Ejection mitigation systems mandated...

[Bignate603]

I've thought this also. Cars should have five point harnesses. I've also thought helmets should be mandatory in a vehicle, regardless of messing up hair.

Helmets? Seriously? 🙄 That's never going to happen.

As for the article, I don't support any safety system that is primarily aimed at saving people that don't take reasonable action to protect themselves. Side impact airbags to make sure you don't hit the window/doorframe even while buckled in are a decent addition, but adding hundreds of dollars to the cost of a car to save the lives of people that couldn't be bothered to buckle themselves in is ridiculous.

 

[Elfear]

Helmets? Seriously? 🙄 That's never going to happen.

As for the article, I don't support any safety system that is primarily aimed at saving people that don't take reasonable action to protect themselves. Side impact airbags to make sure you don't hit the window/doorframe even while buckled in are a decent addition, but adding hundreds of dollars to the cost of a car to save the lives of people that couldn't be bothered to buckle themselves in is ridiculous.

+1

Is that 1.2 second click really that tough?

 

[PlasmaBomb]

"When fully implemented, we believe this standard will prevent on average 373 fatalities and 476 serious injuries every year."

This is the government justifying its existence. These are minuscule statistics.

How many of those 373 people would have been saved by wearing their seatbelts?

1? 2? 372? 373??

 

[MotF Bane]

Helmets? Seriously? 🙄 That's never going to happen.

As for the article, I don't support any safety system that is primarily aimed at saving people that don't take reasonable action to protect themselves. Side impact airbags to make sure you don't hit the window/doorframe even while buckled in are a decent addition, but adding hundreds of dollars to the cost of a car to save the lives of people that couldn't be bothered to buckle themselves in is ridiculous.

What's wrong with helmets? It'd make it very tough or impossible to talk on a cellphone, drink coffee, snack... sounds great!

 

[Zap]

The amount of people ejected from a car while wearing a seat belt is so low on anything that isn't a jacked up truck or suv that this is a huge waste of money.

I know someone who was ejected from a car that rolled/flipped doing 120MPH. He's lucky to be alive. He was a passenger and the only one NOT wearing a seatbelt. Coincidentally he was the only one ejected, and the only one seriously injured (broken leg + misc).

Why on earth do we keep trying to protect people who are too damn stupid to wear a seat belt?

IDK. Darwin awards are given for a reason.

The reg seat belt w/shoulder harness cars use now tend to really cause injurys but of course are better than nothing

They cause injuries because people don't wear them properly (across the hip, not waist, height properly adjusted, properly tensioned).

I was in a head-on collision on the freeway with a properly adjusted seatbelt (no airbags, older car) and I walked away from it.

Do 5-point harnesses work on really fat people?

Eh? Regular seatbelts don't work on really fat people.

What's wrong with helmets? It'd make it very tough or impossible to talk on a cellphone, drink coffee, snack... sounds great!

Probably wouldn't stop texting.

 

[Zenmervolt]

I can't wait to see the 2020 Lotus Elise which weighs 4000lbs.

Reminds me of this story from an old copy of Road & Track.

I still dont know why there isnt a 4 or 5 point harness mandatory in new vehicles.

Because, as the saying goes, the juice isn't worth the squeeze.

A properly-worn 3-point belt is more than enough for legal speeds. Going to the more cumbersome 4- or 5-point system would only reduce the number of people wearing seat belts and would not provide meaningful increases in safety (at legal speeds) for those who did wear them.

ZV

 

[ElFenix]

They cause injuries because people don't wear them properly (across the hip, not waist, height properly adjusted, properly tensioned).

some people are all waist :hmm:


anyway, most people can't properly adjust their mirrors, something they use (test) all the time, whereas people basically never test their own seatbelt performance. wouldn't be shocked if most seatbelts weren't adjusted properly.

 

[Zap]

Reminds me of this story from an old copy of Road & Track.

