By on May 21, 2014

GM and OnStar Aim to Help Buckle Up America

Automotive News reports General Motors is preparing to launch a belt assurance system in a number of MY 2015 vehicles later this year, including the GMC Sierra, Chevrolet Cruze, Colorado and Silverado. The system prevents the vehicle from shifting out of park until both driver and front passenger are buckled, using weight information gathered from the sensing and diagnostic module to lock the brakes and transmission until compliance is achieved. The system is currently optional, and will be provided free of charge for those who are willing to become beta testers for GM’s latest technological offering.

The Detroit News reports the company is facing down 79 lawsuits linked to the February 2014 ignition switch recall, with plaintiffs asking for as much as $10 billion in lost resale value. Some of the lawsuits are aimed at tying “New GM” to “Old GM” by dissolving the liability protections established in July 2009 when the automaker exited bankruptcy, leaving behind responsibility for accidents linked to the out-of-spec switch that occurred before “New GM” emerged. Supplier Delphi is also named as defendant in a number of the suits for their part in manufacturing the switch. All of the lawsuits are currently on hold by federal judges in California and Texas pending ruling on which of the claims will be allowable.

Meanwhile, the fallout from the February recall may upend the U.S. automotive industry as a whole, especially in its relationship with the federal government. GM’s credibility, already perceived as lacking among the public, isn’t being helped with the hiring of “Old GM” executives, the retirement of engineers with ties to the switch, or the status quo maintained in the automaker’s legal department. As the spotlight shines brighter on GM’s problems, it will likely face the same sledgehammer used by the U.S. Justice Department when the latter levied a $1.2 billion settlement upon Toyota for its own recall issues. In turn, more recalls, cautious product development and reduced profits will be experienced by all automakers, while consumers may see satisfaction from the heightened scrutiny.

Finally, Edmunds says GM and Google are partnering for ride-share pilot program at the latter’s Mountain View, Calif. campus, featuring the 2015 Chevrolet Spark EV as the vehicle of choice. The EV was chosen thanks to its “small footprint” along with its ability to seat four while cornering past the ARCO and connecting with the Google mothership. GM says the program will combine “commuting data, analytics, telematics, navigation and smartphones to run a smart, real-time system that mixes and matches drivers, riders and cars during morning and evening commutes,” with convenient door-to-door service and flex-scheduling the main goals expected.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

86 Comments on “GM Ready To Introduce Seat-Belt Interlock System In Select 2015 Models...”


  • avatar

    So what year will the new seatbelt interlock system be recalled?

    • 0 avatar
      Elena

      How optimistic! Some won’t start during test drives. Older vehicles (15k miles or 1 year, whichever comes first) will flood dealerships to override the system (a TSB will be issued to help them). A couple of crashes will be related to a passenger unlocking the seat belt to reach an object causing the transmission and brakes to decelerate the vehicle while travelling at highway speeds. Later (5-8 years) they will find out a minor design flaw in the control circuitry allowed the system to engage if cruise control is on…

      • 0 avatar
        PRNDLOL

        Correct.

      • 0 avatar
        morbo

        GM already sell cars with all the ‘features’ you list; seatbelt interlocks won’t change it.

        You want to change the behavior, make the fine for unbelted injuries astronomical. Or let Geico et al avoid injury payouts when people aren’t belted in. People will belt up real fast if they are faced with the economics of their actions.

        • 0 avatar
          wsn

          Who is to pay, if a drunk but seat belted driver collided with a sober driver without seat belt in a parking lot?

          • 0 avatar
            morbo

            I would argue that since the majority of the sober drivers injuries would be presumably caused by lack of seat belt, his insurance should not be liable for them. The drunk drivers insurance should also not be liable for the percentage of injuries caused by being unbelted versus being belted in, although some percentage would be covered solely because the accident was initiated by a drunk driver.

            Some percentage would be worked that that undoubtedly favored the insurance companies. It wouldn’t be fair. but it would drive much higher seat belt utilization rates once people realized the insurance companies have an out AND that modern cars record that information.

            Welcome to the 21st Century, citizen.

          • 0 avatar
            Rick T.

            I’m not a lawyer but I am married to one: comparative negligence?

  • avatar
    Rod Panhard

    Hey, does anybody else remember back in the early 1970s when they had the “starter interlock switch” in cars? You couldn’t start your car unless your seatbelt was fastened.

    It lasted for a year, right? Then everybody said, “Uh, no.” I think it was 1973. I even think my dad avoided his “replace this GM product before it costs me serious money” cycle because of it.

    That’s how loathsome this was. How is a transmission interlock going to be any different?

