Passat wagon cargo/boot divider?

[Marakai]

The Milford barriers issue a disclaimer saying that the barrier is only certified to a load rating of 60kg so if you load the rear up like we

What HB said. I have no quibbles with ratings. E=mv^2 is a bitch of a law. 60kg at 100km/h is a missile that will take your head off and applies to any object loaded in a wagon that isn't secured and can freely move forward in the case of an emergency stop.

My quibble is, if anything, Euro (specifically German) regs are far more safety oriented (and not so much with an eye on lawsuits and insurance, which in Australia has taken US levels of idiocy), so if they have barriers that are rated, I daresay that they meet or exceed what a Milford would do, yet with more elegance and more modern materials. I need to read what the speed and weight ratings are for the German VW part. Always keep the significantly higher speed limits in Germany in mind.

That said, the barrier for the Passat isn't even focused on stopping high stacked items: unless that has changed, it's against the law anyway, not the least because it obscures view to the rear. I'll see what I can find.

[Guest001]

Uhm, deep breath, mate! While I think it's as idiotic as you do, from what I gather ADR is being withheld, which is NOT VW's doing. Rather the legislation and regulator is being a pr*ck. Obviously if they told me the truth, but even then it could be dealer making stuff up whole cloth, not VW themselves.

The probable answer actually is that people like MIlford make gear to sell and the R&D costs money as does compliance with relevant rules.

There are lots of vehicles they dont make them for BECAUSE OF LACK OF DEMAND.

They wont make units available that after all the expense they might sell 10 a year when stuff like Landcruiser and other 4x4 will buy hundreds if not thousands a year.

Makes logical business sense I would think.

All of Milford's barriers comply with all Aussie rules and standards.

Perhaps talk to Booba who want s to sell what you want.

[wai]

Thats a bit rugged The car is not unsafe in any way. UNLESS some idiot loads it higher than the back of the seats. This applies to any wagon and not just Passats. Just as an aside I saw a video of what a slab of beer did in the back of a hatchback.

Exactly. What I was trying to point out is the sheer absurdity of saying that having a cargo barrier is "unsafe" by refusing to sell one that does not meat Australian Standards, however you can still carry the exact same loads in the cargo area without any barrier at all and that is considered OK?

It's a simple risk assessment. As long as the barrier does not increase the risk to the occupants over having no barrier at all, the risk is reduced. In both cases, loads need to be secured. I do know that one of the dangers is that people see a barrier and therefore believe that no load restraint is needed. This is plainly wrong. Heck, having a box of tissues on the rear parcel shelf of a car can cause a heck of a lot of damage. Remember that impact forces will typically see a deceleration of 20 G. So a 250 g box of tissues becomes 5 kg box when it hits you on the noggin. I certainly would NOT want to be hit on the head by something that was 5 kg.

But then we all do stupid things. I seem to recall a death in one of the Around Australia Rallies where the team carried a rear axle housing unrestrained inside the vehicle. A sudden stop saw both driver and co-driver killed.

It is the stupidity of VW trying to play the nanny that saw my comments. So, if VW dealers take the attitude that the barrier not meeting the Australian Standard renders the vehicle unsafe and so will not sell it, then no barrier in the vehicle must make it even more unsafe. After all, loads must be restrained no matter what; barrier or no barrier no matter if the barrier meets Australian Standards or not.

In the case of a vehicle carrying 3 plastic 20 l jerry cans, a Honda generator, and a toolbox, they all should have been suitably restrained. It does not matter that they were all inside a vehicle. All a barrier would do is add a further level of protection should something else fail. There is no legal requirement to fit barriers. Any barrier simply has to add a level of additional protection over and above the normal restraints that should be used.

[kleung]

I'm looking at the Milford website right now and when I try to narrow down the search for Volkswagen, the Passat doesn't even show up.

Again, I did the same thing, and assumed that it wasn't available, until your post prompted me to get off my backside and ask the question. And since the Passat is not an unpopular car here, it stands to reason that some of the other manufacturers might have suitable barriers too.

The Milford barriers issue a disclaimer saying that the barrier is only certified to a load rating of 60kg so if you load the rear up like we

did when we went travelling in a Landcruiser it wouldnt be compliant anyway

Ironically, if you had loaded up the back of your Landcruiser, it probably would have been perfectly safe, since the objects behind the barrier wouldn't actually have any room to move around in the event of sudden deceleration.

The example of the unrestrained slab of beer you gave - if the slab was placed hard up against the back seats (and assuming it remained in that position while the vehicle was in motion), chances are it and the occupants would have been fine.