Heh, kind of reminds me of the movie Duel.

 

[Howard]

Reminds me of this story from an old copy of Road & Track.

Jesus Christ that story was hard to read.

 

[punjabiplaya]

I was talking to family friend who is a doctor. He had a patient come in from a car accident with massive internal abdominal bleeding because his spleen ruptured because he was in the "gangsta" lean all the way back and got rear ended. The seat belt was across his stomach not his hips and tore into him.

 

[fbrdphreak]

FWIW, some people do get ejected even if they're wearing a seatbelt. I don't know all the reasons how this is possible, but a few obvious ones are equipment failure and improperly fitting belts (being too small or two big). I'm an EMT and have heard (though not seen) plenty of stories of people being ejected despite wearing seat belts.

And as much as everyone says "OMG let the stupid people die," something like this WOULD have value for when one of those stupid people hit you.

A helluva lot more value than mandatory backup cameras. If you are unsure of what's behind you, get the fuck out and look. It's a great optional feature, one that I will likely order if I ever get a large vehicle, but is ridiculous to be mandatory.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

I can't wait to see the 2020 Lotus Elise which weighs 4000lbs.

Don't forget, They mandate more and more safety equipment which ads weight to the car. Then they mandate better gas milage. Then more safety and then complain when we can't meet the gas milage standards.

Don't be fooled. The people in Congress that pass these laws that regulate private enterprise, do it because they want control over every aspect of our lives.

 

[Fenixgoon]

FWIW, some people do get ejected even if they're wearing a seatbelt. I don't know all the reasons how this is possible, but a few obvious ones are equipment failure and improperly fitting belts (being too small or two big). I'm an EMT and have heard (though not seen) plenty of stories of people being ejected despite wearing seat belts.

And as much as everyone says "OMG let the stupid people die," something like this WOULD have value for when one of those stupid people hit you.

A helluva lot more value than mandatory backup cameras. If you are unsure of what's behind you, get the fuck out and look. It's a great optional feature, one that I will likely order if I ever get a large vehicle, but is ridiculous to be mandatory.

right, but that represents < 3% of driver fatalities per year (roughly 15,000). why not mandate more thorough driver education classes? make getting a driver's license a very rigorous test that requires competence and skill behind the wheel. DL issue rates would plummet, but your new drivers would be much better behind the wheel.

 

[Zenmervolt]

And as much as everyone says "OMG let the stupid people die," something like this WOULD have value for when one of those stupid people hit you.

But not nearly as much value as it could have if it were designed for people wearing seat belts. That's the problem. The regulations are forcing it to be designed explicitly for people who don't wear a seat belt. As we found out with airbags, that tends to have negative consequences for the people who actually do wear seat belts (as evidenced by the "2nd generation" airbags that now deploy with much less force and now actually protect properly-belted passengers instead of just breaking their noses).

I have no real problem with a mandate for side curtain airbags or other devices that are designed to work in conjunction with seat belts. My issue is purely with the mandate that such devices work in lieu of proper seat belt usage.

ZV

 

[Zap]

why not mandate more thorough driver education classes? make getting a driver's license a very rigorous test that requires competence and skill behind the wheel. DL issue rates would plummet, but your new drivers would be much better behind the wheel.

The problem is that you can't make people learn common sense and judgement. My mom took 3 tries to get her driver's license. Yes, her driving could be better, and she probably has no clue on the more esoteric driving laws in California. However, she doesn't take risks or do stupid risky stuff. For instance the most recent accident she was in was a multi car pileup on the freeway. She doesn't tailgate, so she managed to stop before hitting the car in front of her which had rear-ended the car in front of it (and several others in front). However, the TWO vehicles behind her were following too closely and they piled into her.

That's the problem. The regulations are forcing it to be designed explicitly for people who don't wear a seat belt. As we found out with airbags, that tends to have negative consequences for the people who actually do wear seat belts

Very good point.