shackles

Just curious as to why you "need" them?

 

Because of the second collision. Seat belts were designed to keep the driver and passengers from colliding with the interior of the car. They work.

 

Having an engineering degree myself (mechanical), and often practicing law in the area of catostrophic injury as a result of automobile accidents (as you can see I like a good debate!), I understand the principles behind vehicle crash dynamics and biomechanics. I just see no real logic in the application to a steel box with wheels. Are you suggesting that a lap belt in a '48 CJ is going to prevent a secondary impact? :? If you promote putting a roll bar and shoulder and shoulder/lap combo, the pro seatbelt argument makes more sense. If we add a 5-point belt with a full cage, it makes more sense. If we add airbags to the '48, it makes even more sense. Why don't we top it off with a helmet and head restraints? Where do we stop? Do you REALLy think a lap belt only, with no cage, will prevent a secondary impact with the dash/wheel/windshield? If we are worried about secondary impacts and brain shear injuries/closed or open head injuries, should we have a roll bar at all? For my '55 with no roll bar and no belts, what do you recommend? Your answer, if truly considered TIMGR, will tell me your true feelings about vintage Jeeps.

 

i dont see the need for argument or debate. i dont believe tigmr said specifially just a lap belt. i would absolutely at least have a lap belt in my jeep something is better than nothing. i have lost a handful of friends in numerous accidents that would have at least stayed in the vehicle and been alive had been wearing a seatbelt, and not thrown through the side glass plus 50 more yards. And thats in a newer car only going 55mph with much more technology than a jeep with no doors, now of course theres always people who say that seatbelts dont make a bit of difference, just like some people say well i have smoked for 60 yrs and it didnt give me cancer". theres always some lucky ones.
and also i have been 4 wheelin in a jeep and if i didint have the lap belt on i most certaintly would have been out of the jeep lol, esp after landing from 4 ft in the air, its like being on a bull. those who dont need seatbelts dont take their jeep to the limits. now rockcrawling is different i know thats really slow and u have time to move etc... unless its extreme then you need the 5pt. but riding fast its needed or on the highway.... great example.... my dad had a cj5, well he hit a huge pothole at 65 mph on the highway it broke the sterring column the jeep fliped on its side and he slid to a stop on the pavement... ok without the lapbelt there would be slim chances of hanging on holding all your bodyweight with the wheel and not coming out of that side without that lapbelt and 20 yrs later he would still have a nice pavement rash if he didn't fall out and get splattered or loose a limb
now you were talking about secondary impact the last few posts. but you did say something earlier about wouldent you rather get thrown out and have a chance of living then get crushed...every situation is different but i have a feeling if there was a pole for pro seatbelts or no seatbelts they benefit in most accidents. on or offroad

 

My debate is my nature. I mean no harm by it. At all! Obviously, everybody is entitled to their opinions. I just like to see that people have a reason for their opinions and find out what those reasons are. If your reason for no seatbelts is experience, then so be it. If your reason for seatbelts is experience, then so be it. If your opinion is b/c someone told you so and you believe them, then so be it. When someone gives a reason that is based on a technical principle . . . . now that is something worth getting into. If I told you that I thought that 9" brakes were better than 11" drums because they provide more braking friction, you sure as heck would be on me like white on rice. If I said they were better because they looked better or because my best friend died as a result of an 11" brake failure, you would probably chalk it up to utter stupidity or feel sorry and understand. I am just jiving with Timgr to hear his justification for saying that Jeeps should have belts. It is all fun (I hope ) and no hard feelings. This country was founded on debate, as were all of our laws that allow us to have Jeeps. It is best for Jeepers to hear all sides of the seatbelt argument before making a decision either way. We are the only ones (hopefully) who have to live (or not) with our decisions.

Another note: Ask Howard how the government recalled all of the military trucks that he used to deal with because of the recognized danger that having a seatbelt posed. Years of studies and deaths caused them to come to the understanding that under certain circumstances, a seatbelt is more dangerous that no seatbelt. I believe that an open 5 with no cage provides one of those circumstances.

