Automatic / America seatbelts - Why not here?

mickdw

Just wondering why the american type setup that automatically belts you into the car never were used here. Im not even sure if they are widely used in america or other market anymore but they look like a fantastic idea to me.

fasttalkerchat

mickdw wrote: »

Just wondering why the american type setup that automatically belts you into the car never were used here. Im not even sure if they are widely used in america or other market anymore but they look like a fantastic idea to me.

Automatic Seatbelts?? Like this?

mickdw

Yep thats what Im talking about. Is there some draw back that Im not seeing?

fasttalkerchat

Anyone who wears a seatbelt has no need for it and anyone who doesn't wear a seatbelt won't want it. They would be useful in taxi's though.

mickdw

but wouldnt it do away with alot of messing if it was just a standard fitment meaning there was no choice. No need for the road safety adverts (that dont convert people anyway) etc.

Big Nasty

Are there still people out there that don't wear seatbelts!?!

fasttalkerchat

MCMLXXV wrote: »

Are there still people out there that don't wear seatbelts!?!

In Ireland the majority of rear seat passengers don't wear seat belts!
I know of a few drivers who don't wear them. Always wear one myself.

Some EU statistics if you're interested: http://www.etsc.eu/enforcement-seatbeltuse-whyincrease.php

Anan1

mickdw wrote: »

Yep thats what Im talking about. Is there some draw back that Im not seeing?

Only the part of the belt that goes over your shoulder is automatic. The part that goes across your waist still has to be put on manually.

Big Nasty

Anan1 wrote: »

Only the part of the belt that goes over your shoulder is automatic. The part that goes across your waist still has to be put on manually.

Don't some of the Merc coupes have them actually?

mickdw

Anan1 wrote: »

Only the part of the belt that goes over your shoulder is automatic. The part that goes across your waist still has to be put on manually.

That would be the bit that I was missing. Still, nothing to stop the bottom attachment sliding similarily along the door cill and across under steering to clear feet for getting in and out.

Anan1

MCMLXXV wrote: »

Don't some of the Merc coupes have them actually?

They hold them out so you don't have to reach way back behind your shoulder, but they don't actually put them on for you.

mickdw wrote: »

That would be the bit that I was missing. Still, nothing to stop the bottom attachment sliding similarily along the door cill and across under steering to clear feet for getting in and out.

I can't visualise how that could be done.

Big Nasty

Anan1 wrote: »

They hold them out so you don't have to reach way back behind your shoulder

That's what I meant.

Anan1 wrote: »

but they don't actually put them on for you.I can't visualise how that could be done.

Me neither.

Jammy Donut

Why would you want them?

Just something else to go wrong, Same as these button handbrake and keyless entry and go crap.

mickdw

Anan1 wrote: »

I can't visualise how that could be done.

The only issue is that the belt would rub against / catch your knees as it was moving into place. Im sure with an hour or two thought, that could be engineered out.

Big Nasty

mickdw wrote: »

The only issue is that the belt would rub against / catch your knees as it was moving into place. Im sure with an hour or two thought, that could be engineered out.

With all due respect Mick I reckon seatbelt sensors are a whole lot easier of a solution.

mickdw

MCMLXXV wrote: »

With all due respect Mick I reckon seatbelt sensors are a whole lot easier of a solution.

Well, I hadnt thought about the bottom part of the belt when I started the thread and I really think the top sliding part is a fantastic setup.
Sensors might be the solution we now have and may have for a long time but Im just surprised, given that its such a major safety system that we still get the choice to actually put them on whereas with this system, it would great great levels of stupidity to avoid putting it on.

Stinicker

I've been in dozens of cars in the US, automatic seatbelts are not that common and I personally have never seen one in real life.

Jimbob 83

Why should the vast majority of people who use their seatbelts pay to have this in their cars because darwin cleaned up the gene pool a little ?

ProudDUB

Stinicker wrote: »

I've been in dozens of cars in the US, automatic seatbelts are not that common and I personally have never seen one in real life.

They would be common enough in older cars, but not in anything made in the last 15 years or so.The first car I bought over there had this feature. It was a 1994 Mercury Topaz. If your car didn't have built in head rests (which cars of that genre usually didn't,) it had to have the automatic seat belt that went across your shoulder as soon as you closed the door & turned the key in the ignition.

This was so that your head and upper body had some sort of restraint in the event of a high speed accident. Without it, the force of the impact would make your head snap back and break your neck. When mandatory head rests were brought it, that took care of that problem. The automatic seat belts went the way of the dodo for the most part, as installing them was an unneccessary expense for car makers.

I saw the need for it, but I hated the feature. If I had a handbag jacket/shopping bags etc etc on the passenger seat, they'd always get tangled up in the damm belt as I was getting out of the car. If you were getting in or out with a brolly and you wanted to stay as dry as possible, it was even worse. I wear my seat belt religiously, but I much prefer being the one in control of it. Also, if there was anything going on with your cars electrics, it could stop your seat belt operating. Was not a fan of that part of it either. A buddy of mine had some blown fuses after his brother replaced the bulbs in his head lamps with the wrong voltage bulbs. His seat belt stopped working too. He saved $100 by letting his brother replace the bulbs, but the ticket he then got for driving without a seat belt gobbled that money right back up again.

mickdw

ProudDUB wrote: »

They would be common enough in older cars, but not in anything made in the last 15 years or so.The first car I bought over there had this feature. It was a 1994 Mercury Topaz. If your car didn't have built in head rests (which cars of that genre usually didn't) it had to have the automatic seat belt that went across your shoulder as soon as you closed the door.

This was so that your head and upper body had some sort of restraint in the event of a high speed accident. Without it, the force of the impact would make your head snap back and break your neck. When mandatory head rests were brought it, that took care of that problem. The automatic seat belts went the way of the dodo for the most part, as installing them was an unneccessary expense for car makers.

I saw the need for it, but I hated the feature. If I had a handbag jacket/shopping bags etc etc on the passenger seat, they'd always get tangled up in the damm belt as I was getting out of the car. If you were getting in or out with a brolly and you wanted to stay as dry as possible, it was even worse. I wear my seat belt religiously, but I much prefer being the one in control of it. Also, if there was anything going on with your cars electrics, it could stop your seat belt operating. Was not a fan of that part of it either. A buddy of mine had some blown fuses after his brother replaced the bulbs in his head lamps with the wrong voltage bulbs. His seat belt stopped working too. He saved $100 by letting his brother replace the bulbs, but the ticket he then got for driving without a seat belt gobbled that money right back up again.

Thats some very good information. From the points you raise, it would seem that they are not such a good idea further proven by the fact that they have pretty much gone away.

ProudDUB

I'm not 100% against the idea of them them, just the way that they were configured in my car. If the car is stopped & the engine is turned off & the driver is able to manually control the movement of the belt, that would be grand. There also needs to be a way for the belt to still function manually if something happens to the cars electrics. If the car designers were able to come up with something like that, I would have been fine with them.

conzy

Jimbob 83 wrote: »

Why should the vast majority of people who use their seatbelts pay to have this in their cars because darwin cleaned up the gene pool a little ?

+1 We shouldn't interfere with natural selection or they will be many more stupid people in the future