were so many that were so horrible in several different ways.
But can I nominate the ’74 Corvette for the best of the first-year impact bumpers? Its’ well-integrated full urethane covers were a preview of what would eventually become the industry standard, and actually made for an effective freshening of the ’68 Shark styling.
Gem there is one in the Haynes museum’s red sports car room (in Somerset)
1) 1973 Chevelle. The equivalent of chroming a 6×6 and hanging it on the front.
2) All 1974 Fords/Mercuries except full-size. Oh the horror!
3) Plymouth/Chrysler Prowler. Egads. I know the bumper has to sit at a certain height but that’s the best you could do, Dr. Z?
4) Mid-70’s MG Midget/MGB. I’d have packed up my ball and gone home if I was British Leyland.
I didn’t include the 1974 Matador 4-door because the topic is “most poorly integrated bumper”, not “ugliest facelift in American history”.
The first Nissan 200SX:
I forgot about those! Those plastic covers could have included fishing tackle or tool compartments.
They are especially bad when you see what the home market got:
I loved it when the Japanese designed such eccentric cars!
I remember Consumer Guide magazine calling these “science fiction inspired”. Is that a great (and accurate) compliment, or what?!
I didn’t think the bumpers on these were all that bad.
Daniel:, I found one of these a while back: https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-asian/curbside-classic-1977-datun-200sx-nissan-silvia-s10-the-many-faces-of-silvia/
Paul, at the time, I found metal bumpers with plastic end caps still fairly new on cars. And these plastic ends seemed to look very industrial, protruding somewhat. On this car, they reminded me a lot of the plastic end caps at the tops of shopping carts.
I think they look better in today’s context. As does the overall styling of the late 70s 200-SX.
Eureka! Thanks for posting the advertisement of Datsun 200-SX!
One of my old classmates had that car in vile lemon yellow. Her car was voted by the students as the ugliest car ever. I had been trying to remember the name of that ‘bumblebee’ (as she called it) for the past twenty years. Google wasn’t much of help without specific name.
She made sure that I was aware of the unique dog-leg shifting pattern in the five-speed manual gearbox before I could be allowed to drive her car.
The Canadian spec Mini 1000 of the 1970s was pretty sad also. At least they were easy to remove. It is extremely rare to see a Mini still equipped with them.
Those made it past Transport Canada?! LOL
Yup! Solved the bumper height issue better than jacking up the whole car ala MG Midget/B
I love it! I wish I had watched more closely for these, back then.
I’ve always thought the Mazda RX-4 was pretty bad, with the little filler panels where the early small bumper wrapped up to meet the hood/headlamp trim.
It was a shame. As these were such attractive cars otherwise.
The RX-2 didn’t fare any better, front…
…or rear.
Forgot about these…had a ’73 coupe and it looked quite sweet in comparison!
Looking for both of those cars in the pictures. I will pay a small finder’s fee, if I can locate and purchase. No others, just these two. floridafourseasons@msn.com
Thanks
Not that I would endorse it as a vehicle but I think that the beautiful lines of the early Mark IV Continentals were absolutely ruined by Ford’s completely inept application of crudely designed battering rams on just about every car that they built. Canon must have been mortified.
Agreed. The Mark IV was ruined in 1973.
The full sized gm with the brittle plastic around them
I once owned a ’75 VW Beetle with the big bumpers. Note: this is a pic off the internet, not my bug.
Countach
Coun’stache!
say that quickly and it sounds like a French word for ‘merkin’
I giggled.
Even worse was the “spoiler” on the front that they used to meet both 5MPH bumper and height standards.
My pick would be the Checker Marathon. The front bumper would make a great park bench. I seen one in person that had water inside of the extension; sort of like the water filled highway barriers you used to see on the freeway.
Truly a piece of guard rail.
I think guard rails come with a higher grade of silver paint then do the bumpers of this Checker
See, for something actually in service as a taxi (or designed to look like it), giant battering ram bumpers seem entirely appropriate to me.
Just have to rip on the LTD II…again. Seemed that Ford was just going out of it’s way to make it’s cars the ugliest things on the road.
at least old cars had bumpers unlike the new trash out there.
Actually, they do have bumpers. They’re far better integrated than these shown here. But, instead of chrome, they’re usually a composite, foam-type material covered in plastic.
Which scratches easily, dents easily where there’s no metal behind, and costs $$$ to get repainted. They look great and they’re usually aerodynamic, but I wish they were tougher.
Photo is not my car but my ’01 Prius had a dent just as bad in the same spot ’till I pulled it out. Prius visibility out back is poor, so dents like this are common.
ROFL. those “battering rams” were worthless in higher speed collisions. I don’t give a rat’s arse that they could go unscathed if someone backs into me in a parking lot if the car is still going to fold up and turn me into ground beef in a collision on the highway.
people really overestimate how “safe” old cars were. They were JUNK.