 

It seems that this is the gist of your arguement. I would not think so, especially on the pavement. I have had people fall out of my Jeep when just sitting on the passenger seat with no seat belt ... no great injuries, but they would not have fallen out at all had they been belted (or holding on).

My strong stand on this is the result of a lifetime of education (indoctrination?) starting in high school about the need for seat belts. When I started driving, half (?) the cars on the road had no seat belts, and even a larger fraction effectively had none simply becasue the drivers didn't use them.

Today, we take belts and air bags etc. etc. so much for granted, that the advantages provided by plain lap belts isn't much considered. It took a long time, testing and lots of lobbying just to get the federal government to mandate lap belts. So, is there evidence that lap belts, by themselves, save lives? Sure, just look at the crash test evidence from 40 years ago. These tests weren't done on the softly padded, occupant protecting cars of today, but on cars with metal dashes and sharp, protruding knobs and chrome (sound familiar?). Still, there was enough evidence to convince the Feds to mandate seat belts.

There's no question that you can pick circumstances where the seat belts will not prevent, or less commonly will cause, injury. You can also argue that the incremental safety advantage of seat belts does not make them worth while, especially if you fear a particular type of accident over the most common straight-ahead collision at moderate speeds. Personally, I think that using lap belts, or better yet lap and shoulder belts, on the street is a no-brainer.

On the trail is another story. I'd suggest that most of the serious trail accidents are slow roll-overs on side-hill. In these cases the occupants would benefit from a roll bar and a lap belt. This is the sort of accident that the roll bar was invented to mitigate. Shoulder belts probably would not help much here, but the lap belt and roll bar will. To me, being "thrown clear" seems like a fairly weak rationale, considering the speeds and forces involved.

 

My .02. I would feel fine driving around a field at low speeds without a seatbelt because there is basically no danger of a crash in this situation. The lap belt in my opinion is mainly to keep you inside the vehicle. I would at least have one these if nothing else in any vehicle. I knew a guy here a few years back that had a dozer fall off a trailer while he was loading it. He didn't feel any danger because he had loaded it so many times before, so he didn't wear his lap belt. When it rolled over, he had come out of the seat and the top bar on the cage landed on his head, killing him instantly. The lap belt may not have kept him from hitting his head but it sure would have kept him in his seat. I would rather bump my head than have several thousand pounds land on it. In my personal situation of trail riding, where rollovers are common, most everyone uses four or five point harnesses. We mostly just use the lap belt part until we get to something serious. This keeps you completely in place so you don't have to worry much about anything. But most of it is in the driver and how much common sence you have. I know another guy who wheeled all day with his harness on, then when he was headed back to the parking lot he took it off. He decided to show off a little bit and ended up rolling in the parking lot. He had no protection and ended up breaking his neck and getting thrown around and had all kinds of scrapes and bruises. He was lucky! On the road is another story all together because you have to worry about other drivers. I would at least wear a lap belt because from my experience, I want to try to stay in the vehicle.

 

exactly... he installed a roll bar and seatbelts lol and that was also one of those cases where it was a freak occurance. i wouldn't find myself going up a steep hill w/no roll bar or seatbelt with what we have today. when that jeep came about it was a different story. but today its absolutely stupid to go up a steep hill in a vehicle with possiblilty of flipping with no rollbar or seatbelt. and yes if he had a seatbelt and no roll bar he may have been hurt worse... but so far but is about having a roll bar and seatbelt shoulder or lap
i agree i would much rather stay in the vehicle and wear my lap belt. and would not even try anything with no belt or rollbar

 

From my experience it is different in every situation. I used to be an explorer back in my younger days and also helped out on several accidents with a buddy of mine from the civil defence. Most of the ones I have been to there would have been less injuries if the ones involved had been wearing a seat belt. My aunt and little cousin were killed a few weeks ago in a rollover on the interstate coming back from a trip to Florida. My cousin was thrown out and died instantly and the last time the Mountaineer rolled over it landed on top of my aunt. Another young boy that was friends with my cousin came out with only a few scrapes. If they would have been wearing seatbelts they may still be here today. Also, a few years back, one of my other cousins hit a bus head on in an S10. He wasn't wearing a seatbelt. He is ok now but had he had his seatbelt on, he might not have put his head and arm through the windshield. He also probably wouldn't have had to pull his shifter out of his knee and not broken his femer. It is not for me to say that the seatbelt would have prevented his injuries because it was a pretty bad wreck. However, it just makes sence to me that if he had some restraint from foward movement inside the cab, he would not have been thrown into the dash and windshield. It is not for me to judge someone for not wearing their seatbelt. For my part, I will at the very least a lap belt, I would prefer a shoulder belt, and if I am offroading I will have a harness. You can do what you think is best.

