Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 23:09:35 +0000 From: Colin Stamp <colinnospamp.plus.com> Subject: Re: Do You Have A Glove Box?
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 17:16:43 -0500, "Fred W." <Fred.Willsnospamove this to reply to' myrealbox.com> wrote: > >"Colin Stamp" <colinnospamp.plus.com> wrote in message >news:31ado0pi8gqc510m2qpd922uoo80h934lfnospamcom... > >> Where did I say they weren't meant to be used with seatbelts? >> US airbags have an *extra* requirement above european ones - they have >> to provide some last-ditch protection for beltless people. To meet >> that requirement, they have to be bigger, more powerful and more >> dangerous. > >Then let me clarify the intent of my reply: US airbags are only designed to >effectively protect the occupants during a crash if they are also wearing >their seatbelts. They are not designed to provide adequate protection when >seatbelts are not worn. Nothing can provide adequate protection to an unbelted person, but US airbags seem to be subject to some standard requirement intended to improve the chances of the belt-free. > Any airbag would provide *some* amount of >additional protection as compared to no airbag, even without seatbelts, but >that is not the intention of the design. It is the intention of the extra US requirement. The designers, as you say, may not be under any such illusions but their hands are (were?*) tied. > >> >> A casual Google seems to confirm. It seems I heard right after all. > >A casual Google gives me no sites that say otherwise. Please provide a link >to any credible site that does. I already have. On this very thread even. http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl=en&lr=&selm=cu48o058iilai36cc3oq1mkndnlfvrhnsb%404ax.com or there's this, which mentions legislation. http://www.cars.com/carsapp/kentucky/?srv=parser&act=display&tf=/advice/safety/airbags/airbags_switch.tmpl or how about this. http://www.dotars.gov.au/transreg/str_airbag.htm *One thing I haven't come across, is anything to say that the legislation is still current. Cheers, Colin. > >Thanks, >Fred W > >