Doing some research...seatbelt interlock.

"After many of the delays that auto-makers love, on August 15, 1973, Department of Transportation officials finally issued a new regulation
requiring ignition interlocks on all new cars. There was now no need for airbags, so they dropped from the picture. During this two-year delay, however, Congress member Louis Wyman (R-N.H.) was preparing an amendment to the Motor Vehicle and School Bus Safety Act of 1974, which said, "Federal safety standards may not require that any vehicles be equipped with a safety belt interlock system." Some Hill staffers say Ford actually wrote the amendment. With a well-timed push from auto lobbyists, the amendment passed. The airbag and the ignition interlock were now both dead, victims of one of the most brilliantly executed double fixes in the history of lobbying."
____________________________________________________________
We note that our agency's previous experience with ignition interlocks indicates that great care must be taken in requiring vehicle modifications to induce higher belt use, to avoid consumer backlash. As of August 1973, Standard No. 208 required all new cars to be equipped either with automatic protection or an ignition interlock for both front outboard seating positions. General Motors sold about ten thousand of its 1974 model year cars equipped with air bags that met the automatic protection requirement. Every other 1974 model year car sold in the United States came with an ignition interlock, which prevented the engine from operating if either the driver or front seat outboard passenger failed to fasten their manual seat belt.
In a notice published in the Federal Register (39 FR 10272) on March 19, 1974, we described the public reaction to the ignition interlock as follows: "Public resistance to the belt-starter interlock system . . . has been substantial, with current tallies of proper lap-shoulder belt usage on 1974 models running at or below the 60% level. Even that figure is probably optimistic as a measure of results to be achieved, in light of the likelihood that as time passes the awareness that the forcing systems can be disabled, and the means for doing so will become more widely disseminated. . . ."
There were also speeches on the floor of both houses of Congress expressing the public's anger at the interlock requirement. On October 27, 1974, President Ford signed into law a bill that prohibited any Federal motor vehicle safety standard from requiring or permitting as a means of compliance any seat belt interlock system. In response to this change in the law, we published a final rule in the Federal Register (39 FR 38380) on October 31, 1974 that deleted the interlock option from Standard No. 208 effective immediately.
________________________________________________________________
DOT gave manufacturers a further choice for new vehicles manufactured between 1972 and August 1975. Manufacturers could either install a passive restraint device such as automatic seatbelts or airbags or retain manual belts and add an “ignition interlock” device that in effect forced occupants to buckle up by preventing the ignition otherwise from turning on. 37 Fed. Reg. 3911 (1972). The interlock soon became popular with manufacturers. And in 1974, when the agency approved the use of detachable automatic seatbelts, it conditioned that approval by providing that such systems must include an interlock system and a continuous warning buzzer to encourage reattachment of the belt. 39 Fed. Reg. 14593. But the interlock and buzzer devices were most unpopular with the public. And Congress, responding to public pressure, passed a law that forbade DOT from requiring, or permitting compliance by means of, such devices. Motor Vehicle and Schoolbus Safety Amendments of 1974, §109, 88 Stat. 1482 (previously codified at 15 U.S.C. § 1410b(b) (1988 ed.)).
so there...
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
[Chuckle.] I love how air bags are considered to be "automatic protection" that satisfies the DOT standard. In my lil ole accident a month ago that took out my Tercel's front end, the air bags stayed well rested in their compartments and did not deploy. Maybe I wasn't going fast enough--only 15 to 30 mph.
Kinda hard to classify that as **Automatic** protection.
I always use the belt, except sometimes I'd wait from 30 seconds to a minute until I was on the road to fasten the belt. Well the accident happened as I left the gas station parking lot, not 30 seconds from turning the key.
We ought to bring back the interlocks. Even the fools among us deserve to live. Thankfully my injuries were not major--a bump on the forehead as the forehead hit the steering wheel an inch above the left eye. But it was the biggest jolt I've probably ever had.
Two weeks afterwards, the forehead bump was gone, but then my left eye started feeling sore and occassionally blurring my vision when I'd read a book or a computer screen. Happy to say the eye's back in good shape again.
I'm amazed at something. That 1995 Tercel, even with the front end demolished, still runs! It won't pass inspection at all--components like the battery are knocked maybe 6 inches back, radiator tilted, engine may not be seated in the cradle properly--may even be knocking up against the firewall. Motor mount may be broken. BUT gosh darn it, THAT TERCEL STILL RUNS, and runs VERY WELL.
And the only fluid leak resulting from the accident was the windshield wiper fluid.
Looking forward to picking up the new Corolla when the dealer gets it in a week, but my 1995 DX automatic 4-door Tercel only has 33,000 miles on it--kind of a shame.
Bring back those interlocks--and please don't wait 30 seconds until you're on the road to fasten your belt, like foolish me. Do it before turning the key.
Apparently that's as close to "automatic" protection that lobbyists will let us get. I can say first hand that air bags are far from being automatic.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 05:55:07 +0000, Built_Well wrote:

