** Reply to message from DOINKS99@AOL.COM on Tue, 17 Nov 1998
16:46:29 EST

The "passive" restraining system was a terrible compromise which the
US gov't allowed/required in lieu of airbags during the airbag
phase-in period.  The requirement was a restraint that the passenger
didn't have to apply by hand.  Usual systems were: Shoulder belt
attached to door, manual lap belt; Shoulder belt attached to motorized
car above door frame, travelled forward when you open the door and aft
when you close it -- and a manual lap belt; and (VW!) Shoulder belt
attached to door, knee bolsters instead of lap belt.  None of these
methods are anywhere near as safe as a standard 3-point belt properly
applied, and I personally am enraged that my own safety is compromised
in an effort to force people to wear belts.  The irony is that for
perfectly legitimate reasons, all those shoulder belts have an
emergency release at the top, so people who don't want to wear them
simply unhook them at the top end!  Grrrrr!

As far as converting from standard to one of these abortions, It
would be hard -- the door has to be strengthened and special catches
put into the B-pillar and the belt reels have to go in the middle of
the car instead of at the sides.  I think the motorized kind would be
impossible.

David

> I found out that the safety standard this 88 crew cab  didn't meet
was the
> restraining system. I was told that it must have a passive
restraining system
> and that this one has an active system. When i drove the vehicle i
noticed no
> difference in the seat belts. Does anyone know of this difference in
> restraining systems?

David Beierl <dbeierl@ibm.net>
401 274-5827 voice, -6349 fax
OS/2 V4, FP7, JVM 1.1.6, JSM 98.6.3