| Author |
 Topic  |
|
leckstein
USA
411 Posts |
 Posted - 29/06/2008 : 13:01:56
|
I want to thank Bruce and note that his suggested solution is what I was thinking about. I was only seeking conformation from anyone who has actually done it. I did not intend to start a philosphical war over the proposal. We each drive our cars in different ways over very different roads and circumstances. I believe like most males(whether right or wrong) that I am a great driver. Been doing it now for almost fifty years. Anyone who drives a pre 55 MG (and I have three of the them) and doesn't drive them defensively with a gas tank sitting on their rear is not with us anymore.
I note that I drove in Great Britain in 1990 in a 54 TF on the Circuit Of Britain . I drove on every kind of road from motorways to singe carriageways. I had a US left hand drive car ,driving thus on the wrong side of the road. I covered more than 3000 miles with the seat belts firmly attached, and the belts did not cause one accident.
Ask those on this list who participated in the " British raids" what it was like driving in the USA and particular getting their vintage and MMM cars from the docks in New Jersey to their hotel using the twelve lane wide New Jersey Turnpike. Leaving your car as a result of an accident is certain death.
As a child, I would stand on the front seat of my fathers car. If he had to make a sudden stop, his arm would come out to hold me back and keep me from going through the windscreen. Today I watch moms spend three or four minutes putting their children into special child seats before they can go anywhere. It is a different world.
The point is, that for some of us, seat belts make sense, This does not mean that the other points of view are wrong, only that there is more than one correct view. Sorry to have stirred the emotions, but isn't this one of the reasons we have this forum?
Mike
Mike L |
 |
|
|
tonym
United Kingdom
654 Posts |
Posted - 29/06/2008 : 16:22:45
|
Mike
As one of the 3 "Raiders" to go on both of the most enjoyable New England Raids, I felt at the time that I was not in any real danger on your highways - even the 12 laners - and we seemed to sample most of the lanes!
The most dangerous aspect was the crap state of the road surfaces - we think they are bad over here - but nothing compared to the Newark area.
The other dangerous thing was out of control cars - with people leaning out of windows takin photos of us!
Tony Margel |
|
|
|
David Allison
United Kingdom
665 Posts |
Posted - 30/06/2008 : 09:24:00
|
As a H&S proffesional myself I am constantly amazed by people who propose solutions to problems which do not actually exist!
I always try look at a potential hazard from an objective point of view and most of the solutions come from "outside the box".
The most important thing to consider when delivering a solution to a potential cause of injury to person - is NOT to produce an equal or worse potential problem as part of the solution.
In my years competing in motor sport, my modern MG Midget was fitted with a rollover cage, high back racing seat, electronic extinguisher and six point race harness.
My first instinct in my everyday car is to buckle my seat belt (and to pull back the slack in the inertia belt to make sure it is tight).
When excercising (I cant say racing) a pre war car - the thought never enters my head.
WHY?
1: The chassis twists and bucks around like a piece of warm spaggetti and the thought of being attached to it and potentially injured by the belt tightening on me due to chassis twist puts me off!
A TD or TF does not suffer with this and indeed if I were to race one I might consider fitting belt to a TD or TF (but only with a full roll cage).
2: It is extremely unwise to fit belts to a car without fitting a roll cage - the risk of injury in an accident is significantly increased by fitting belts if a cage is NOT fitted.
The introduction of belts into the MGB cost MG a huge amount of investment in the early 1960's - this work included revisions to the chassis design to make sure the belts would not only work - but also provide a greater degree of safety than the car without belts.
The windscreen pillars, windscreen mounts, dash area, seat belt mounting points and the main floor - were all strengthened.
3: Mounting the safety cage and belts is also a problem - the first T type racers to fit cages and belts were not well thought out at all (at least 2 cars I know had bolted the assembly to the wooden floor!).
Fitting such safety equipment to MMM cars is inadvisable (I have already discussed belts so will not go there again) - bolting a cage to the chassis could increase the stress on the chassis frame to a degree that could cause stress fractures to the frame.
Reed, Bob and others have it right in my opinion - drive defensively and make sure the doors are properly shut.
Please dont introduce a potential for injury which is worse by fitting safety equipment which is unecessary.
Sorry Mike but you are well out of order on this one - please consider very carefully before fitting belts in a MMM car!
Regards David |
|
|
|
Bruce Sutherland
United Kingdom
1578 Posts |
Posted - 30/06/2008 : 12:50:22
|
David, all,
The original question wasààààöAny suggestions of where to anchor the (lap) belts on a two seat PA?ö
Whilst I agree with the concerns and advisability raised in fitting such safety devices to a car which was never conceived to have them, none-the-less the specific question raised "where to anchor" requested a specific answer.
