Airbags Could End Veyron Sales in the US

[YSSMAN]

U.S. airbag regulations are threatening to "put Bugatti out of business," said company president Thomas Bscher in a letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. He said the new regulations — which go into effect in September — would cause Bugatti "substantial economic hardship" and have a "catastrophic" impact on sales. That's because the required changes would add at least ten percent to the cost of the automaker's only car, the Veyron.

In May, Ferrari was granted an exemption from the new rules for its F430 supercar. The regulations aim to require "smart" airbags that will help protect children and some women.

Volkswagen — which owns Bugatti — has warned that profits at its Lamborghini subsidiary may also be decimated if the automaker is not granted an exemption. VW has said it would have to conduct 120 crash tests to implement the technology. The automaker said Lamborghini's earnings would fall from a $2.2 million profit to a $6.0 million loss. Meanwhile, Bugatti is already expecting to lose $3.8 million over the next three years, and the added costs would make any near-term profitability impossible.

VW argues that the "smart" airbags do little to improve safety. The automaker also warns it would have to delay or stop development of the next-generation Veyron. Bugatti says the next-generation Veyron — due in 2009 — would meet the regulations.

Remember our little discussion about the Ferraris having trouble a few months back? Much the same thing once again, so I'd pretty much call it a "don't worry about it" type thing.

Anyway, I don't see how this is going to put them out of business. They are only supposed to be selling a few cars here, so whats the big deal?

 

[Swift]

Well, I think that there should be exceptions for cars of that level. Just because nobody with any sense would put a child in a Veyron. At least not a small child...

 

[Poverty]

lol I think VAG would rather not have to change anything concerning the veyron, but if they have to they could easily pass on the extra cost to the customer, and say that they have added a bigger glovebox hence the price increase

As for lamborghiniit would be sad, but 6 million is nothing to a company like VAG, but every little helps.

 

[Jim Prower]

I think our safety laws are overrestrictive anyway. I've never liked airbags...I've always thought the seatbelt a much better and more effective restraint device. The Side Curtian 'bags, on the other hand, are a very good idea, but front-impact 'bags are often as dangerous as they are safe.

and what was with 5mph bumpers? (no, seriously, what do they do?)

 

[Alex.]

TVR'S have no airbags so cant they be sold in the US?

 

[Dave A]

That's one reason of many that TVR's arn't sold in the US, but the new owner is working to create a line of cars that will meet US regualtions with the aim to try and bring the TVR brand back to America once again.

 

[Swift]

and what was with 5mph bumpers? (no, seriously, what do they do?)

Cost us a LOT of money from the lightest tap. That's all.

 

[Carl.]

Is there any regulation against Britney Spears being allowed to drive yet?

I mean, at least, that would have the merit to potentially save one child.

 

[///M-Spec]

Is there any regulation against Britney Spears being allowed to drive yet?

I mean, at least, that would have the merit to potentially save one child.

Britney was granted federal exemption status back in 2003: she comes with a pair of her own airbags.


Three, if you count Federline.


Thank you! Thank you! I'll be here all week, folks.


M

 

[McLaren]

That's not good for Lamborghini given this has been one of their most profitable years.

 

[Tornado]

I like how the article implies that Bugatti is so far worse of because of this.​

He said the new regulations — which go into effect in September — would cause Bugatti "substantial economic hardship" and have a "catastrophic" impact on sales.

Right. It would drastically lower sales from 15 per millenia to 14 per millenia, because guy number 15 doesn't want to bother to buy his way past the law like Billy Gates has done, or even gray market the car.
​

That's because the required changes would add at least ten percent to the cost of the automaker's only car, the Veyron.

Wait, $130,000 for an airbag? It sure as hell better be encrusted with diamonds, regardless of if that voids the point of said airbag. Seriously though, anyone who was willing to buy a Veyron wouldn't care if the car had to add another million to the price.

Meanwhile, Bugatti is already expecting to lose $3.8 million over the next three years, and the added costs would make any near-term profitability impossible.

What are they talking about? Bugatti is said to lose 3.8 million per car. How the hell are they supposed to profit at all?

 

[harrytuttle]

This whole thing is like requiring a 1967 Mustang to have ABS. The car's finished its development, it passed the regulations once, and let's move on to the next one. It's double jeopardy, only for cars.

Cost us a LOT of money from the lightest tap. That's all.