DAMN! 33K on a '95?! Mine had 133 when I sold it, and ran like a champ!
Good for you, you're all right. Bet you'll be fastening the belt as soon as you get in the car now!
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Smart people do. EVERY time they (we) drive in traffic.
I just don't want some $%^&ing interlock telling me I HAVE to. Or any $%^&ing law either, for that matter. Even the $%^&ing seatbelt bleeper gets disconnected on my vehicles.
-Don (glad to live where wearing a motorcycle helmet is my choice too)
--
"Ladies and gentlemen take my advice.
Pull down your pants and slide on the ice."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Bring back seat belt interlocks? Does this guy need his mommy to wipe his nose for him, too? I thought being an adult meant you took responsibilty for your own stuff, like fastening your own seatbelts? It's bad enough we've got airbags, so that any moment in a frontal crash we can have Washington and all its hot air reproduced for us . . .
Charles
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I'll ignore the rude comments from one poster.
By the way, I neglected to mention that the other driver is perfectly fine--never injured because he was wearing his seat belt, thankfully.
But I caused $2,700 damage to his SUV, the only claim ever against my policy, which means things should have a happy ending.
So did that service technician disable your Corolla's interlocks without you even asking? Kinda sounded that way.
Wow, 1974--what a pivotal year. So many unnecessary deaths and injuries in the last 31 years because legislators succumbed to industry puppeteers. Hope I don't get sued for that--just a guess or opinion on my part from reading the excerpts above.
But I'm glad to see it wasn't a court that ruled against the interlocks--it was our "independent" legislators.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Rude, my ass! I'm trying to make a point here and it completely missed you. Interlocks are for non-adults that can't take the time or the responsibility to buckle their own seatbelts. They are mental children, wanting the nanny state to take care of all their needs for them. They will be the people that will vote for Hillary in 2008.
I am glad I never owned a 1974 vehicle. I had to take driver's ed in one and the interlock didn't work right half the time.
Charles
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If you were exiting a gas station when the accident occurred and you were hit from the side or at an angle, the steering wheel air bag probably wouldn't deploy because it is designed to protect in a frontal collision. There are 3 air bag sensors - at least 2 have to sense rapid deceleration in order for the air bag to deploy.

Auto manufacturers do not classify air bags as automatic protection. That is why they are referred to as a **supplemental** restraint system by Toyota, supplemental inflatable restraints by GM, etc. They are not intended to replace seatbelts. In fact, a properly worn seatbelt is necessary to keep the person in position for the air bag to work. Otherwise, the passenger can and often is ejected from the vehicle or the air bag injures a properly positioned person.

