MX-3.com

I haven't taken the initiative to measure a stranger's bumper, but it appears to be shorter(top to bottom), meaning it wouldn't hang down quite so far as our bumper. Also, it's already got an exhaust path cut(non ghetto either, which disgusts me every time I see it...) I guess I'm looking for an option that will raise the lower edge of the bumper farther off the ground, while still looking stock.

Doesn't look any shorter to me but that's only my opinion. Why would you want to shorten back bumper anyway?

I honestly think the rear bumper is the worst looking part of the car, It gives the rear end a bulbous look that the rest of the car just doesn't match. It's the one thing about the look of the MX-3 that never sat right with me, and no aftermarket bumpers that I've seen improved my opinions... They all make it bigger, or more specifically taller.

The reason why the rear bumper is so big is to hide the spare tire bay.

Now, as you already know, when ("if") I can get another mx-3, modifying the rear bumper (both, front and rear, actually) is one of my first priorities, but that involves quite a lot more fabrication than just replacing the bumper itself.

Other than that, at least in my opinion, that bumper is too boxy for the 3.

The spare tire bay is going away if/when I find a smaller bumper

I know it's not as simple as bolting on another bumper, I just wanted to see what people thought.

I can see where you're coming from, it's got straight lines, not curves... The stock bumper is just so big, I want a smaller one that looks like it came on the car -.-

The only real change I would make to the bumper is having it lowered.. not shortened.. It does stick out a bit too much rear wise but definitely not downwards. Look at the car from the side man.. if you shrunk the bumper it would make it look like a taller vehicle which you don't want. You want it to look low and aggressive

Inodoro Pereyra wrote:The reason why the rear bumper is so big is to hide the spare tire bay.

Now, as you already know, when ("if") I can get another mx-3, modifying the rear bumper (both, front and rear, actually) is one of my first priorities, but that involves quite a lot more fabrication than just replacing the bumper itself.

Other than that, at least in my opinion, that bumper is too boxy for the 3.

Not entirely true...it's bulky to fit actual bumper aka bumper reinforcement, rebar, etc behind it which is mandatory on car for safety reasons (in case you are rear ended, rebar will absorb "energy" or simply put force of impact.

mitmaks wrote: Not entirely true...it's bulky to fit actual bumper aka bumper reinforcement, rebar, etc behind it which is mandatory on car for safety reasons (in case you are rear ended, rebar will absorb "energy" or simply put force of impact.

Read the original post. He's talking (WE are, actually) about the VERTICAL size of the bumper, not its horizontal protrusion from the body. And even that horizontal protrusion can be made much smaller, by moving the bumper reinforcement (and the supporting structure, spare tire bay included) forward a bit.

MM92: there's an idea I've been playing with for some time now. I'll give you more details on PM.

Hoodzy wrote:The only real change I would make to the bumper is having it lowered.. not shortened.. It does stick out a bit too much rear wise but definitely not downwards. Look at the car from the side man.. if you shrunk the bumper it would make it look like a taller vehicle which you don't want. You want it to look low and aggressive

I've never been a fan of the "aggressive" look people go for. I'd rather the car be fast, than "aggressive"... It's not fast if it drags on everything higher than the road itself Stock ride height = fine for dragging, lowered... not so much. Even the back end can drag if you don't take 45 seconds to leave your driveway. That just doesn't do it for me... If I lower the car even an inch, I want to know I'll still clear my bumpers.

mitmaks wrote:Not entirely true...it's bulky to fit actual bumper aka bumper reinforcement, rebar, etc behind it which is mandatory on car for safety reasons (in case you are rear ended, rebar will absorb "energy" or simply put force of impact.

You're right, from that perspective; I initially mentioned the height(top to bottom), as well as the bulbous appearance... It just strikes me as more bubbly than the rest of the car, which has curvy lines, not like this :



I could have been more descriptive, for that I'm sorry guys. It's an opinion thing, I just don't like the look of it from the rear. The side view of the rear bumper is just fine by me.

Erebuni made a shorter rear bumper, but you have to remove the rebar I believe. EZ_4_Fun has it on his car.

Here's a video of it, shows it very nicely
http://s974.photobucket.com/albums/ae22 ... Menace.mp4

That's a LOT shorter front to back, it's not noticeably shorter top to bottom though... Still, thanks for posting it, there may be more options than I've considered.

Ah, sorry, misunderstood which way you wanted it shorter.

No worries, I showed a single angle in the picture I posted, and didn't clarify what I meant It's funny that I do that, considering I usually use way more words to describe something than necessary!

I forgot one thing that is a MUST for me. I back into parking spaces 90% of the time, because the front lip won't clear even at stock height. I'd like to maintain my ability to do this, while driving a lower than stock MX-3.