The intention was pedestrian safety. Or to keep insurance rates down, since steel bumpers don't cause as much damage on body panels. This only shifts the damage from the one who's been hit to the one doing the hitting: the plastic, foam-reinforced bumper just about dissolves on impact. It also helps to reduce whiplash, since the energy in slow-speed impacts are just absorbed by the crushed bumper. This is why fender-benders have gone from something your dad will never know about, to something you'll be working all summer to pay for.

What are they talking about? Bugatti is said to lose 3.8 million per car. How the hell are they supposed to profit at all?

That's right: 3.8 million @ 1 car per year = 3.8 million per year. I thought that VAG had written off all the development for them, thus Bugatti would at least break even by selling each car. I could be wrong, though....

 

[TS]

Britney was granted federal exemption status back in 2003: she comes with a pair of her own airbags.


Three, if you count Federline.


Thank you! Thank you! I'll be here all week, folks.


M

And who in their right mind who owns a veyron would actually drive it regularly?

 

[McLaren]

This whole thing is like requiring a 1967 Mustang to have ABS. The car's finished its development, it passed the regulations once, and let's move on to the next one. It's double jeopardy, only for cars.



The intention was pedestrian safety. Or to keep insurance rates down, since steel bumpers don't cause as much damage on body panels. This only shifts the damage from the one who's been hit to the one doing the hitting: the plastic, foam-reinforced bumper just about dissolves on impact. It also helps to reduce whiplash, since the energy in slow-speed impacts are just absorbed by the crushed bumper. This is why fender-benders have gone from something your dad will never know about, to something you'll be working all summer to pay for.




That's right: 3.8 million @ 1 car per year = 3.8 million per year. I thought that VAG had written off all the development for them, thus Bugatti would at least break even by selling each car. I could be wrong, though....

It's gotta be more than $3.8 million per year given there's been a good increase of the vehicles since they're official release in, late 2005 was it? The demand of the vehicle seems to be extremely high, esp. with 2-3 in California.

 

[JCE]

I think our safety laws are overrestrictive anyway. I've never liked airbags...I've always thought the seatbelt a much better and more effective restraint device. The Side Curtian 'bags, on the other hand, are a very good idea, but front-impact 'bags are often as dangerous as they are safe.

and what was with 5mph bumpers? (no, seriously, what do they do?)

Sorry, but Airbags have saved my life twice...you heard me twice. I don't buy this arguement about airbags do more harm than good. They clearly are a huge factor in reducing injuries and death. Yes the seatbelt alone is a good thing...but airbags ontop of them are even better. To use an analogy; a sniper rifle with no scope just isn't as effective as one with a scope. I see airbags+seatbelts in the same way. The people that get hurt by an airbag are the IDIOTS that sit too close to them, put children in the front seat, and improperly mount a childseat in the front or back.

And, I've had to listen rednecks try and say this crap for years here in Texas. Oddly enough the same rednecks don't even wear a seatbelt.

 

[red70mach1]

Overzealous regulators like to kill (or limit) niche markets. I take dislike in the system, but learned to live with it mostly.

 

[Sage]

Note to government: Just because you can legislate doesn’t mean you always should.

///M-Spec: You dirty.

 

[Sniffs]

JCE is the only break in the general grumble over the "over-safetyizing" of the american automobile. my vehicles are so damn old, anyway, that the airbag modules are probably long since fried. besides, I have my two airbag equipped models sitting here, rotting away to nothing cause I can't get rid of the damn things.

however, even I'm a grumbling as vehicles fall into tech overload cause you can't work on em...mostly cause there's no room due to the wiring harness alone...and that's my late eighties/early ninties leftovers I get stuck with.

the cause of the 70's and eighties government scrooge interference, where american cars were detuned so hard they couldn't get up over a speed bump, wa a combination of safety scares, monstorous insurance rates instigated by teenage baby boomers, and opec being it's p***y self. safety has lingered, but you can't kill performance at least.

btw...those 5MPH bumers DO stand up...on vehicles that aren't all soft plastic blend in. i was hit in the rear back at the beginning of 03 by a brand new Camry while puttering around in a 91 Acclaim...i got a teeny little scrape...her entire front end got smashed down, and her grille got punched in...cause she literally slid under me.

