Front and Rear Bumpers in California

[tinkwithanr]

Quick question for FAQers in California. I'm going to be moving there in a few months time and so I've been trying to keep the regulations and such in mind while I decide what route to take my project.

Which brings me to the point of what bumpers, if any, I want to run. Right now I'm leaning toward a turbo air dam in the front and no bumper in the rear a.k.a. the shaved look with the regular bumper holes filled in. In your experience is running not bumpers a big no-no as far as police are concerned. I do realize that it would leave my body much more susceptible to damage, but considering it's current condition I'm not to worried about it. And if the fender bender is anything more than 5 mph the bumper wouldn't be doing much protecting anyway. Pretty much my only concern is getting in trouble with the law, or giving them a reason to pull me over etc.

Thanks for you help!

[Colin]

You'll be alright.

[ziff73]

Probably not a big deal, but I would get tickets from parking enforcement when I had the bumper off the front of my 76' 10 years ago... Real cops never seemed to care, though.

[SteveJ]

Years ago, OK, many years ago, I did get a ticket for no front bumper on my 2002. I had taken the front bumper off and installed a Zender air dam. The Walnut Creek police officer also wrote the ticket for bald tires. I wasn't going to argue with him, but the tires were Yokohama A-008's which had that big solid shoulder on the outside edge. Had the officer looked, he would have seen the tires actually had plenty of tread.

I put the front bumper and license plate back on the car and took it over to the CHP office for them to sign off on the ticket. Sat there for 20 minutes talking cars with the officer there.

A few take-aways:

The air dam was black plastic and stood out on the front of the car. I have seen people paint these body color and include a black stripe which looks like a sort of bumper and carried the trim line around the car. A chrome rear bumper and no front bumper also stands out. This was in the late 80's and molded in body bumpers were not the norm. BMW didn't start this until they redid the E30 bumpers starting with the 88 M3.

Nowdays, these molded in bumpers are very common, and a airdam only (sans bumper) on a 2002 may not stand out as much.

The CVC does state that a front bumper is to be fitted. When I got my ticket, they still had such a thing as 'fix-it' tickets that you could just get signed off and be on your way. Those days are gone. Now you have to get the ticket signed off AND pay a fine.

I'd look through the CVC and see what you find.

It's your call. You may never get stopped, or...

[pocho]

i have a 74 DD and a 72 just restored, working construction in and around los angeles i cringe at the thought of my small bumper car being parked where it is succeptible to people who think that "hitting" your bumper is the time to stop, i've witnessed this twice on my 74. having said that, i ran without the front bumper on my 74 for about two months doing some front valance work, never got pulled over, my wife had to use it one day, as soon as she pulled onto the main hwy. she got pulled over and issued a fix it tix. took awhile to smooth that one over. where in cali. are you moving to? chris 74 dd 72 weekender 2001 suburban

[c.d.iesel]

look at your Calif DMV rules - online

V C Section 28071 Passenger Vehicle Bumper Requirements

Passenger Vehicle Bumper Requirements

28071. Every passenger vehicle registered in this state shall be equipped with a front bumper and with a rear bumper. As used in this section, "bumper" means any device designed and intended by a manufacturer to prevent the front or rear of the body of the vehicle from coming into contact with any other motor vehicle. This section shall not apply to any passenger vehicle that is required to be equipped with an energy absorption system pursuant to either state or federal law, or to any passenger vehicle which was not equipped with a front or rear bumper, or both, at the time that it was first sold and registered under the laws of this or any other state or foreign jurisdiction.

Amended Ch. 451, Stats. 1973. Effective January 1, 1974.

[tinkwithanr]

I'll be moving to the bay area, probably somewhere near Stanfords campus.

And I did look up the laws, and yes it does say that a vehicle fitted with a bumper from the factory needs to still have one. But that doesn't mean they heavily enforce the law. In Ohio there are window tint laws, but they never get enforced for example. I was just curious if it was something similar.

Thanks for the replies!

[jayamasaki]

I live in the San Gabriel area, way far south from your move here to Cali, its great here. So many kids, posers, ricers, hot rodders, chunties, and just plain ol jallopies i'd say no harrasments with no bumpers here. I think personally where i live, there is too many cars that are modified in so many ways the cops, and sherrifs dont really harrass. Just so as long as your not fucking around too much.

Last time I got a ticket for something "modified" related was no front plate, but it was years ago, and my car was slammed to the ground, i running an open header, and had blacked out tint, and a motor that didnt match my vin# to the car (he made me pop my hood).

To my defense, (about the open header) i was on my way to the muffler shop from my mechanics, he had just swapped the motor out and of course it sounded pretty awesome, so i was hammering down on the throttle SGV police said he had heard me blocks away....

[Colin]

I'll be moving to the bay area, probably somewhere near Stanfords campus.

And I did look up the laws, and yes it does say that a vehicle fitted with a bumper from the factory needs to still have one. But that doesn't mean they heavily enforce the law. In Ohio there are window tint laws, but they never get enforced for example. I was just curious if it was something similar.

Thanks for the replies!

I live near where you do and frequently drive in the Stanford area. My 2002 is my daily driver and I have the Kamei airdam and have NEVER had a problem. It looks like it IS the bumper.

