Airbags - only last 10 years ?

Guy King ( snipped-for-privacy@zetnet.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

Because :-

a, It's going to be pissing in the Atlantic. b. They'll promptly get changed back wrong again. c. I don't tend to look at entries I know about already, I look at entries on subject I *want* to know about.

Makes you wonder, though, if it could potentially be an issue in the future - not airbags going off when they shouldn't - but not going off when they should.

15 years ago was 1991, and rust proofing on a hell of a lot of cars in those days was still s**te. But in another 10 years, there may well be a lot more 15-year-old cars on the road - just as there are probably more 10-year-old cars on the road now than 5 years ago, because they're built better, oils are better, rustproofing's better, etc etc.

And insurance groupings, I would guess, are ultimately derived from how much a car is likely to cost an insurer, on average, if involved in a claim. I would guess that, all other things being equal, a car with an airbag would be a lower group than one without, as it would potentially reduce (or possibly completely eliminate) the size of personal injury claims. Something that may or may not outweigh the cost of replacing the airbag. But then again, most cars of that age are likely to get written off anyway, so it wouldn't cost them any extra, but its absence could mean that they're likely to pay out much more in personal injury claims.

After all, if one reason the insurance rating for a car is low is because the airbag can (and does) save the insurance company a *lot* due to reduced personal injury claims, then if it's not working (or hasn't been replaced as schedule) it could give them reason to increase the premium.

So I reckon that possibly, at some point in the future, insurance companies may require the owners of older cars fitted with airbags to prove that the airbag was replaced as per the schedule, or refuse to insure them at all. In the same way that they refuse to cover certain more desirable models of car against theft without proof of an immobiliser having been fitted.

Obviously there's the question of it being part of the owner's responsibility in maintaining their own vehicle, but generally it's supposed to be kept "in a roadworthy condition", so if a rotten brake pipe was the cause of the crash, then it would be the fault of the owner for not replacing it as part of maintaining the vehicle properly (which could then be passed on to the garage who last serviced it, if that was the case). But would the same apply to an airbag? Probably not, if it wasn't the cause of the accident, just that it affected the cost of the claim - so it'd probably be more of a concern of the insurance company than the police.

Discuss.

That means that a significant proportion must be 20 or more. That is unusual. I don't live in a prosperous area but neither is it a disadvantaged city area, but cars are probably way older on average than for most of the country. Even so, as I travel around, there are very few cars still on the road much older than 15, as a proportion of the total. They are H reg or older. In fact I have a B and a J prefix still going but a 'B' car is a rare sight indeed nowadays as is anything older than about 'F' or 17 years old.

Huw

Huw (hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

Yes, Huw.

You get a choice between buying a car with electronic alphabetti spaghetti, or one without.

No argument.

BUT - why SHOULDN'T people still have the right to buy a car without electronic muppet-overrides if they so wish?

No, it won't. Galileo is just another GPS. The satellites will sit in geostationary orbits and broadcast timestamps. Just as GPS does. Your receiver will receive them and triangulate to give a position. Just as GPS does.

What applications are built *around* that position is a different kettle of fish. Just as with GPS.

Huw (hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

I think you may find a visit to uk.rec.cycling informative.

"If you want AND SOMEBODY DECIDES TO MAKE IT"

Ian Johnston ( snipped-for-privacy@btinternet.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

Absolutely. Look at the rash of cambelt failures.

Many people think that the MOT is all the annual maintainance any car needs.

The message from "Huw" contains these words:

I saw a Marina today!

The message from "AstraVanMan" contains these words:

You seen a Ka rusting away happily to itself yet? There's plenty that have!

AstraVanMan ( snipped-for-privacy@whataloadofforeskinbollocks.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

I don't think there will be. The sheer economics of trying to keep an older car running will plain not work. You will not be able to buy the electronics - or afford them if you can. That's what is going to kill cars.

It's already getting that way - but 10-15yo cars now are nowhere near the complexity of today's 0-5yo cars. Fancy trying to troubleshoot a multiplexing fault in your drive? No Bloody Chance.

Did they still make Escorts and Orions without front wheel arch liners then? If so, they were the minority of s**te rust prone cars that I can think of. Most cars had fair rustproofing about five years before this and in the case of VW about ten years. I remember my new [in '82] Golf oozing wax from every orifice in hot weather.

But in another 10 years, there may

Yes but the cost of fairly minor repairs combined with an abundance of cheap as chips replacements older than 6 years mean that there will always be a lot of 10+ cars going to the scrappy with only fairly trivial problems. Cars are almost throwaway consumer items not worth repairing after a point.

It makes bugger all difference so far to premiums so is unlikely to in the future.

