Lets argue about airbags

billy3esq wrote:

Jensenman wrote: And you reinforce my point. So the insurers infer from current actuarial data that airbags do help. Okay, i conced the point. There are no actuarial studies or data (at least that I am aware of) comparing cars with better reinforced bodies to those without. So there's a huge hole in the actuarial data. Bzzt.

(JM trimmed the long winded lawyerly response to what seems to be the salient point of the wordstorm) I understand your point to be that more rigid passenger compartments would be of greater safety benefit than airbags. I further understand that you base this conclusion on some combination of your experience with a Sawzall and the absence of actuarial evidence to the contrary. While I will concede your substantial Sawzall prowess, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

Whoo, do you get paid by the word?

I'm saying that in the real world airbags are of no real good if the car crumples around you due to a weak passenger compartment. Like my daddy sez about doing stupid stuff like going on through an intersection when there is someone obviously running the red light and coming at you, or passing when you have the dashed lines and there's someone passing on a solid line coming at you, or a host of other things: you might be in the right but you wind up just as dead.

I might as well toss this out: if airbags are so great, why do none of the sanctioning bodies require them in race cars?

Jensenman wrote: Whoo, do you get paid by the word?

Sometimes.

Jensenman wrote: I'm saying that in the real world airbags are of no real good if the car crumples around you due to a weak passenger compartment.

That point I agree with*, but I read somewhat more into your first and second articulations of that point.

• My agreement is qualified because I believe studies of side impact airbags suggest that getting hit in the face by an airbag being pushed by the bumper of an SUV is better than getting hit in the face with the bumper itself.

Jensenman wrote: I might as well toss this out: if airbags are so great, why do none of the sanctioning bodies require them in race cars?

Because racing is inherently dangerous and they want to keep it that way.

Actually, the reason is that the dynamics of a racing incident are somewhat different because the passenger is far more restrained in a race car than a 3-point seatbelt.

Since you distilled your salient point, so will I: I think you underestimate the amount of development that has gone into safety-cell design over the last 15-20 years.

Jensenman wrote: Whoo, do you get paid by the word?

Incidentally, by my count (actually my word processor's count) you've got 3293 words in this thread (not counting another 1000 for the picture on page 2). Conversely, I have 1121, not counting this post.

That assumes I copied and pasted everything correctly.

Just sayin'.

Jensenman wrote: I might as well toss this out: if airbags are so great, why do none of the sanctioning bodies require them in race cars?

You are going around in circles with yourself.

Shaun wrote:

Jensenman wrote: I might as well toss this out: if airbags are so great, why do none of the sanctioning bodies require them in race cars?

You are going around in circles with yourself.

'Splain, please, how I'm going in circles.

Seriously, if airbags were really so great you'd think NASCAR or the FIA or some sanctioning body would say 'we gotta get these in the cars'. Even LeMons which is arguably some of the most dangerous racing out there (I know first hand) says to remove the bags before racing. Like Arsenio Hall used to say, 'there's stuff that makes you go Hmmmmm...'

billy3, you counted my words? Dang dude, you need a LIFE. I at least can blame diarrhea of the keyboard...

Jensenman wrote: I might as well toss this out: if airbags are so great, why do none of the sanctioning bodies require them in race cars?

I don't know your background / knowledge of racing is ....

but you are aware that race cars can and do take many bumps and hits during any given race.. ?

the bag would deploy with the first hit then be in the way for the rest of the race... try driving with a deflated air bag flopping around in your face...

meaning the driver would be through.. no chance to continue after fixing the body damage....

actually I looked at your profile and know you/of you , so I'm aware of your knowledge of racing... so why the silly question to start with ?

Jensenman wrote: billy3, you counted my words? Dang dude, you need a LIFE. I at least can blame diarrhea of the keyboard...

I just copied and pasted into my word processor, which counted for me. It took about a minute and a half to do both yours and mine. It would have been even quicker if I'd been using my dual monitor desktop instead of my laptop.

Honestly, I was a little bored this afternoon, though.

Comparing a street car with a semi restrained unattentive dolt at the helm of a marginally street worthy vehicle being poorly driven among similarly under-qualified drivers just trying to get home to the comfy chair and a beer, to a performance machine built for sustained high speed and with a mandated safety cage, 5 point harnesses sinched down very tight and wearing a full safety suit and helmet, being driven by a fully alert and supposedly experienced driver among other equally attentive drivers all supposedly going in the same direction.

Sorta like comparing jumping off Mom's patio roof to being an astronaut........ IMHO

aussiesmg wrote: Comparing a street car with a semi restrained unattentive dolt at the helm of a marginally street worthy vehicle being poorly driven among similarly under-qualified drivers just trying to get home to the comfy chair and a beer, to a performance machine built for sustained high speed and with a mandated safety cage, 5 point harnesses sinched down very tight and wearing a full safety suit and helmet, being driven by a fully alert and supposedly experienced driver among other equally attentive drivers all supposedly going in the same direction. Sorta like comparing jumping off Mom's patio roof to being an astronaut........ IMHO

This is the at least the 6th attempt to point out this rather obvious reality. I doubt this one works either.

wbjones wrote:

Jensenman wrote: I might as well toss this out: if airbags are so great, why do none of the sanctioning bodies require them in race cars?

I don't know your background / knowledge of racing is .... but you are aware that race cars can and do take many bumps and hits during any given race.. ? the bag would deploy with the first hit then be in the way for the rest of the race... try driving with a deflated air bag flopping around in your face... meaning the driver would be through.. no chance to continue after fixing the body damage.... actually I looked at your profile and know you/of you , so I'm aware of your knowledge of racing... so why the silly question to start with ?

