mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Rubber Bumper B

To: MG List <mgs@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: Rubber Bumper B
From: Max Heim <mvheim@attbi.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 12:31:01 -0800
Very good points, Kelvin.

On the subject of seat belts, I was wondering if anyone could testify to a
successful retrofit of 3-point belts to a Mk. I roadster, without going to
modern seats or adding a roll bar.

When I was looking into this issue, it was strongly suggested to me that the
rear deck belt mount (as used in say, 1969) was unsatisfactory in use and
potentially hazardous, even with highback seats (it seems pretty obvious
that it would be a bad idea with non-locking, lowback seats and no
headrests). This had seemed like the simplest and most visually "correct"
approach. I am not familiar with where the later cars anchor the shoulder
belts. Suggestions or comments?

The alternative, consisting of "not getting into any collisions", has worked
OK for 15 years, but of course this is no guarantee of future results (as
the stock prospectuses put it).


(or is that "prospecti"...?)



on 3/18/03 11:44 AM, Dodd, Kelvin at doddk@mossmotors.com wrote:

> John:
> 
> I don't have any structural engineering specs on the cars, so my comments
> are opinions not fact.
> 
> In parking lots with speeds < 5mph the rubber bumpers are going to survive
> without damage.  That's what they were designed for.  In these cases a
> chrome bumper car is going to have expensive chrome and sheet metal damage
> as the over-riders are forced back into the shell.  Been there, done that.
> 
> At speeds high enough to be a danger to the occupant I feel the two cars are
> comparable with a slight edge to the RBB cars as they have a bit more
> reinforcement to the front frame sections.  The MGB is a very safe car, as
> the shell is very strong and has good crumple zones.  In a front impact the
> engine assembly will dive down below the tunnel just as in a Volvo, rather
> than coming through the firewall and saying hello to you.  In a rear
> collision the big liability is the fuel tank, and the rubber bumper car may
> have a bit of an edge, but it is arguable.
> 
> In side impacts, the 1973 on doors are much stronger and have anti-burst
> features, definitely an asset.
> 
> No matter what the comments about looks, the 1968 on crash dash and
> collapsible steering column do make surviving major collisions more likely.
> 
> 
> The single most important safety feature no matter what the year are SEAT
> BELTS!!!!
> 
> Wearing a 3 point seat belt is going to give you the best edge there is.
> Rubber or chrome bumper.  The inertia reel belts fitted to the late cars are
> relatively easy to use and probably make more difference than anything else.
> Wearing a lap belt only is a good way to get to find out what windshield
> frames taste like.
> 
> I worked in a British Sports Car scrapyard for many years and could always
> tell who was wearing the belts and who wasn't.
> 
> just a thought
> 
> Kelvin.
> 


--

Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Mountain View, CA,
it's the primer red one with chrome wires

///  or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
///  Archives at http://www.team.net/archive


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>