On or around Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:04:54 +1200, EMB <
[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:
>GbH wrote:
>
>> While you're at it, how many restrained front seat occupants are damaged by
>> unrestrained projectile children in the event of a collision.
>
>Having been involved in scooping up the remains of projectile children
>who had been propelled through the windscreen in a couple of accidents I
>think the changes would be a bloody good idea if they had been
>implemented in a workable manner.
they are workable. I doubt that the enforcement will be any better than
before, mind.
There will always be problems with specific vehicles (such as ones never
designed to have seat belts in the rear) and there will always be problems
with specific people...
But the regulations make sense, in that there are few exceptions. Granted,
it's not going to be possible to adequately secure 5 kids in the back of a
typical motor, but that's because it never was, not because the law is a ass
- if you allow more than a very few exceptions (like the thing about
necessity: if your child needs to got to hospital and there's no suitable
belt, that's allowed, ferexample, or if you suddenly have to pick up a
friend's child from school) then you may as well not bother, because half
the people will go "oh, but I don't do it because..."
In some specific cases, such as defenders, it might be more difficult, but
that's partly due to the fact that the middle-row seats are a hangover from
a design 40 years ago (109 SW), as is the whole vehicle in fact.
sideways bench seats have been deprecated for some time and have been
illegal for children on organised trips for several years in the UK. I'd
tend to argue that the single side-facing folders with lap belts in the
discos are not much less safe than a forward-facing lap belt-only seat - the
back of the middle-row seat, which they'll hit in the event of a front-end
shunt, is padded and the headrests come up quite high, with respect to
children. The back door would be the worst risk, in the event of a serious
rear-ending.
If you're bothered about carrying children suitably in a 110, you're going
to have to get it worked on, and then inspected, as there aren't suitable
belts. You'll also have to accept that you can't fit 12 people in, and
secure them adequately. I reckon I could get 8 people in a defender and fit
suitable belts, including the fabrication of mounting points where there are
none, it would then need a seatbelt installation check. It comes down to
the fact that the defender, big as it is, is not a big motor inside.
The question is how highly do you value your children...
BTW, if anyone wants a genuine 12-seater 110, I reckon I've got most of the
process of fitting a transit body to the 110 chassis sorted out in theory -
if I'd not run out of money this summer I'd have built one by now.
It'll run you about 2 grand more than the cost of a 110 and a suitable
transit, ballpark figure. might be a bit less, if there are enough good
parts to be sold. If, however, you start from a 110 with good chassis and
drivetrain but ****e body and a sound tranny body with shagged engine,
there's not going to be much value in the residual bits. I'm inclined to
think that I'd return the possibly-saleable parts, and the owner could
recoup as much as they manage to from them.
--
Austin Shackles.
www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose"
Alphonse Karr (1808 - 1890) Les Guêpes, Jan 1849