Funny quote that! You just proved Jmans point. Instead of relying on an airbag, A well built car/safety system lets a driver take not just one, but multiple hits beyond when an airbag would typically deploy and not only survive but continue driving as fast as possible in a high demand situation.

Production cars are not race cars, that's why.

Different goals, different solutions, different engineering. Engineers working for automotive companies no matter how bankrupt or successful aren't retarded, nor are the market analysts who hold sway over some of their decisions. Cars are what we (maybe not You or I or That Guy specifically...) have made them. If people feared death like their life depended on it, we would have 9 point harnesses and 2" OD, .25" wall cages made of aermet. If NASCAR wanted easy-in and -out convenience, hell they'd probably have three point belts and airbags and we the public might have a popular racing series featuring cars we know and love and actually are stock cars.

MrJoshua wrote:

wbjones wrote:

Jensenman wrote: I might as well toss this out: if airbags are so great, why do none of the sanctioning bodies require them in race cars?

I don't know your background / knowledge of racing is .... but you are aware that race cars can and do take many bumps and hits during any given race.. ? the bag would deploy with the first hit then be in the way for the rest of the race... try driving with a deflated air bag flopping around in your face... meaning the driver would be through.. no chance to continue after fixing the body damage.... actually I looked at your profile and know you/of you , so I'm aware of your knowledge of racing... so why the silly question to start with ?

Funny quote that! You just proved Jmans point. Instead of relying on an airbag, A well built car/safety system lets a driver take not just one, but multiple hits beyond when an airbag would typically deploy and not only survive but continue driving as fast as possible in a high demand situation.

[Elvis] Thankya, thankyaverramuch.[/Elvis]

MrJoshua wrote: snip Funny quote that! You just proved Jmans point. Instead of relying on an airbag, A well built car/safety system lets a driver take not just one, but multiple hits beyond when an airbag would typically deploy and not only survive but continue driving as fast as possible in a high demand situation.

... as long as one is willing to accept a 5-point harness in a racing seat, roll cage, non-openable doors, and wearing a helmet (with a HANS) at all times.

Jensenman wrote: At no point did I say there should be no airbags. I did say (more than once) that they are a partial solution. IMHO a lot more effort and money should have gone into strengthening the passenger compartment rather than basically ignoring that facet, stuffing airbags into every available crevice and calling that a fix for everything, i.e. the appearance of safety rather than the reality.

I don't think anyone has advocated for a bubble-wrap car yet, so no one's suggesting air bags are the end-all-be-all...

There have been amazing improvements in passenger-cell safety in the last 20 (even 10) years, and just cutting through tubing with a sawzall won't tell you how it will deform when it's loaded (in a different direction) in a crash.

Side-curtain airbags are an AMAZINGLY effective way to reduce head injuries in a side-impact crash (where there's obviously quite a bit less room to crumple).

Even the strongest roll cage in a vehicle with windows will split your skull open when you get t-boned unless there's something between you and the window.

davidjs wrote:

MrJoshua wrote: snip Funny quote that! You just proved Jmans point. Instead of relying on an airbag, A well built car/safety system lets a driver take not just one, but multiple hits beyond when an airbag would typically deploy and not only survive but continue driving as fast as possible in a high demand situation.

... as long as one is willing to accept a 5-point harness in a racing seat, roll cage, non-openable doors, and wearing a helmet (with a HANS) at all times.

The point is we have good evidence that there is a system that works really well. Instead of designing safety for lazy people we should do our best to emulate that system while providing as much convenience as possible. A 4 point harness with reel retractors would allow plenty of freedom and more controlled deceleration with the force spread out over a larger area. 4" thicker doors with anti intrusion and impact absorbing qualities would help in side impact. A safety cage type body structure would help with most any wreck. I like side curtain airbags a bunch. They make quite a bit of sense to me. Front airbags make a little as well, but they should only come into play in severe accidents where the above measures are not adequate.

[broken record again] The safety cage I keep mumbling about would be contained within the existing body structure (much like the Subaru setup but it would extend all through the unibody and include the cowl area). You'd never see it once the trim panels were in place. The last car I caged (a Saturn SL1) had plenty of room inside the existing body structure to run 1.750 OD tubing. Well, the A pillars would have been tight, maybe 1.625 OD would be better. Then stick padded trim panels inside (it already is in place in many cars) and voila: you have a concealed captive roll cage that Mr and Mrs Average would never even see or have to think about. The same setup could be integrated into existing door structures and again you'd never see it.[/broken record again]

Notice how the door beams are tied into the hinge and latch, but there's only a single beam which is square in cross section? Why not run 2 beams directly from the hinge to the latch (which is a very important part of a side impact system, that's why the striker bolt is so big) with a bend at the ends to replicate a NASCAR side impact door bar?

billy3, what's my word count now?

My '90 Lincoln had an airbag and kept me from eating steering wheel in my head-on collision with a drunk. Everyone that saw the car couldn't believe I lived, much less got out on my own (well, hobbled). Nice heavy steel car (#3800 or so) with metal bumpers and no crumple zones that I know of. Next wreck was in my '95 Saturn SC1, t-boned at low speed by a Hyundai and totaled the SC1, the Hyundai looked perfect. The Saturn crumpled like tupperware. Even if it had side airbags a hit from a big car would have just driven through me.

I'm against the whole "I need a big car to be safe" argument because it's a never ending escalation of size to be "safer". The technology is there to be small and safe, but it will still boil down to how lucky you are.

BAM! Frankenthread returns!

Here's an aftermarket example of what I keep mumbling about. Notice how the cage is integrated in such a way that once the interior is installed you'll never see it. But it's there.

The rest of the thread is drool worthy.

http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=4515333&page=1

Curious if they did anything with the doors?

it "might" be fun to drive....