 

Thanks to Lynn for posting that interesting anecdote; I would draw a rather different conclusion though. First, since this is anecdotal, I would not be too hasty to make any sweeping conclusions. Since your sample size is 1, and there are so many variables involved, I don't think you can extrapolate the result to make a case for or against lap belts. You could instead conclude that sometimes people do not sustain serious injuries in a rollover even without much safety equipment. I have my own theory - somewhat different from yours.

If we had more instances, we might be able to see a pattern. It would be helpful to hear other such stories.

 

I have a full cage not tied to the frame and lap straps. I took a buddy out on a putt and the whined the whole time my Jeep being unsafe as it doesn't have have doors and the only restraints are the lap straps. He went on about having shoulder straps were safer. I disagree with shoulder traps mounted to a cage not tied to the frame.
Lap strap keeps me in the seat, keeps me from bouncing and sliding. That gives me more control of the vehicle. I feel a shoulder strap would be dangerous if the cage went one way and the Jeep the other way.
Of course, this guy is a whiner and stared at the pavement thru the door opening while white knuckling the cage all the way out R) . As far as doors. To me an opinion from somebody like that is worthless.If I wanna bail, I wanna bail now!

 

Most of what you say here is how I feel. Some people go way too far with what they think is safe and trying to push it on other people. If I think something is safe I will not ride with someone else driving it. If the cage is not tied into the frame, it offers only minimal protection, but at least there is some there. I agree with you on not wanting the sholder belt attatched to anything that is not tied into the frame.

With that said, get that thing attached to the frame so you can experience the joys of a great rollover.

 

No argument from me here. I think this is a good point that several people tend to over look. Most of the CJ's I have worked with have a boxed frame and I do a ton of bracing on them when doing a cage. How you drive depends on how much strength you need from it. I have seen fully braced and gussetted cages fail under certain rollovers. I have also seen just the factory roll bar hold up to rollovers that you would think would rip them off the tub. If you crawl like most of the guys I run with, it doesn't have to be as strong.

 

As for the not having the seat belt on being the best thing. There have been a lot of times where I have asked myself "will I have time to get my seatbelt off in this situation". That is why I never say anything when someone is not wearing one. I only have my experiences to go by about it. A stock Jeep like the one in the pic is really not much more protection than being on a motor cycle, so in that, at normal speeds, you might be better off being thrown out more than being belted in. I just know that I will never tell anyone they would be better off without a seatbelt.

 

Mike, I agree that this is the only way to go if you are putting belts of any kind in an open jeep. Worst case (hopefully), you (and passengers) roll down the street in a cage of steel like some Disneyland ride. Of course, you might lose your legs , but better than your life. Timgr, you have definitely pinpointed my argument: No cage with seat frames tied in . . . no belt, that's it! Howie, as usual .... Touche!

 

I don't think ANYONE has said this! I know I only said when no adequate roll protection. I am very happy to see that true rationales and logical arguments have begun on this topic. I am sure we all agree that it is muy importante.

 

i will agree with howard...... i know of a few accidents of people i "knew" who would have had a good chance of surviving had they not had seat belts on. these were in jeeps of course. in a vehicle that was not designed for impacts with restraints,.. your odds are more favorable to be thrown from the vehicle. like a motorcyle! other than that seatbelts do and have saved MANY lives including mine

IMO the best protection in a jeep is a full cage (tied in to frame) with lap and shoulder straps. (4 and 5 points are top notch!) along with THE BEST braking system and THE BEST steering system (dont skimp $ here). your in a short wheelbase narrow vehicle thats been raised in the air and now you wanna see how close to verticle you can get! get some protection or suffer natures laws...........

oh and drive safe!