IMHO
This whole issue of air bags and and other automotive safety devices really
boils
down to a very simple principle: there is really no serious lobby for the
automobile owner and/or driver. Therefore, when another lobby such as the
insurance industry, automobile manufacturers, or even government agencies
decides
to invoke some new regulations, the cost is simply passed on to the massive but
defenseless millions of automobile buyers.
We all know that money rules. It is the bean counters who actually make most of
the decisions about what solutions will most effectively meet the requirements
of
some new regulations. Government agencies are famous for ignoring the practical
cost considerations. Having been a government contractor for many years, I saw
countless examples of the government's utter disregard for the taxpayers money.
There are infinite ways to circumvent the systems that require competitive
bidding. The motivation which steers the insurance industry and the automobile
manufacturers is simply risk-management. The auto industry doesn't care what it
cost to put air bags in a car as long as every manufacturer is force to do the
same. The insurance industry is only concerned with minimizing expensive
injuries; while staying in compliance with the government regulations.
As any packaging engineer will tell you, the secret to protecting the contents
from damaged during shipment is to immobilize the contents within a resilient
material. Damage occurs when a force encounters an immovable object. If a
person is thrown against a hard dashboard, they will sustain some injury. On the
other hand, if the person immobilized by a five point harness as in a race car,
then that person will not move in a collision and therefore, will not sustain
injuries due to secondary impact.
The matter that was raised about the difficulty of entering a race car through
its window because the door was welded shut, can also be dealt with in a
cost-effective and simple matter: don't weld it shut. Presently, I think that
most car doors use a three-point mechanism to lock them: two hinges, and one
actual lock . If car doors fly open so frequently (I don't believe that they
do.) that this would somehow be a concern for use with a five point harness (I
do
not see the connection.) then additional locking mechanisms can be added to a
car
door with little expense and complexity. If we don't believe that, visit your
nearest office supply superstore and take a look at the cost difference of small
safes with anywhere from a two pin locking system all the way up to a six pin
locking system. I can tell you from my own recent experience, that such an
upgrade will cost a maximum of $75. These safes range in price from $125
through
$200.
My point is simply this: we should not be looking for a way to make sense out of
the regulations professing to try to protect the occupancy of a motor vehicle.
The choices that the various industries made regarding safety equipment were not
made with an ounce of common sense. These were business decisions not
engineering or scientific solutions.
Jim
Ajhsys@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 1/7/00 12:02:55 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> REwald9535@aol.com writes:
>
> << > << The safety devices used in race cars works better IMHO, and the last
> > thing
> > we need is to be getting punched in thbut when living of of the by George
> Foreman during an
> > accident. >>
> >
> > No question about it. Funny how competition seat belts are ILLEGAL for
> > street use in most states. Can anybody shed some light on that stupid
> move?
>
> Having driven race cars on the street, I can tell you that after a while,
> climbing over the side anti-intrusion bars gets a little old.
> While I don't know the reason behind race belts being illegal for road use,
> I
> have a couple of ideas. First they are not DOT approved, this is a deal
> ender right here. Secondly what if somebody "installed" the belts with a
> set
> of sheet metal screws, would they offer greater protection than the factory
> belts? Before you say that no one would do this, the masses are as***.
> Rick Ewald >>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> I guess that they have some legit reasons for not legalizing competition
> harni (plural of harness) in street cars. I guess I was thinking of us SCCA
> types who have a comp. harness in addition to the stock belt so we can play
> autocross on weekends. We mount the belts so they pass a tech inspection and
> are safe for competition. But you are right. I can just imagine how some
> people could botch up the job.
>
> Allen Hefner
> SCCA Philly Region Rally Steward
> '77 Midget
> '92 Mitsubishi Expo LRV Sport
|