I have gotten the no front plate ticket, however.

[tinkwithanr]

Good to know. Do you think putting the plate visibly in the front windshield would work for that? That's what I do in Ohio and it seems to get the job done.

[Colin]

Good to know. Do you think putting the plate visibly in the front windshield would work for that? That's what I do in Ohio and it seems to get the job done.

I see many of the honda kids doing that here and I don't know how well it works out.

I will say that I've gotten the no front plate ticket 4 times in a little over 5 years.

4 of those times were from the DPT who issue parking tickets. Those are about $30 to pay off. I've not gotten a front plate because it requires quite a lot of work as my car never had a front plate.

The 5th time was from a cop in training in San Francisco. That one was $183.

[ricortes]

I'll be moving to the bay area, probably somewhere near Stanfords campus.

And I did look up the laws, and yes it does say that a vehicle fitted with a bumper from the factory needs to still have one. But that doesn't mean they heavily enforce the law. In Ohio there are window tint laws, but they never get enforced for example. I was just curious if it was something similar.

Thanks for the replies!

California is known for social engineering. Palo Alto is probably one of the better cities in that they don't harass the local citizenry but just about any place you would go you would find trouble.

#1 problem is California is trying vigorously to get rid of all pre ~1990 cars so everyone from meter maids to DMV will give you a ration in the misguided notion they are saving the planet.

#2 We have our own form of DWB: If by some chance you are caught in the wrong neighborhood by the cops i.e. In a rich neighborhood they will think you are there to rob people, in a poor neighborhood they think you are there to buy drugs, the car gets the 3rd degree.

It would probably be safe to drive locally as long as you had ID that showed you lived there or on the freeway during normal hours. God help you if for some reason you had to pull off the freeway after dark for gas somewhere that is known for drugs or an upscale area like Atherton.

Rick

[Colin]

I'll be moving to the bay area, probably somewhere near Stanfords campus.

And I did look up the laws, and yes it does say that a vehicle fitted with a bumper from the factory needs to still have one. But that doesn't mean they heavily enforce the law. In Ohio there are window tint laws, but they never get enforced for example. I was just curious if it was something similar.

Thanks for the replies!

California is known for social engineering. Palo Alto is probably one of the better cities in that they don't harass the local citizenry but just about any place you would go you would find trouble.

#1 problem is California is trying vigorously to get rid of all pre ~1990 cars so everyone from meter maids to DMV will give you a ration in the misguided notion they are saving the planet.

#2 We have our own form of DWB: If by some chance you are caught in the wrong neighborhood by the cops i.e. In a rich neighborhood they will think you are there to rob people, in a poor neighborhood they think you are there to buy drugs, the car gets the 3rd degree.

It would probably be safe to drive locally as long as you had ID that showed you lived there or on the freeway during normal hours. God help you if for some reason you had to pull off the freeway after dark for gas somewhere that is known for drugs or an upscale area like Atherton.

Rick

California is certainly full of socialist B.S., but I have no idea what you're on about. Do you live in the Bay Area? For the most part, most people love seeing a classic BMW and no one will think you are out to rob people or to purchase drugs. This is a ridiculous notion. The Bay Area probably has more classic cars out daily then just about ANYWHERE in the world. I drive mine DAILY and NEVER have issues with law enforcement.

[jayamasaki]

I'll be moving to the bay area, probably somewhere near Stanfords campus.

And I did look up the laws, and yes it does say that a vehicle fitted with a bumper from the factory needs to still have one. But that doesn't mean they heavily enforce the law. In Ohio there are window tint laws, but they never get enforced for example. I was just curious if it was something similar.

Thanks for the replies!

California is known for social engineering. Palo Alto is probably one of the better cities in that they don't harass the local citizenry but just about any place you would go you would find trouble.

#1 problem is California is trying vigorously to get rid of all pre ~1990 cars so everyone from meter maids to DMV will give you a ration in the misguided notion they are saving the planet.

#2 We have our own form of DWB: If by some chance you are caught in the wrong neighborhood by the cops i.e. In a rich neighborhood they will think you are there to rob people, in a poor neighborhood they think you are there to buy drugs, the car gets the 3rd degree.

It would probably be safe to drive locally as long as you had ID that showed you lived there or on the freeway during normal hours. God help you if for some reason you had to pull off the freeway after dark for gas somewhere that is known for drugs or an upscale area like Atherton.

Rick

California is certainly full of socialist B.S., but I have no idea what you're on about. Do you live in the Bay Area? For the most part, most people love seeing a classic BMW and no one will think you are out to rob people or to purchase drugs. This is a ridiculous notion. The Bay Area probably has more classic cars out daily then just about ANYWHERE in the world. I drive mine DAILY and NEVER have issues with law enforcement.

HAHA unless your in a vehicle that says "rape Beemer" or have a sticker that says "I heart cocaine" i think you'll be OK as far as Automobile profiling.

[1972_Targa]

The other possible issue that you may want to think about is insurance related. I had a friend years ago in Houston who had removed both bumpers, and got rear ended. The rear-ender's insurance company made a big stink, saying that his 2002 sustained far greater damage with no bumper in place. In the end, they paid up, but not at the level he was after. Might be worth asking about or checking into. Just sayin'.