Lets argue about airbags

If you are ever in a serious high speed wreck you will rethink any argument against airbags, as a passenger in such a wreck and while wearing my seatbelt, we struck a car which failed to give way broadside at 65 mph.

Everyone was injured except me in the front passenger seat, thanks to the airbag in my face, I did have some red abrasions, everyone else was hurt, but the driver's injury was from his knee striking the dash, other wise the airbag saved him also.

Both backseat passengers have permanent injuries caused by the rapid deceleration and being whipped in their seat belts, both have broken vertebra from the impact.

The obvious answer to this is to follow the money. Every insurer of which I am aware gives a discount for vehicles with airbags. Why is this?

1. Because actuarial studies have determined that airbags reduce the amount insurers pay in claims (because of reduced injuries/fatalities).

2. Because the insurance companies are in bed with the military-industrial complex, Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderberg Group to screw the little guy.

If you answered 1, airbags are a good thing. If you answered 2, add another layer of tinfoil to your hat.

I dislike them, but I'm glad to have them in my wife's car, as well as in each of my kid's cars.

Not that they are bad drivers. But I extracted my dead stepfather from his Ford Country Squire station wagon,and I'd like to never have to do that again to anyone I love.

I am not, however, in favor of them being mandated. Enough people would buy them that I should always be able to find a nice used vehicle with decent airbags for my family.

I'd bet money that the majority of people opposed to them do not have kids who drive.

I once asked my insurer if they'd give a discount for advanced driver training classes. Nope, the only driving skills that they thought were worthwhile were those offered by the AARP classes. So I don't think insurers are completely without a certain amount of head-up-assness. Still, it's an interesting way to judge effectiveness.

Airbags are a solution to a problem. Unfortunately, I think they're the wrong solution. I don't think cars should be made less safe, I think the approach is wrong. Do what you can to keep the cars out of accidents first, whether it's the ability of a car to avoid a collision with something or the driver to avoid a collision. Adopt a zero tolerance policy on DUI. Make getting a license harder than getting a library card. Require annual safety checks.

Then, start with the basics. Keep the occupants restrained. If you get hurt in a car wreck and you weren't wearing your seatbelt, you made the decision to get hurt. All cars are equipped with seatbelts and they work. I have no problem with mandatory seatbelt laws, probably because I grew up in a country with universal health care and because there's no problem with wearing a belt.

Jensenman, have you ever tried to drill through the windshield frame of a car? At least on a Miata (the only car I have any significant experience with, thus my incessant babbling about them), it's a much, much stronger steel than the rest of the body.

I don't have kids that drive. But I have a wife that does, and she's pretty important to me . There's no airbag in her Miata. Does this worry me? No, because her driving skills are above average thanks to autocross and track experience. She's not a track monster, but she knows how to brake well and how to deal with skids. Her car's braking and cornering abilities are above average and it's in excellent mechanical shape. It has rollover protection. She pays attention to her driving because she hangs out with people for whom driving is something that's taken seriously, instead of yammering on the phone and driving over curbs like her sister does. She always wears her seatbelt and she does not drink and drive. If you don't have a 0.000 blood alcohol limit in our family, you don't get behind the wheel.

I would treat any kids exactly the same way. And I wouldn't rely on an airbag to save them either.

I think if seatbelts were all that they would have them on School Buses.

I always use mine, but I don't think it should be a law, helmets shouldn't be a law, and no insurance should have to cover the people who choose not to use them.

Traffic is bad enough. Let these people eliminate themselves from the gene pool if they wish to do so.

Whether you like air bags or not, find and follow the deactivation instructions when you have to work around them.

I do wish that it was easier to remove/change steering wheels on newer cars without risking a face full of "safety".

Keith wrote: I don't have kids that drive. But I have a wife that does, and she's pretty important to me . There's no airbag in her Miata. Does this worry me? No, because her driving skills are above average thanks to autocross and track experience. She's not a track monster, but she knows how to brake well and how to deal with skids. Her car's braking and cornering abilities are above average and it's in excellent mechanical shape. It has rollover protection. She pays attention to her driving because she hangs out with people for whom driving is something that's taken seriously, instead of yammering on the phone and driving over curbs like her sister does. She always wears her seatbelt and she does not drink and drive. If you don't have a 0.000 blood alcohol limit in our family, you don't get behind the wheel. I would treat any kids exactly the same way. And I wouldn't rely on an airbag to save them either.

I treat my kids exactly the same way. Both of my (driving) kids autocross regularly. So does my wife. Our rules and standards are pretty much the same as yours. And I completely agree with your opinion on airbags.

I'm just saying that I don't mind having them in my kid's cars. Every little bit helps.

so.. anybody know what the law is when concerning removing the airbags? I already pulled the non-functioning air out of my Ti.. removing the airbags sounds like a good idea too... especially if it gets rid of my nasty wheel with the leather worn off

Varies State to State.