I watched 2 old cars hit bumpers the other day both bumpers bent in the sprang back to shape NO damage which is just as well the 2 cars were a 36 Buick Limo clipping a 39 Austin 16 photos on the cohort.
wrong pic
1978 Subaru’s need some bumper love/hate:
Looks like a 4×4 chromed board in addition to the 4×4 drivetrain
Jaguar E-type series III, with the huge dagmars that looked like an afterthought.
1975 Maserati Khamsin
This is what the home market got.
You beat me to it. Also, are those some kind of universal taillights? They look just like the ones on the back of the Bricklin, and my foggy memory of the UK market DeLoreans.
Can’t remember the precise manufacturer, but they’re Italian and used on many cars – eg Alfa Romeo sedans from the period.
I don’t think the bumper makes that much worse 😉
That’s worse than the McLaren. This story is making me feel queasy.
My nominee HAS to be the 1973 Chevelle Laguna where the huge bumpers were covered with an enormous soft plastic clip!
I had to pick up my jaw off the floor when I first saw one at a Chevy dealer in Sacramento. Not only was it hideous, but wavy and ill-fitting to boot. FWIW, the car was that common mist-green color, too.
Bad, bad, bad…
McLaren F1
Oww, looks like a skin disorder.
Add that it’s a very expensive car that’s known for its top speed, that now looks like it has the mumps and definitely has a lower top speed. It just ruins the car.
Oh, that’s disgraceful. Has to be the winner.
I recalled an article in Road & Track about the federalisation process of McLaren F1. The owner insisted that the registered importer keep all of the original components so he could revert his F1 back to its original configuration after receiving the roadworthy certificate of approval.
He did a couple of F1 (yellow and silver).
Maserati Khamsin (US is the distant silver car, gold car is global).
Brendan, I’m honored, and a bit nauseated at the same time. Some really good picks in here. I had forgotten about how bad the R Body was. That over lapping exo filler panel also tended to deform, leaving some nasty ripples where it met (or didn’t meet) the bumper. But, Chrysler was broke and drinking ripple to drown its sorrows.
Steve, sorry to borrow your LTD II photo, but yours is excellent with its slight top down view. The real sin of the LTD II is that it was part of a major refresh three years after the law went into effect. It’s like Ford was punishing America for passing the law. Or thought their effort on the 1974 Comet was genius. Hank II was known for drinking as well, at least according to Mr. Iacocca.
1977-1979 Ford LTD II…………..
Comuta-car. Rear:
And front:
And one more, for good measure.
And we have a winner. Since they didn’t, um, integrate them in the slightest.
Yes I think this would have to be the winner, if the prize were for “bumper size as fraction of the car’s overall size.”
BTW Bob Loblaw, how’s that law blog of yours coming along?
Yup, this one gets my vote too. These did get a decent amount of press, when new.
Looks like a little rubber ducky with a big ol’ cookie shoved in it’s mouth
More like a cookie with a rubber ducky set on top of it.
Oh, yeahhh. I have a CC set of one of these that I haven’t posted partly since the car looks so horrible. IIRC they’re actually full of batteries. Weight distribution, polar moment of inertia, nightmarish, not that it matters on these homemade-looking shopping carts.
Citicar and Comuta-car set the electric car stereotype for an entire generation. As in maybe the bumpers are that big to store the ten-mile-long extension cord…. sh-boom.
Must gaze at this for awhile to erase those images from my mind.
And the “before” picture:
I have seen a few of those in central Ohio. But, never on the road or at the mall. Have only seen them at car shows.
I was going to say The MG Midget and MGB but someone beat me to it.
I have to say that the mk1 Jetta’s bumpers have always been a bit ridiculous to me. They’re practically park benches.
This is my best friend’s ’84 turbo diesel (a CC as soon as I get the time to finish it up 😉
before he did the euro bumper swap.
73 Lincoln Mark IV. 72 looked so good and the 73 bumper made the front look hideous.
Ford had four different front-end designs of its new-for-’72 models that had to be severely altered for the ’73 front bumpers: not only the Mark IV and Thunderbird but also the Torino and Montego lines. Likewise, Chrysler’s mostly-new-for-’72 large cars had five different front ends, of which three required full redesigns for ’73: Newport/New Yorker, Polara, and Fury (the Monaco and Imperial were able to get by with rubber blocks only, at least outwardly). And GM would have been in the same boat with its four different makes of intermediates (representing perhaps seven or eight different front end designs) had it not been forced to carry over the 1971 cars for an extra year.
I always enjoy seeing a delicate-bumpered ’72 Mark IV (especially without the optional horizontal bumper guard across the bottom of the grille) and in that respect I’m glad cars like it and the ’72 Gran Torino were made, if only for one year. But the expense of changing so radically the front end of an existing design must have been as hideous as the results.
