Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 07:44:10 -0500
Reply-To: EMZ <vw4x4@FYI.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From: EMZ <vw4x4@FYI.NET>
Subject: Passive restraining systems.
In-Reply-To: <199811172221.WAA97210@out1.ibm.net>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
WHat the F$%^&#$%!! is wrong with our goverment! All this
crap on new cars, and we still need to put on our seat belts.
Passive restrains (air bags) have failed!
It's really obvious that Air bags do little once passengers
where there seat belts, yet they are still mandated.
We don't need to get rid of air bags ...,, we need
to get rid of the government!
On Tue, 17 Nov 1998, David Beierl wrote:
> ** Reply to message from DOINKS99@AOL.COM on Tue, 17 Nov 1998
> 16:46:29 EST
>
> The "passive" restraining system was a terrible compromise which the
> US gov't allowed/required in lieu of airbags during the airbag
> phase-in period. The requirement was a restraint that the passenger
> didn't have to apply by hand. Usual systems were: Shoulder belt
> attached to door, manual lap belt; Shoulder belt attached to motorized
> car above door frame, travelled forward when you open the door and aft
> when you close it -- and a manual lap belt; and (VW!) Shoulder belt
> attached to door, knee bolsters instead of lap belt. None of these
> methods are anywhere near as safe as a standard 3-point belt properly
> applied, and I personally am enraged that my own safety is compromised
> in an effort to force people to wear belts. The irony is that for
> perfectly legitimate reasons, all those shoulder belts have an
> emergency release at the top, so people who don't want to wear them
> simply unhook them at the top end! Grrrrr!
>
> As far as converting from standard to one of these abortions, It
> would be hard -- the door has to be strengthened and special catches
> put into the B-pillar and the belt reels have to go in the middle of
> the car instead of at the sides. I think the motorized kind would be
> impossible.
>
>
> David
>
>
> > I found out that the safety standard this 88 crew cab didn't meet
> was the
> > restraining system. I was told that it must have a passive
> restraining system
> > and that this one has an active system. When i drove the vehicle i
> noticed no
> > difference in the seat belts. Does anyone know of this difference in
> > restraining systems?
>
>
> David Beierl <dbeierl@ibm.net>
> 401 274-5827 voice, -6349 fax
> OS/2 V4, FP7, JVM 1.1.6, JSM 98.6.3
>
| 