Keith, I have cut windshield frames (A pillars) quite easily with a Sawzall, most recently dismantling a 3rd gen RX7. No biggie, it didn't take any longer than cutting anything else of similar dimensions. The Hurst Jaws of Life make very short work of them. No, I haven't cut a Miata. I would imagine it's well engineered since it's an open top car, to cut down on cowl shake if nothing else.

billy3, as far as the actuarial tables go they gather only information from vehicles equipped with the current system of Mickey Mouse intrusion protection and airbags. Since they have no pool of information on other designs to draw from, of course airbags look great. How could they not?

I am not saying that airbags haven't helped; they have. I just think that there could have been a lot better systems engineered which would have had at least as great a positive impact, if not more so. Instead of a true safety cage which could help the average car survive an 80 MPH crash with a reasonable expectation of occupant survival, we get electronics and rocket fuel which do their job in limited ways.

Other than Dale Earhardt, who's the last driver to be killed in a NASCAR event? Those cages are engineered to withstand 200 MPH crashes, one engineered to half of that standard (easily done, think about it) would offer excellent protection in everyday situations.

EastCoastMojo wrote: I think if seatbelts were all that they would have them on School Buses.

They do now.

A friend of mine always wanted rally car survivability in his street car. It's amazing how much those cars will withstand along with the effectiveness of the driver's safety gear. But if people won't wear belts, I think expecting 5-points and a helmet might be too much to ask.

There must be some changes in regulations, though. The 2003 Miata (oh no, he's talking about Miatas AGAIN!) saw some extra padding on the inside of the hardtop right above the window as well as a different a-pillar.

It doesn't matter how good a driver you are. If airbags had existed back in 1966 I would still be able to see out of both eyes!

I was hit broadside by a drunk driver who ran a stop sign. Minor damage to the front left fender of my car, but my face met the vent window frame(remember those?) with a pair of sunglasses in between. I looked worse than that picture of Feilpe Massa that you have no doubt seen.

I wish my current car had side airbags but they weren't available when I bought it.

Speaking about the A pillars, not all are designed the same, I read about this when I got my Legacy, makes me feel a bit better if a rollover should ever occur.

http://www.drive.subaru.com/Sum06_WhatsInside.htm

Jensenman wrote: Other than Dale Earhardt, who's the last driver to be killed in a NASCAR event? Those cages are engineered to withstand 200 MPH crashes, one engineered to half of that standard (easily done, think about it) would offer excellent protection in everyday situations.

You do realize that NASCAR cars do not have doors, the driver crawls in and out of the thing to sit is a seat that no civilian would ever put up with because it is so contrasting. To state the obvious, a roll cage works because the driver is constrained to VERY limited movement in what is essentially a custom built super tough enclose. Meanwhile civilians of vastly different sizes easily get in and out of identical cars with big assed doors, are free to turn around to smack their kids with their seat belts on, reach to the gloverbox for their single oz vodka bottles with their seat belts on, text and eat burgers and slog Slurpees with their seat belts on, can carry loads of crap in their interior unsullied by steel tube even though the interior is already packed with electronic dood daads galore.

The design parameters are TOTALLY different. You cant just take half. I doubt automotive engineers are as stupid as you think, if you were working with the givens they are you would come up with pretty much the same answers they do.

I was waiting for this type answer. Yes I know the parameters are completely different. That's why I said 'half the engineering'. I know first hand how hard it is to crawl in and out of a NEXTEL Cup car, done it a few times, last time at the Richard Petty Driving Experience. The cage in my Jensen and the roll bar in the Abomination are definitely not the hot ticket for jumping in and out at the local convenience store for a pack of smokes. Neither of those cars is intended for running errands and I know the average idiot is not going to put up with such shenanigans. But it is most definitely possible to add some of the features of a cage to a passenger car to good effect.

I have cut apart more than one car for restoration or disposal purposes meaning I have first hand experience with how they are built and yes they are built to a minimum standard (read: down to a price) that'll get them through crash testing so they can be sold. Don't take my word for it; check into 'seam welding' and how much it stiffens the average unibody for an indication of how much room there is for imporvement. I know (again first hand) there's plenty of room inside the average A/B/C/D pillar for some serious tubing. You'd never see it unless the interior trim panels were removed.

I have gutted more than one door for racecars, again seeing just how crappy the factory side impact bars are and how they are again built down to a price. It does not surprise me in the least to see cars in the boneyard nearly flattened from side impacts.

Then the manufacturers hang airbags everywhere including the ashtrays and cupholders and call the vehicle 'safe'. I call bullE36 M3. Airbags are now a marketing gimmick, as evidenced by the earlier post about the guy who bough the Elantra based strictly on the number of airbags it contained.

I don't think it's the engineers so much as it is the bean counters and the gubmint. The bean counters want cheapness, the gubmint and the average car buying goober want the illusion of safety. And so we wind up here: electronics, rocket fuel and leaky balloons.