I can well remember in my early motoring days when seat belts were just coming onto the market, owners of cars conscious of their benefits, began retro-fitting seat belts to their cars - e.g. early Morris Minors, etc.
In the early 70Æs I fitted rear lap & diagonal rear seat belts to my Cooper S 1275 then subsequently to the rear in my Renault 16, and these provided a serviceable fixing for my young sons safety seats. Due care was taken to reinforce the anchorage points with large load-spreading washers. Granted these were both saloons rather than an open 2 seater, but the belts served a good purpose in securing my youngsters in the car.
Over the years many of our cars have received, and continue to do so, many modifications away from their original specification, including modifications to fundamental safety-related features û non-standard brakes and steering systems to name but two.
Not withstanding DavidÆs sage advice, more recent technology may be fitted to older vehicles. Owners of cherished vehicles are mature and intelligent people (viz this forum) and, cognoscente of the pros and cons, may choose to apply a piece of more modern technology to their car(s) should they so wish.
The safety criteria and testing which must rightly be applied to new vehicles to meet new legislation and to satisfy the ever increasing litigious nature of the market place û not least of which is the USA, with which Mike will be extremely familiar û is most demanding and expensive in resources during design and development.
IÆm sure that Mike and other fellow members of the legal profession are better-versed than I, but once in service, modifications are permissible at the owners own liability. However, the suggestion from one respondent for a steel spike to the hub of the steering hand-wheel might be frowned upon.
By all means we should have discussion on the technical benefits and disadvantages of various issues, but without prejudicing a fellow-memberÆs final decision.
Bruce. |
|
|
|
taterry
USA
107 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 05:55:34
|
This topic pops up regularly on T list in the USA...It always amuses me in that few, if any responders have been in a major accident with or with out seat belts. I have in my TA, a major head on with a four door Chevy, not my fault, lap belts on...broken nose, cracked sternum.
25K to rebuild the TA....which now has 3 point belts as does the TF. The NA, well its on the show circuit for now! nuff said!
Terry in Oakland, CA |
|
|
|
David Allison
United Kingdom
665 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 09:47:17
|
I have been involved in a couple of accidents over the years - each time in modern cars and have been glad of the safety cell and harness.
However two of the accidents I have witness as a marshall - one a roll over when the occupant was thrown clear (no seat belts) and the other a man badly burned because the chassis had deformed and the belts he had installed would not release - have perhaps coloured my judgement.
I hold by what I said - I would no more install belts in my MMM car than I would drive a modern car without them!
Drive defensevly and with complete confidence and only the most unfortunate accident can befall you.
I would comment that a fractured sternum is a pretty serious show that if you had not been strapped in and had dived onto the passenger seat instead - you might have been saved any injury at all?
Each to their own - if you want belts then fit them - my personal advice is - DONT!
Regards David |
|
|
|
George Eagle
United Kingdom
3244 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 10:46:04
|
I am a cyclist and have been hit by cars on two occasions, neither my fault and both at road junctions where I had the right of way.
I find that motorists treat both cyclists and drivers of old cars with disdain and agree totally with Reed, John and the others who advocate driving defensively and treating other drivers as mindless idiots. For example drivers jumpimg red lights here in Milton Keynes is fairly common so I always proceed with caution!!
Personally I would consider a lap belt as being dangerous in the event of a head on collision, it would simply hold your waist in whilst the upper and lower parts of your body would be flung forward to meet the dash etc.
George |
|
|
|
Rodney Collins
United Kingdom
424 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 15:22:09
|
With regard to lap only belts , i watched a program on TV sometime ago where they were pointing out the dangers of people sitting in the centre of rear seats in modern cars where just a lap belt is fitted. The damaged caused to pasangers in these belts when the cars have been involved in accidents is quite horrific, one young girl has had her gut so badly damaged that she has to have an external bypass and is fed through a tube direct to har stomach. She will never have a normal digestive system, and will always have to have liquid food. I am with david on this I always belt up in my modern cars but I feel just as safe when out in the P type because I drive knowing that the brakes are poor and if I get hit I am in trouble. That's not to say I potter along, I drive my PA with some enthusiasm and get great pleasure form doing so.
Rodney |
|
|
|
timmetcalfe
United Kingdom
2 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 15:26:23
|
Without wishing to prolong what has become quite an emotive topic and one that has moved well away from the question originally asked, the fitting of seatbelts to pre-war cars is something I feel very strongly about. Having raced and driven countless road miles in both pre-war and modern cars for 20 years and had a few accidents along the way I would like to share my experiences.
Whilst there is no "right" answer as to whether seat belts and in particular lap belts should be fitted to pre-war cars I must say I agree with the points made by David Allison (not just because he is my brother-in-law!) and others.
