The banner above is an advertisment - if it asks you to download software, please ignore.
Site News - 3/26 M Car Covers (by State of Nine) | 12/12 Make Amazon Pay Saabnet!
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 19:49:51 GMT
From: "someguy" <someguynopsamhere.se>
Subject: Re: 9-5 Passenger Airbag - how to disable?


This will be a long posting! "Nutmegger" <nutmegger_7717nopsamo.com> skrev i meddelandet news:b7bn76$cn343$1nopsam38055.news.dfncis.de... > > "someguy" wrote: > > > Actually both accident statistics and research shows that the safest place > is in > > the front seat. > > Can you please post a link to such or provide your source? I find that very > hard to believe from all the research I've done into this. *** Several of my arguments were taken from this page (unfortunately in Swedish but maybe a good translation program can help) http://svt.se/svt/jsp/Crosslink.jsp?d=112&a=473 Here three experts from insurance, authorities and research instute respond to questions about the safest location to place a child seat. Actually the insurance company is the same that has been investigating thousands of accidents over the years and found that Saab 9-5 is the safest car (about 40% safer than the average car) There are also a lot of interesting reports from the Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute http://www.vti.se/edefault.asp is the English page. I have not checked if everything is available in English. > > There are several reasons for this: > > > If the child seat is mounted in the rear it is supported only > by the > > back of the front seat, > > What about the seatbelt? *** The seat belt is of course needed in all cases but the dashboard is still stiffer than the back of the front seat > > > which gives a much more unsafe support than the > panel. > > The situation can be improved by using a child seat stand that goes down > to the > > floor, but it is still inferior to the front seat mounting. > > > > - Collision tests show that child seats mounted in the rear give higher > stresses > > on the child body than seats mounted in the front. > > Interesting, but if you look at most accidents many more involve the front > sections of the vehicle verses the back. *** True, but modern cars are designed to leave the passanger area fairly intact for front collisions > > >The trick to reduce the > body > > stresses is to be able to have the child seat follow the car collision > impulse > > curve as much as possible (this is done by having the seat mounted as > tight as > > possible, welding is the best method here!) and by spreading the collision > > forces on as large area as possible of the child body (this is done by > making > > the child seat back as large as possible ) > > That makes sense to me, but it doesn't explain why the front is better than > the back. > > > > - If the child is placed in the rear never place it close to the door, > rather in > > the middle > > It's common sense to me! I mean in the center of a vehicle with lots of > metal on all sides. > > >(and don't forget the supporting stand to the car floor!). The > reason > > for this is that the post between the front and rear door is the weakest > point > > of the car at a side collision. > > What does that mean? Your car will crumple into an accordian if it is hit > at this point? *** No, not a modern Saab. > > >Also for a side collision the front seat > > mounting is superior since the car is strongest at the front post, which > in > > combination with the fairly stiff wall between the engine and passenger > areas > > protects the child extremely well. > > Unless the vehicle hits from the passenger side, then all you have is the > door for protection. *** No the front post and the engine wall form a fairly stiff structure in side collisions > > > > - The available volume is often larger in the front, which means that the > child > > can sit facing the rear much longer. Scientists recommend to have children > in > > reverse mounted child seats up to the age of 4 or 5. > > Scientists? > Hmm....I can't imagine having a three year old in a reverse mounted seat. I > did it up to the recommended weight of forty pounds, then I switched. The general recommendations here in Sweden are to have the child reverse-seated as far as possible. The dimensioning factors are when the head goes above the back of the child seat and when there is no mor room for the legs. These conditions typically occur at the age of 4. I the front seat the leg room is often better than in the rear seat. *** A typical page where you find these recommendations are the National Association for Promoting Traffic Safety (also in Swedish unfortunately) http://www.ntf.se/konsument/default.asp?RecID=10111 > > > > - Having the child in the front reduces the risk of ending up in accident. > A US > > study shows that the risk of getting an accident at all is increased by > about > > 30% if the child sits in the rear seat, this is probably due to the poor > contact > > between the driver and the rear seated child. > > Well, that is the drivers fault so to speak, nothing to do with what is > safest for the child. Most babies fall asleep anyway. *** Well even if it is the driver's fault the risk is still increased when the average driver handles the car. This includes not only the risk for the child but also for pedestrians and drivers/passengers in the oppising lanes. > > > > Car manufacturers tend to recommend to have the child seat in the rear > just to > > simplify their responsibilities > > Yes, but the insurance industy also recommends it as well as NTSB. > > >and to reduce the problems of being able > to > > easily disconnect the airbag. Thus, don't trust the car manufacturers in > this > > case, they are not looking at the problem from a child perspective. > > The scientists are? > Who is? *** This statement is something you find for instance in the first reference I gave, both insurance companies and traffic researchers have the same opinion > Facts here, seem to speak for themselves wouldn't you say? > It leaves me with the question, how many children died from sitting in the > front, verses how many children died from sitting in the back? > I think the figures would be surprising to us both, don't you? > I also think if anyone lets a child under the age of 16 sit in the front > with a passenger airbag is stupid! How many cases of children dying does it > take to get this through to people's thick heads?! I totally agree, the airbag is a very good invention for protecting adults but it is not (yet?) suitable for use with children. > > http://www.nospam/people/injury/childps/ *** In this link the recommendation seems to be that children above 1 year should be seated forward-facing. At this age the mass of the head is about 20% of the total body mass while the skeleton and muscles are still very weak. Thus an accident will lead to very large stresses on the neck of the child. In this report http://www.vti.se/pdf/reports/N46-2001.pdf that summarises five years of all lethal accidents in Sweden involving children there are some cases with forward-faced 3-4 year children where the investigation indicates that the child would have had better chances rear-faced. I think this discussion has been quite interesting, clearly showing the cultural difference betwee two countries and the way the authorities look at the situation. I think we have succeeded quite well in Sweden with 550 traffic deaths per 9 000 000 inhabitants (61 ppm). This is low compared with most other countries, e.g. US has 41000 killed in 280 000 000 inhabitants (146 ppm). Maybe the figures will be different when counting vehicle traveled miles, VTM, but I have not been able to find these figures for European countries. The vision here in Sweden is zero deaths in traffic. I doubt you can reach this, mainly because there are always some people using the traffic as a suicide means but with methods like safer cars, centre barriers on all larger roads, adequate speed limitation means etc todays figures. You can compare this with figures like infant mortality. 30 years ago it was generally believed that the bottom limit was reached but the figures today are about a factor four lower, in some cases reached by simple means as recommending to have the babies sleeping on their back. -- someguy

Return to Main Index
StateOfNine.com
SaabClub.com
Jak Stoll Performance
M Car Covers
Ad Available

The content on this site may not be republished without permission. Copyright © 1988-2024 - The Saab Network - saabnet.com.
For usage guidelines, see the Mission & Privacy Notice.
[Contact | Site Map | Saabnet.com on Facebook | Saabnet.com on Twitter | Shop Amazon via TSN | Site Donations]