The Datsun 280Z. Especially when you consider how gorgeous the 240Z was.
That first Z went through five bumper changes in one generation of the same sheetmetal, which I believe was a record. Porsche 901-933 had more total bumper designs but the sheetmetal changed too.
240Z 70 − 72
240Z 73 (I believe front different than 72 but may be same)
260Z 74 – early 75
280Z late 75 − 76
280Z 77 − 78 (pic below)
I liked the 77-78 bumpers almost as much as the 70-73. The 75-76 were really ugly and it’s no wonder they changed them.
AMX Banacek Edition
Comet, Matador, X1/9, Mazda RX4 you guys got them all!
I thought these bumper on the 75-76 Porsche 914 were really awful.
The ’85-’93 Cadillac de Ville. Yes, some ’70s designs might have been worse, but this one hung around an embarrassingly long time on what was supposed to be a “luxury ” car.
wow, I tended to say anything Mercedes in the late 70ies had a ridiculous overbite … but man, there where truly truly … ATROCIOUS things on the market these days! thanks everybody for filling me in!
Back in the day, my opinion was that FoMoCo had the least integrated bumpers. But, there were certainly other offenders with a year or two of big, bulky, un-stylish “safety” bumpers. In my mind, the Maverick/Comet were a great example. I liked the looks of the pre-safety bumper Maverick and Comet. But, with the big, bulky safety bumpers added, it seemed like the looks of the car were ruined.
1. just about any Ford from 74-78
2. the 73-74 Plymouth Satellite sedan. Chrysler tidied them up a bit on the 75s but you could use the bumpers off this 74 (picture cribbed from CC) as support beams for skyscrapers
Triumph Spitfire
lol
Front bumper on that Comet reminds me of Mr. Bottomtooth from Family Guy
There is a ’79 Maserati Merak over on BAT right now that is a beautiful design ruined by federal bumpers. I’d copy pics if I knew how.
Here’s another assault on the eyes… and what’s with that goofy upturn at the corners???
-1
That car is beautiful and I’d love to add it to my pile of other ’73 Buick intermediates — especially in that green-gold metallic. The ’74 or ’75 models without the upturn look goofy to me. Oh well, WHATEVER.
I have to add the ’75-78 Eldorado. Top points for integrating the bumpers with ‘flexible for five years’ painted rubber filler panels around the front and rear lamps, which were integrated into the bumper as vertical sections. These looked great when new. Unfortunately, a few midwestern 100 degree summer/ -15 degree winter combinations combined with GM’s poor paint during that era meant that these cracked and eventually fell off- leaving the bumpers and sidelamps/ taillamps floating in midair. Of course these parts were unobtainable after very few years, and the fact that EVERY Eldo had the same problem meant that you couldn’t find good ones in a scrap yard either.
Conversely, I do have warm regard for big battering ram bumpers, as on my previous ’79 ‘commando bumper’ Volvo 245. These were ugly, but MUCH less ugly than a car with sheet metal damage after parking next to incompetent fools who park by feel. Here in the UK, few people have driveways, and your car is always exposed to the poor driving skills of your fellow motorist. The ’70s cars we had here had very beautifully integrated bumpers, but they were thin strips of chrome that often sat below a jutting out bonnet or wing line that took the brunt of any bump. My Volvo was hit by an Audi at 20mph and the only damage was to the bumper pistons, which bent at their metal bracket. It would have been a write-off if it had the slim 145 style bumpers and considerably uglier after the accident than the commando bumpers. Volvo also marketed their cars on safety, and I think intentionally made the bumpers ugly and big as a marketing ploy. Thankfully, they also made the filler panels out of black rubber which did not crack and deteriorate the way the body color plastic inserts did on US cars.
’74 2002
Coming in late here, but anything by FoMoCo and the ’74-78 AMC Matador/Ambassador get my vote. The GM colonnades were no prizes either, but Ford seemed to go out of their way to make their bumpers look like afterthoughts.
Incidentally, the initial standards were 5mph front/2.5 mph rear for ’73, moving to 5mph rear in ’74. That’s how GM and Chrysler got away with essentially carryover rear clips and bumpers, plus bumper guards in ’73, although I’ve never understood how the front bumper guards on ’73 Chrysler C-Bodies met the standard. Anybody know?
As for the Chrysler R-Bodies (and companion Cordoba/Mirada/imperial), those bumper wraps were inexcusable – especially as Chrysler did a perhaps the best integration jobs of the era with the new ’74 C-Bodies and the remodeled ’75-78 B-Bodies (and Cordoba/Charger/Magnum). I remember looking under the front bumper of a ’79 New Yorker Fifth Avenue – in Champagne, of course – and the ends of the wrap arounds were held in tension by a pair of bungee cords!