More likely to refuse or reduce payouts if the airbag did not provide the expected protection having not been serviced as recomended.

More likely to refuse or reduce payouts like I said above.

It could become a matter for the MOT at some point, though I doubt it because a missed airbag service does not make the car unroadworthy, but then neither does a faulty seatbelt, so who knows? IMO it is not something anyone should worry unduly about as long as they recognise that an old [older than say 12 years] airbag might not deploy efficiently. Remember that there is no guarantee that even a new airbag will deploy so as to prevent injury and indeed might even cause some injury. Travel is never without risk. Every journey [indeed every action in life] is a matter of weighing the advantages against the risks. Provision of safety related kit is probably a 'good thing' but even all the safety equipment available will not make it safe, only safer.

Huw

But they do. In very small numbers. And this is not the reason they buy them I suspect very strongly. Look at it the other way and ask why an expensive car like a TVR should be offered without. Very few other reputable manufacturers do. An 'off' switch would cost a matter of pennies.

Galileo will facilitate a whole range of applications which have not been dreamt of yet. One that has been dreamt of is road pricing of even minor roads and this would not be practical using present systems. Also finding the location of every or any vehicle at any time. Possibility of tagging people or even every individual so the State knows where they are at any time. There will be many beneficial applications I'm sure, such as the possibility of precision automatic steering which is not possible at present without a stationary correcting signal.

Huw

Have you ever considered moving somewhere less pikey?

;-)

Huw (hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

Yes. And you seem to be arguing they shouldn't be able to.

Agreed.

Which are impossible for physical, logistical and political reasons FAR more major than the mere accuracy of current GPS.

Increased GPS accuracy (I'm using GPS to include Galileo) is of no benefit above and beyond current imaging systems, as it can never cope with obstacles in the road.

Galileo's biggest advantage over GPS is that it isn't a proprietary military system that just happens to be available for civilian use. The technology is fundamentally identical.

Guy King ( snipped-for-privacy@zetnet.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

You'll get over it.

Pass - plenty of Mk4/5 Escorts are rotten as a pear at that age though - it's not the front arches/wings that are the main issue, it's the sills/rear arches/floorpans AFAIK, same as it always was.

Well yes, there are manufacturers that have always been better than others, but as with SteveH's Alfa 75 (galvanised) - just goes to show that nothing lasts forever, and there are plenty of stuff like Cavaliers/Carltons of that age that have their weak spots, that a lot of modern designs have improved upon. Suppose it's more to with the design than anything - you seldom hear of a rotten Mk1 Mondeo, but you hear of plenty of Kas with rusty sills that are much newer than the average Mk1 Mondeo.

Aye, this is true.

Fair enough - I don't know enough about underwriting and all that, to comment accurately.

Possibly, but this could leave drivers open to being sued by their passengers (if a passenger airbag didn't deploy, and would have made a significant difference to the level of injuries sustained).

Doesn't it? I thought anything that failed an MOT is unroadworthy - surely that's the point. Aren't you getting it confused with endorsable offences relating to the condition of a vehicle i.e. tyre tread/inflation, leaking brake fluid ??

Indeed, but surely if it was within 10 years old (or whatever the recommendation for that particular model was), failed to deploy when it should have done (and this could be proved), and could have prevented injuries had it deployed, then surely the liability would lie with the manufacturer (provided the car had been properly maintained as per the schedule up to that point), wouldn't it? Obviously once it's past the time when it should have been replaced, the onus is passed to the operator.

Absolutely - as we all know, the most safety-crucial item on any vehicle is the nut behind the steering wheel.

AstraVanMan ( snipped-for-privacy@whataloadofforeskinbollocks.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

Is a car with failed ABS unroadworthy? If it is, then all cars without ABS fitted must also be unroadworthy.

Thing is, there's not actually that many MkI Mondeos left out there these days - they seem to be killed by stuff other than bodywork at a relatively early age, meaning the longevity of the bodywork isn't really being tested.

(It's probably because a MkI Mondeo is worth nothing - even early MkII Diesels are around for 500 quid if you look hard enough)

SteveH ( snipped-for-privacy@italiancar.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

Hmmm. There's a lot of cars round here that are over 15yo but certainly aren't pikey.

Just off the top of my head - there's an Austin Healey 3000 on the next road over - and another one in the block of lockups (a five minute walk away) where I keep the Ami - and a rally-prep Mk 1 Escort in the lockup next to mine. Or the Daimler 250 just down the road. I think his son's sold his GT6, though.

Nope.

ABS has a valve fitted in the brake line which turns off the brake even if you have your foot on the pedal. If that goes wrong and fails 'off' then you have no brakes.

To me that sounds unroadworthy.

A non-ABS car has no such valve.