 

[Sage]

^ Yup – last year a friend of mine accidently plowed his older F-150 into the back of a new Toyota RAV4 at 40 mph. The RAV4 was demolished – the entire back end was wiped out till the back seats. His truck? I couldn’t even tell that there was anything wrong with it, until he pointed out that the front bumper was tilted up slightly. Not even a scratch on it.

I’ve looked at my Mazda 3’s bumpers, and it’s pretty scary how little protection they have – a thin piece of plastic with a couple blocks of styrofoam behind.

 

[L8 Apex]

Overzealous regulators like to kill (or limit) niche markets. I take dislike in the system, but learned to live with it mostly.

I guess I could do the same, were it not for the de facto ban California and 4 other states have on new diesel cars. In short, by the California Air Resource Board's "logic," a Hummer H2 that probably gets 10 mpg coasting downhill with a tailwind is okay, but a VW New Beetle TDI that probably gets 50+ mpg under the same conditions isn't! Go figure... 🤬

 

[1X83Z]

Why was Ferrari exempted?

I presume if Ferrari was exempted Bugatti and Lamborghini will be as well.

 

[YSSMAN]

I though Ferrari conformed? I can't be completely certain though...

I know Lotus is currently exempt, and it is part of the reason why they don't plan uppon brining the Europa to the US.

It makes you wonder how hard it would be to get GM or Nissan on the phone and say, "Hey, could we buy the rights to use your airbag systems in our cars?"

 

[1X83Z]

I though Ferrari conformed? I can't be completely certain though...

Lord - do you not read the articles you post either?!

In May, Ferrari was granted an exemption from the new rules for its F430 supercar. The regulations aim to require "smart" airbags that will help protect children and some women.

 

[YSSMAN]

Ooops...

...It's been a long night. We didn't get out of work untill 1 AM, so I'm quite tired...

 

[1X83Z]

Ooops...

...It's been a long night. We didn't get out of work untill 1 AM, so I'm quite tired...

Ah not a problem, not a problem - let's just focus all of our energy into keeping the beauty of the Veyron in the United States.

 

[Slicks]

I’ve looked at my Mazda 3’s bumpers, and it’s pretty scary how little protection they have – a thin piece of plastic with a couple blocks of styrofoam behind.

Kinda negates the point of a bumper, doesn't it?? New bumpers will always look better than the chromed I-beams of yesteryear, but it doesn't make sense to me that the bumper is more fragile than the rest of the body panels.

 

[niky]

It's built to give way. Sort of like it's better to have a huge marshmallow strapped to your forehead instead of a concrete block if you're falling face first into the ground.

General rule of thumb: the softest part of the car usually absorbs the brunt of the impact energy and disintegrates. Modern cars are designed to ensure that the softest part isn't necessarily the nut behind the wheel.

I'm confused, too, as to how hard it would be to install the weight sensor needed for the modified airbag system? 130,000 bucks sound like a lot for a dual-stage/function/whatever airbag and a chip under your butt...

 

[TheCracker]

It's gotta be more than $3.8 million per year given there's been a good increase of the vehicles since they're official release in, late 2005 was it? The demand of the vehicle seems to be extremely high, esp. with 2-3 in California.

Well, at the moment apparantly the UK has the highest amount of Veyrons on order - a huge 15!

They can't be expecting that much of a loss from a maximum of 14 cars?

 

[ExigeEvan]

VW has said it would have to conduct 120 crash tests to implement the technology.

Did everyone else miss this? The reason it'll be so expensive to issue is because they'll have to destroy many millions of cars just for testing.

^ Yup – last year a friend of mine accidently plowed his older F-150 into the back of a new Toyota RAV4 at 40 mph. The RAV4 was demolished – the entire back end was wiped out till the back seats. His truck? I couldn’t even tell that there was anything wrong with it, until he pointed out that the front bumper was tilted up slightly. Not even a scratch on it.

It's because of the crumple zones now used in a variety (nearly all over here I think) cars. In a way, he should be thankful for it, other wise it would have been like two hammers hitting each other rather than a hammer hitting a 'soda' can.

 

[Dave A]

The losses on the Veyron are huge, the more cars they make and sell the lower the loss it, if they sell 4 cars each Veyron has cost Bugatti in the hundereds of millions. They sell the Veyron for more than it costs them to actually build the car, but the price they're selling it for isn't making the cost of the cars development. If they build and sell 400 cars, they are making a £3.8 million loss on each car.