Fortunately, it sounds like you were not severely injured and will now wear the seatbelt before putting the car in motion.
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Some interesting tid-bits:
"Today, however, [about] 35 years since the federal government required that all pas- senger cars be equipped with seat belts, approxi- mately one-quarter of U.S. drivers and front-seat passengers are not buckling up."
[Yikers, that's a lot of people! One out of 4 aren't buckling up.]
Here's more support for interlocks--or at least the use of loud reminding buzzers and internal strobe lights:
"Belt use rates in the United States lag well behind the 90 to 95 percent usage rates in Canada, Australia, and several north- ern European countries."
"Properly used, seat belts can reduce the risk of fatal injury for front-seat occupants by about 45 percent in cars and by about 60 percent in light trucks driven as passenger vehicles"
[And that's just for Fatal injuries--I imagine the percentage skyrockets for all injuries in general, including serious injuries.]
Now the following is TRULY scary:
"Hard-core nonusers comprise approximately 4 per- cent of drivers, but this same group has significantly more traffic violations, higher crash involvement rates, higher arrest rates, and higher rates of alcohol con- sumption than those who buckle up all or part of the time."
"Sixty percent of drivers in severe crashes were reportedly not wearing seat belts. These nonusers pose risks to themselves and to others and are therefore an important audience to reach; however, reminder sys- tems may not be effective."
Sounds to me like the roads are really unsafe.
I dunno. If you ask me, it just makes sense that a car shouldn't start if the belts aren't engaged.
But at the very least, a really loud buzzer ought to sound for *as long as the car is on*--not these whimpy buzzers in use today. And this intolerable buzzer should remain on for the entire length of the car trip if the driver isn't belted. I'm guessing even somebody drunk outta his gord couldn't ignore a loud, loud buzzer running for even 10 minutes, let alone a whole 40-minute drive.
Oh well.
1974--a year which will TRULY live in infamy. I think there's roughly 50,000 deaths on the road each year in the U.S. Multiply that figure by the 31 years that have passed
since 1974, and you come up with over 1-and-a-half MILLION deaths. That's more than 3 times the number of U.S. deaths suffered in World War 2, in both the European and Far Eastern theaters.
Put another way, each year on the roads, we suffer about half the deaths as the average number of yearly war deaths sufferred during each year of World War Two (50,000 compared to roughly 100,000).
My gosh, we have a mini-Dubbya Dubbya Two on the roads each and every year. Someting really needs to be done--at least the loud non-stop BUZZER system if not the interlocks. I hope our legislators start earning their $150,000 pay checks and do something that counts, instead of cow-towing to Emperor Ford or Fuhrer General Motors. I'd be damn ashamed to be a Senator or Representative.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Oh, did I say our Representatives and Senators earn only about $150,000 each year? I neglected to mention that they also get about a million dollars each year for office expenses. Not many people know about the extra $900,000 or million each Rep. and Senator gets annually just to run an office.
If any legislators happen to be reading--and I doubt any are--probably getting BJ's from Congressional pages (remember that scandal a few years back?), please do something about these death machines that are killing your fellow Americans at half the rate as World War 2.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
My goodness, a Senator or Rep. can get a lot of BJ's with all that office money. Don't believe for a second that all that cash is spent on office supplies [Chuckle!]
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Let me say that my allusions to World War 2, such as "day of infamy," "Emperor Ford," and "Fuhrer General Motors" were all in good fun and satire. I criticize my own government more than anyone else's, as you can see from my Congressional pay comments above.
I'm glad we're all friends now, American, Japanese, German, etc. That's the way it should be. And nobody makes better cars in the world than Toyota.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 19:13:20 +0000, Built_Well wrote:

And you had a Tercel. I had a '95, 100,000 when I bought it, 130,000 when I sold it 2.5 years later, and 45 MPG most of the way.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I just learned something awful. Not only did Congress's 1974 law forbid federal traffic safety agencies like NHTSA from requiring that car companies use seat belt interlocks, but
the law also forbade NHTSA from requiring manufacturers from even using buzzer warnings that lasted more than 8 seconds!!
Now that's a true travesty!
8 SECONDS.
I'm guessing _continuously_ sounding buzzers would save thousands of lives annually, yet they are still outlawed. And they'd probably prevent hundreds of thousands of injuries,
From a recent paper by the TRB (Transportation Research Board):
"[In 1974] Congress promptly enacted legislation prohibiting NHTSA from requiring either ignition interlocks or continuous buzzer warnings of more than 8 seconds."
Now that's true industry lobby evil--not even letting buzzers do their job.
"NHTSA then implemented the requirement of a 4- to 8-second warning light and buzzer system [that's all NHTSA could do] that is activated when front seat belts are not fastened at the time of ignition. This standard remains in effect [today]."
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
My left eye and forehead are still sore 6 weeks after the accident--getting better but slowly.
I understand what happened now.
In __1974__ had New Hampshire Congressman Louis Wyman not prevented the highway safety administration from requiring car manufacturers to use anything longer than a measley 8-second MAXIMUM buzz time for safety belt warning buzzers, I seriously doubt I would have been injured at all __31 years__ later.
And I'm sure that's true for millions upon millions of others who have been injured, many seriously, since '74.
Louie's unsafe amendments to the '74 highway safety bill not only prevented federal agencies from requiring seat belt interlocks (the use of which can be debated), but Louie's amendements also limited agencies from requiring anything longer than an 8-second seat belt Buzzer warning, still in effect today. In other words, no continuous buzzer warnings. I don't think the utter badness of that idea can be debated. Why would industry lobbyists not want continuous buzzers? Any ideas?
If _Continuous_ buzzers were around, I would guess the very first thing almost everybody would do upon entering a car is fasten the belts. There would be no hesitation or wait time because we would have quickly tired of that sound of the continuous buzzer long ago.
As mentioned, I always wear seat belts, but sometimes I'd wait 30 seconds to a minute until I was on the road to fasten it. BIG Mistake as the accident happend not 30 seconds after starting the car and pulling out of the gas station parking lot.
Thank you Representative Louis Wyman.
I see on Google that he died in 2002. I'm sure I'm speaking for millions when I say:
"Rest in peace, you spineless industry lap dog."
I would recite some curse about your children or grandchildren, but not being superstitious, I know that such a curse would do no good.
I might also say to Little Louie to "burn in hell" but, again, not being superstitious I don't believe in heaven and hell.
The law has to be changed to at least require continuous buzzers, if not interlocks.
Okie, now on to happier things.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It was not the industry that killed off seatbelt interlocks, it was the constituents of those in Congress that screamed and hollered to have that regulation rescinded LOL
Ford and Toyota vehicles continue to sound the 'no belt' warning again every so often, in any event. Ford and GM sound an alarm if one neglects to turn off a turn signal after a while, as well.
mike hunt

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, you're WRONG about that. The FIRST thing I did was DISCONNECT the $%^&ing thing! I don't NEED a nanny telling me what to do; I have a BRAIN and I can figure that out for myself.

If you think that you don't need seatbelts as SOON as you are in traffic, then you're an idiot. Crashes can happen ANY time. I taught my kids from day one that they had to have their seatbelts on as soon as we were at the end of the driveway. They still wear seatbelts EVERY time they're in traffic, as do I.
BUT none of us NEEDS a nanny buzzer telling us when we need to put on a seatbelt. Each of us can use a BRAIN to figure that out.
If you can't, you are TOO ST00PID to be driving!!
-Don
--
"Ladies and gentlemen take my advice.
Pull down your pants and slide on the ice."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Don Fearn wrote:

Apparently one-fourth of the driving population needs a buzzer:
Quote from a recent study: "Today, however, [about] 35 years since the federal government required that all passenger cars be equipped with seat belts, approximately one-quarter of U.S. drivers and front-seat passengers are not buckling up."
And these millions of unbuckled drivers pose a danger to you as well as themselves.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

To me??
In what way???
Unbelted drivers die more often in crashes. That means less time in intensive care units, and therefore less cost for me.....
--
"Ladies and gentlemen take my advice.
Pull down your pants and slide on the ice."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Don Fearn <pooder> wrote:

But, all too often, an unbelted driver in a crash finds himself through the windshield or on the wrong side of the passenger compartment, so the car is totally out of control. THAT is a danger to me.
--
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Brian Gordon --> snipped-for-privacy@panix.com<-- brian.gordon at cox dot net |
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.