Re: Anyone fitted mudflaps to a 6C?
Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 12:53 pm
Thanks, folks, for all your inputs. Special thanks to SRGTD for supplying those links. I have, in fact, now sent an enquiry to vwmotorparts, including some pictures taken by me of the lower parts of the wheelarches and cills on my Polo. However, your various comments may now have changed my mind about fitting mudflaps.
Certainly, on previous cars of mine I've always fitted mudflaps - but not for any of the reasons you guys have annunciated. Primarily, my reason hitherto has been to keep rainwater and mud away from the ends of the cills at their front ends. The latter have generally not been fully closed entities (at that end) and, despite internal wax treatment, have been susceptible to corrosion. However, it's always been a double-edged sword, because usually fixing mudflaps to the wheelarches has involved putting further holes and screws into the metalwork, which themselves then have to be regularly inspected and treated against corrosion. Generally, I've been highly wary of the potential for rust to catch hold at the cill front ends. It can be a situation where you can become complacent and then suddenly one day you notice corrosion bubbling through that end of the cill from the inside. It's then too late to do much about it.
As for rear mudflaps, well, I'd say they tend to get fitted more to preserve the symmetry than anything else. If there's any practical advantage it's not to the driver's car but to vehicles travelling behind, as the rear ones stop a lot of the roadspray and stones from being thrown into the path of following vehicles. It could be argued that we'd all be better off if mudflaps were always factory-fitted on all vehicles by default, because it'd likely make motorway driving in wet weather that much safer. However, that debate needs to be left to another time.
Incidentally, if my own Polo is anything to go by, VW still leaves the front ends of the cills largely open; the cills are certainly not hermetically sealed. And the area just behind the front end of the cill is a bit of a mud-trap, it has to be said. The only thing that appears to keep the majority of water and mud from being thrown by the wheel at the cill end is the plastic wheelarch insert, but the interface between the two, namely at the outside edge, still remains a potential entry point.
All that said though, mudflaps no longer seem to make much of an improvement to this. Indeed, the wheelarch covers themselves provide the protection instead, right to the very edges of the wheelarch rims.
As has been pointed out, a fitted set of the kind now available can look a bit garish and 'out-of-place', especially if the car's body colour is bright. I agree that, going by those pictures, the aesthetics are degraded by their addition. So, seeing that has, alone, somewhat put me off. Incidentally, my guess is that the ones shown in those shots are the short ones. There'd be a risk I'd think, with the long ones, of catching them on servicing ramps, kerbs, and roadhumps.
So, once again, thanks folks for making this a worthwhile discussion and causing me a re-think. I'll now give 'em a miss.
Certainly, on previous cars of mine I've always fitted mudflaps - but not for any of the reasons you guys have annunciated. Primarily, my reason hitherto has been to keep rainwater and mud away from the ends of the cills at their front ends. The latter have generally not been fully closed entities (at that end) and, despite internal wax treatment, have been susceptible to corrosion. However, it's always been a double-edged sword, because usually fixing mudflaps to the wheelarches has involved putting further holes and screws into the metalwork, which themselves then have to be regularly inspected and treated against corrosion. Generally, I've been highly wary of the potential for rust to catch hold at the cill front ends. It can be a situation where you can become complacent and then suddenly one day you notice corrosion bubbling through that end of the cill from the inside. It's then too late to do much about it.
As for rear mudflaps, well, I'd say they tend to get fitted more to preserve the symmetry than anything else. If there's any practical advantage it's not to the driver's car but to vehicles travelling behind, as the rear ones stop a lot of the roadspray and stones from being thrown into the path of following vehicles. It could be argued that we'd all be better off if mudflaps were always factory-fitted on all vehicles by default, because it'd likely make motorway driving in wet weather that much safer. However, that debate needs to be left to another time.
Incidentally, if my own Polo is anything to go by, VW still leaves the front ends of the cills largely open; the cills are certainly not hermetically sealed. And the area just behind the front end of the cill is a bit of a mud-trap, it has to be said. The only thing that appears to keep the majority of water and mud from being thrown by the wheel at the cill end is the plastic wheelarch insert, but the interface between the two, namely at the outside edge, still remains a potential entry point.
All that said though, mudflaps no longer seem to make much of an improvement to this. Indeed, the wheelarch covers themselves provide the protection instead, right to the very edges of the wheelarch rims.
As has been pointed out, a fitted set of the kind now available can look a bit garish and 'out-of-place', especially if the car's body colour is bright. I agree that, going by those pictures, the aesthetics are degraded by their addition. So, seeing that has, alone, somewhat put me off. Incidentally, my guess is that the ones shown in those shots are the short ones. There'd be a risk I'd think, with the long ones, of catching them on servicing ramps, kerbs, and roadhumps.
So, once again, thanks folks for making this a worthwhile discussion and causing me a re-think. I'll now give 'em a miss.