InigoMontoya wrote: Speaking about the A pillars, not all are designed the same, I read about this when I got my Legacy, makes me feel a bit better if a rollover should ever occur. http://www.drive.subaru.com/Sum06_WhatsInside.htm

The linked article is a perfect example of what I've been talking about. No, it's not a true 'captive roll cage' (that's what I call my idea of an integrated roll cage) but it's the same general idea.

wish I had had one when I had the "big" one.... someone ran a red light and I T-boned them (~45 mph impact ).... my wrists gave (both broken)✴ the steering wheel didn't .... maybe with an air bag it would have deployed quickly enough to push my hands off the rim.... maybe gotten a broken nose but WTH I'm already ugly so no one would ever notice...

and yes I was wearing lap and shoulder belts.... 88 accord coupe

✴ take a moment and think of all the things you CAN'T do with both wrists broken

Good roll cages are expensive and time consuming to produce. They are impractical and intrude into the passenger compartment (see: harnesses, harness bar, etc.).

Someone think of the children:

Jensenman wrote:

InigoMontoya wrote: Speaking about the A pillars, not all are designed the same, I read about this when I got my Legacy, makes me feel a bit better if a rollover should ever occur. http://www.drive.subaru.com/Sum06_WhatsInside.htm

The linked article is a perfect example of what I've been talking about. No, it's not a true 'captive roll cage' (that's what I call my idea of an integrated roll cage) but it's the same general idea.

http://www.volvocars.com/intl/corporation/NewsEvents/News/Pages/default.aspx?item=56

Volvo articulated same Idea in 1972. The integrated roll cage cat has been out of the bag for a loooooong time. Yes, the Auto makers are profit driven, and that is a constraint the engineers work with. Subaru is crawling upmarket with safety features too. The German and Swedish automakers absolutely market safety including airbags, and invest a great deal in design and engineering. They have been doing the integrated roll cage for 20 + years.

It is a complicated set of coupled dependencies and you want to pull them in a direction of greater constraint and more robust enclosure. The regulatory bodies and the carmakers have been pulling the dependencies in a soft enclosure direction so the consumer can feel lovely in their luxo bubble.

I have seen lots of convincing evidence supporting airbags as a useful component in automotive safety design and engineering.

Another point

Roll cages don't crumple. They are meant to remain in shape to protect the driver and keep adequate space between him and the outside world. Because the car with a roll cage doesn't crumple, there are greater forces exerted on the driver's body (the car itself does not give and therefor the deceleration rate experienced by the driver is greater) to slow him in the event of a crash. To make up for this, the force of the impact must be spread over more of the body which leads to harnesses.

Believe it or not, millions of people sacrifice their safety everyday so that they don't have to strap on a 5 point harness, buckle their helmet and hans device and arm the fire suppression system every time they drive. Cars are full of compromises one of them being airbags. They slow you down slower and you don't have to think about them.

Jensenman wrote: billy3, as far as the actuarial tables go they gather only information from vehicles equipped with the current system of Mickey Mouse intrusion protection and airbags. Since they have no pool of information on other designs to draw from, of course airbags look great. How could they not?

Bzzzt. Thanks for playing. That's not how actuarial science (statistics on steroids) works.

Insurers have stacks and stacks of data going back a long time with lots and lots of variables from which to draw inferences. Admittedly, the best data is probably from the transition years when model year to model year changes could have otherwise similar vehicles with only changes in the airbags, but the data is still statistically valid. Moreover, there are lots of mathematical techniques that would make your eyeballs explode for isolating the effect of particular variables on a data set. (It makes my eyeballs explode, and I minored in mathematics.)

Insurers' claims experience clearly suggests that vehicles with airbags have improved claims experience versus similar vehicles that don't. Otherwise they wouldn't offer a discount. If airbags didn't improve claims experience, what possible motive could they have for offering a discount? (Hint: if you think there is one, see comment above about appropriate shielding for headgear.)

Since we all know that airbags result in more expensive repairs to the vehicle, the improved claims experience must come from some combination of: (1) fewer injuries, (2) less severe injuries, and (3) fewer fatalities.

Of course claims experience is to some degree aggregated, meaning that in any given event airbags may contribute to more injuries, more severe injuries, and/or fatalities. However, since I don't get to pick the exact dynamics of my crash, I'll stick to playing the odds.

Could a hypothetical engineer with an unlimited budget and no market constraints come up with something better? Maybe. That doesn't mean that airbags aren't better than the absence of airbags.

Then again, what do I know. I like ABS and stability control (in street cars), too.

ABS and stability control are examples of technologies designed to prevent accidents - the best kind of safety. I've said it before, but I'll say it again. I'd love to see a maximum stopping distance required for passenger vehicles. I personally think that would be more effective than airbags, but I do not have proof.

When I totaled my Escort all the brakes in the world wouldn't have helped as the wheels were off the ground. I did hit hard enought to bend two of the seatbelt mounting points and break my seat. The air bag did a good job of slowing me down and keeping me inthe car away from the windshield. Inspite of all my broken bones I had no internal injuries and stayed conscious the whole time. If I were to do it again I'd like to have airbags.