It is the stupidity of VW trying to play the nanny that saw my comments. So, if VW dealers take the attitude that the barrier not meeting the Australian Standard renders the vehicle unsafe and so will not sell it, then no barrier in the vehicle must make it even more unsafe.

According to the FAQs on Milford's website, AS4034.1:2008 also places liability on fleet operators and/or company executives should one of their employees be injured in an accident as a result of a non-compliant barrier. Without reading the AS4034.1 in its entirety, it's impossible to say what liabilities VWA or the dealership may incur as a result of selling you a non-compliant barrier.

I've also found in my research that in the UK (and presumably other parts of Europe as well), some barriers are sold as pet/dog barriers, and are designed only to separate the pet from the passenger compartment. These barriers are exempt from the regulations that apply to cargo barriers. To my knowledge, there is no equivalent exemption in the Australian Standards.

[phaeton]

Dare I say Isofix

Damn ADR would not know a safe item if it bit them on the you know what?

[wai]

I've also found in my research that in the UK (and presumably other parts of Europe as well), some barriers are sold as pet/dog barriers, and are designed only to separate the pet from the passenger compartment. These barriers are exempt from the regulations that apply to cargo barriers. To my knowledge, there is no equivalent exemption in the Australian Standards.

The thing though is that any load (passenger, pets or goods) must be suitably restrained, and ANY risk assessment will show that a barrier of ANY type (even a simple cargo net) has to result in a lower risk when compared to the same load without a barrier.

There ARE laws covering passengers where you can only have as many passengers as there are approved seatbelts fitted. There are also laws covering the type of restraint for the age of its user. On pets and goods, it is a broad requirement that they should be suitably restrained.

On any liability that VWA or fleet operators might have, this is nothing more than lawyers justifying their fees. The ONLY liability VWA might face would arise from any barrier they sell that might actually increase the risk. By this I mean one where the barrier itself is not properly restrained and so becomes an unrestrained load itself. This is not because it has been impacted by something, but because the barrier has come loose itself in an empty vehicle.

These are all simply quantifiable. In a risk assessment, you look at the risk before you do something and then the risk after you take steps. If the level of risk has not increased, then the assessment is acceptable.

It is far more likely that fleet operators and/or company directors/executives/employees would be in the firing line if they failed to restrain loads adequately or failed to provide operators with restraint mechanisms.

This gets really silly. Most wagons these days have load anchor points. My Caddy Maxi Life has 4 of them. They do not have a load rating sticker near them, and the same would go for most wagons on the market. Manufacturers also sell simple cargo nets, but from what I have seen they do not have any label listing what the maximum load they are designed to restrain. VWA or any other manufacturer would face a far greater liability selling or providing such features simply because there is no guidance provided to the driver as to what the safe working load of the anchor point is, but they are OK because there is no ADR or Australian Standard.

VWA would face some liability if they claimed a barrier passed the Australian Standard when they knew it had not. All VWA has to do is clearly state that the barrier is a secondary separator and that all loads must be adequately restrained and drivers should not rely on the barrier as a primary restraint system.

[Guest001]

[QUOTE

it's against the law anyway, not the least because it obscures view to the rear..[/QUOTE]

Only partly true. As long as you have your exterior mirrors it is not illegal to obscure your internal mirrors view to the rear.
To wit Towing a van, Driving a vehicle with solid rear doors as in a Hiace or god forbid a Transporter etc.

[Marakai]

it's against the law anyway, not the least because it obscures view to the rear..

Only partly true. As long as you have your exterior mirrors it is not illegal to obscure your internal mirrors view to the rear.
To wit Towing a van, Driving a vehicle with solid rear doors as in a Hiace or god forbid a Transporter etc.

Yeah, just had to check (it has been a while since I had to read the German road laws ). As long as you have two outside mirrors you may block the view of the internal rearview mirror. Other regs regarding securing the load, max weight, dimensions, etc apply, of course.

[Guest001]

Yeah, just had to check (it has been a while since I had to read the German road laws ). As long as you have two outside mirrors you may block the view of the internal rearview mirror. Other regs regarding securing the load, max weight, dimensions, etc apply, of course.

Perhaps a read of the Australian Road rules would be more beneficial. LOL

[Marakai]

Perhaps a read of the Australian Road rules would be more beneficial. LOL

Uhm, why? Did you miss that in my post further up I was specifically talking about German laws? I wasn't referring to Australian ones at all. Maybe should have made that clearer.