[geeks] Mac definitions

[Shannon]

On 15-Jul-2011 17:12, Phil Stracchino wrote:

>> This kind of belt has been widely shown to be dangerous. They even tried
>> to make the shoulder part automatic for a few years, with disastrous
>> accident results (i.e. worse than not having one at all).
> 
> Dangerous how?

Because it pushes your lower body into the floor in an accident if you
don't wear the lap part, and they were not as strong and reliable as the
non-automatic ones.

> Large gaps, sure.  I basically left myself just enough slack to be able
> to move around a little.

Three inches is very large. Even a little bit has an effect and it can
be pretty big changes in the spike force in an impact.

They can measure this with crash dummies, and they always get the
best/safest results if there is no slack.

Up to you of course :)

Me, I'm keeping it snug.

>> Beyond that in situations where you are under g-forces, the gap prevents
>> another belt function: keeping you properly in your seat to control the car.
> 
> An inertia-reel belt doesn't give you any lateral positioning control
> anyway.

Shoulder belts do help keep the driver in control. Obviously not as well
as a real harness, they are after all still a compromise.

> If you have a child in the car, the child is REQUIRED to be in an
> anchored child safety seat with either a latching shield, or a four or
> five point harness.  A three-point belt is not permitted.
> 
> Why a four or five point harness?  Because it's safer.
> 
> But you, the adult, are not ALLOWED to have a five-point harness.
> Because it didn't come originally with the car.  The law requires that
> you wear the original factory installed seat belt.  

Oh I agree they have it backwards.

Of course remember that the law is not written for you and I: it is
written for the slobbering morons out there. A lot of people would no
doubt do really stupid things if they could install their own or "upgrade".

I would like the option, but I'm not sure I would like what I can
imagine as the possible results or think of effective ways to prevent or
reduce it.

Interesting problem though: could we have a successful and safe market
for restraint upgrades.

Or since I know we *CAN* do it... *WOULD* we do it.

You are REQUIRED BY
> LAW to install a safer retention system for your child than was
> installed at the factory, but FORBIDDEN BY LAW from installing a safer
> retention system for yourself or any adult passengers.  The law requires
> you to use the factory three-point belt that the law doesn't consider
> safe enough to protect your kids.

I thought the reason for this was because the factory restraints are
designed for a certain range of size and weight humans, and children
fall under that size to the point where the factory harness is not good
enough?