cline@aero.ARPA (Ken Cline) (09/12/85)
I would like to know the real differences between different kinds of
harnesses for street use. I find a lap belt adequate at keeping me in my
seat in place while turning my fwd gerbil box with long tread life radials
(which I occationally drive somewhat hard). However, I question the security
of a conventional lap belt/shoulder harness system.
In particular:
o Are the inertial seat belts less safe than the kind that remain static.
(they are certainly more convienent some of the time).
o Is the added confinement of a four point harness valuable in a
collision? (i.e. can you fall out of the should part in a sideways
impact, can the shoulder belt cause injury from bad placement?)
o Is there any reason to use a five point harness in a street car?
Harnesses are certainly pretty looking in sporty cars. And they are
required by many (all?) serious racing orgainzations, even for showroom
stock class cars. Enlighten me further...
Ken Cline@Aerospace.ARPAgnosis@fluke.UUCP (Chris Villani) (09/20/85)
> I find a lap belt adequate at keeping me in my >seat in place while turning my fwd gerbil box with long tread life radials >(which I occationally drive somewhat hard). However, I question the security >of a conventional lap belt/shoulder harness system. The primary purpose of the shoulder strap is to keep you from needing dental work after swallowing your steering wheel |-) and it will hopefully keep your passenger from encountering the windscreen. > o Are the inertial seat belts less safe than the kind that remain static. > (they are certainly more convienent some of the time). I have only heard of one instance in which an inertial type system failed in an accident. This was due to pilot error. The vehicle was a BMW 5 series. For some reason the owner had rerigged the system so that the strap exiting the inertial reel was not vertical which is required for proper operation in this case. The result was some very sore ribs and a dent/bruise with a radius of curvature equal to the steering wheel across his forehead. Lucky. Also noteworthy: when I was flying light aircraft in the Air Force we used a 4 point harness system with the top 2 points attatched to an inertial reel above and behind my head. I personally prefer a static system with the shoulder harness adjusted to allow unimpeded steering in an emergency situation or competition (autocrosses and track sessions). > o Is the added confinement of a four point harness valuable in a > collision? (i.e. can you fall out of the should part in a sideways > impact, can the shoulder belt cause injury from bad placement?) The more points the better as long as your ability to respond safely is not compromised. A snug static system will be of more benefit in a "sideways impact". Proper placement of the shoulder strap is an absolute must when small children are using them to prevent potentially fatal neck injuries. In fact it is often better to not use the shoulder strap (runit behind the seat) with kids. Generally kids are short enough so they will not impact the dash. > o Is there any reason to use a five point harness in a street car? I've never heard of such a thing. Enlighten me! In general the only reason we have inertial type systems is that people bitch about the little extra hassle involved using static systems that are a little less comfortable but superior from a safety point of view. Chris Villani
haapanen@watdcsu.UUCP (Tom Haapanen [DCS]) (09/24/85)
In article <1474@vax3.fluke.UUCP> gnosis@fluke.UUCP (Chris Villani) writes: >> o Is there any reason to use a five point harness in a street car? >I've never heard of such a thing. Enlighten me! The fifth point (and sixth, in case of a six-point harness) is a "submarine belt", designed to keep you from sliding forward UNDER the belts. It goes from the buckle, down the front of the seat, to the floor. In my opinion, a submarine belt is completely unnecessary for street use (as well as a hassle to use). \tom haapanen watmath!watdcsu!haapanen