I for one would not be here today if there had been seat-belts fitted to a pre-war Lagonda Rapier I was unfortunately to have a large accident in a couple of years ago. Whilst the accident did occur on a test track the circumstances could have happened on a public road (swerving to avoid something, causing the car to spin and roll the front tyres off the rims. The rims dug into the road and the car rolled). I was fortunate to be thrown clear as the car rolled and walked away with nothing more than a few scrapes and broken bones in my hand (caused by the watch I was wearing!). The car landed upside down 100 yards from me crushing where I had been sitting. Had I been held in place it would not have been a pretty sight.
A couple of close friends have also had very large accidents in pre-war cars over the last few years when they have hit something solid head on at high speed. One was thrown clear and walked away, the other unfortunately suffered fatal chest injuries through contact with the steering column. In neither case would a lap belt have assisted and in one would have potentially caused serious injury. Only the fitment of a five/six point harness with a full roll cage on an appropriate chassis (certainly not a MMM or other pre war chassis with solid axles)would have assisted these unfortunate drivers.
In my humble opinion I can think of very few, if any circumstances where the wearing of a lap belt would prevent injury, particularly given it will not prevent the chest or upper body connecting with the steering wheel/column in the event of probably the most common road accident, a front or rear end collision. My personal choice therfore is never to wear any form of seat belt in a car without proper roll over protection and then only belts that will prevent forward motion of the torso in the event of an accident. However, I do believe we are each free to make our own choices however missguided they may appear to be, but sincerly hope that the fitting of belts is never something that is forced upon us.
Tim |
|
|
|
Rodney Collins
United Kingdom
424 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2008 : 17:36:52
|
It's interesting to see George is a cyclist, I have been racing push bike since I was 12, No longer however as I am to old to be competiteve, however I still ride 60 to 70 mile a week for pleasure and keep fit. Cycling makes me a better driver as like george I have been knocked off my bike 3 times once waking up when I was being put into a ambulance. ( hit and Run) I always assume ever driver is out to get me, I have driven about 1 million miles in the past 20 years accident free. My solution to improving the nations driving is to pass a law forceing all drivers to ride a push bike for one year after they pass their test and before they can drive on their own! Might improve the waist line of a few people at the same time!!
Rodney |
|
|
|
kimber
United Kingdom
1529 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2008 : 17:59:08
|
Yes, but there are some really crap cyclists too - try driving around Cambridge for a few days. I cycle and drive in Cambridge. The thing I fear most is the rising bollards. Occasionally people go over them in and the damage they cause to a modern car has to be seen to be believed. They only operate at certain times of the day. If you went over one of those bxxxxxs in a Triple M car with a plywood floor, you'd be in big trouble.
|
|
|
|
Mike Allison
United Kingdom
196 Posts |
Posted - 03/07/2008 : 15:00:02
|
Hi all,
For what it is worth, here is my twopennarth!
First and foremost, let me say that seat belts and anchorages are a designed part of the car structure in modern cars (from way back in the late fifties). These fitments are rigourously and regularly tested for compliance with the various safety standards laid down, and which, it may be said, are far from static.
The question I would like to ask is who is going to donate a vehicle for testing of any proposed fitment? Who is going to carry out the tests, and to what standards are we going to work?
Whatever the emotive answers are to the advisability of wearing seat belts, and the fitting of roll-cages, these points MUST be faced up to. While I do wear a seat belt in modern cars, and have once had my life saved by such equipment, I would not want to wear anything which had not been properly tested IN THE PRECISE ENVIRONMENT FOR WHICH IT IS INTENDED.
Pre-war cars were not fitted with this sort of safety equipment, for the simple reason that no-one at that time thought it was necessary. I can think of many things I would want to change before I got to what is referred to in the trade as Secondary Safety. For instance, the structure of the Triple-M car is too flimsy to withstand any sort of crash-test. The brakes would fail to meet current standards of safety. The steering is not all that wonderful. The wipers are pretty pathetic in anything but a gentle shower.... and the list continues. However the cars from the Abingdon stable were in their day the safest cars of their type... they even traded with the slogan "safety fast"
The short answer to the dilemma of those who genuinely feel "unsafe" in pre-war cars should not bother to drive them! I dont climb mountains because I am scared of hieghts, but I don't go around saying that no-one else should do it!
However for the past fifty years I have enjoyed Triple-M cars for what they are and how they were built. I have covered in excess of a hundred thousand miles in Tiple-M cars. I admire them for what they are still. Talk of how to make them "safer" will only bring about a state (and with our present government, I almost capitalised that word!) where they languish in museums, and no one will be able to appreciate what the cutting edge vehicles of 1928-36 were like to drive.
Cars only come alive when they are used, please let those of us who like to use them do so without interference from do-gooders and others who have not ability to do so, for whatever reason.
Mappy MMMotoring
Mike |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