    • 0 avatar
      mechimike

      I logged in to post this exact thing. 1973/ 1974 was the timeframe…I had a ’74 Plymouth Satellite for a while that had this “feature” (which was easily disabled, BTW).

      Different times today, though. People will happily pay through the nose for any feature offering perceived safety. Back in ’74 customers were happy if they had an engine that made more than 150 HP and got better than 12 mpg.

      • 0 avatar
        BobinPgh

        My dad had a 1974 Kingswood Estate with the buckle start feature. At first, as long as you wore the seat belts it would not bother you. It had a 2 x 2 red light and a loud buzzer.

        Then one winter night it got really cold and even when everyone was buckled up, the buzzing would never stop. It bothered us kids at the time but dad was hard of hearing, so soon it became his car. There was a button under the hood to override it, but the button broke off when this happened (yes, cheap GM plastic). He eventually did get the dealer to disconnect it and traded it in 4 years later but none of us missed that noisy, “buzzy” leaky wagon.

  • avatar
    shaker

    The “ding-ding-ding” is sufficient.
    A “worst-case” scenario would be someone trying to escape a situation (say, bullets flying in the street), and getting shot while fumbling for the buckle.
    The “annoyance” scenarios are (for one), someone moving a car in their own driveway or parking lot having to buckle up.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      This was my first thought. I can think of many emergency situations where I need to move a car RIGHT NOW, and I don’t have time to mess with a seat belt.

      Or when I put my car in the driveway to wash it – that’s annoying.

  • avatar
    Hillman

    Every time I ride in a friends car and have to hear that beeping for the seat belt I am so thankful that I have a car without a nanny. Don’t get me wrong, I always wear my seat belt but when you have to buckle up a cooler because the warning alarm won’t shut up it gets very frustrating.

    • 0 avatar
      KixStart

      Hillman,

      +1

      It’s not at all unusual to throw enough stuff on to the front passenger seat to trigger the “Unbelted Passenger” indicator light.

    • 0 avatar
      piro

      Completely agreed.

      My girlfriend’s car makes an annoying noise when we’re just idling down a long drive way. We don’t need the seatbelt at this time. It’s not a legal requirement for either the driver or passenger at this time (private land), so why is the car making irritating noises?

      Glad my car doesn’t have it.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      It’s a bit inconvenient, but you can always buckle the belt *behind* whatever cargo you’ve got in the front seat. As for the seatbelt chime, the three-tone chime in my MK3 Jetta (they call it the “la cucaracha” chime) is pretty annoying, but I’m good for buckling my seatbelt before I ever stick the key in the ignition. However, some chimes are quite pleasant. BMW Group’s chime sounds come to mind (Rolls-Royce now has its own chime that’s a slightly deeper variation of the BMW chime). And the one in our 2012 Sonata is neither annoying nor interesting.

      “La Cucaracha” chime:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYX5RqvxEPM

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      “when you have to buckle up a cooler because the warning alarm won’t shut up it gets very frustrating.”

      Not just a cooler! My wife’s parents travel with an Invacare Platinum 5 Oxygen Concentrator for use at night when they sleep. The damn thing weighs 54 pounds and has to be transported, strapped in, on the back seat.

      Even strapped in, when the weight shifts going around a turn or whatever, the seatbelt alarm goes off for the adjacent seating area.

      Not just frustrating, each time he has to stop and reposition the damn thing. Double strapping using both seatbelts is not an option since the seatbelts are not long enough to cover two seating spaces.

    • 0 avatar
      carlisimo

      I disconnected the sensor in my Miata. I always buckle up, but not until after I start the car. After all, when I get in, the key is in my right hand and I need to put it somewhere.

  • avatar
    Jimal

    Another dumb GM solution to a question no one is asking, like the retrofit DRL kits they offered for a while and made a big deal about because “it’s the right thing to do”. Ugh.

  • avatar
    canddmeyer

    Dumb, but this is GM we’re talking about. My dog won’t be happy about this at all, especially if the airbag goes off. If GM really wants to make a difference, make the 6.2 motor available on all models of the half ton instead of just the $60,000 models.

    • 0 avatar
      DC Bruce

      Amen. I’ve been shopping for a 6.2 half ton because of its towing/hauling capacity (otherwise I have to step up to a 3/4 ton, using more fuel and riding less comfortably). In the entire metro DC area, there are about 4 of them for sale, and two of them are in Denali/High Country models which never come with the max trailer tow package (mostly a 3.73 rear axle).

  • avatar
    Halftruth

    Ugh bad idea.. Here we go. aircraft style checklists prior to takeoff-

    “Be sure belt is fastened with your foot on the brake pedal. Place hands at 10 and 2 on the steering wheel to enter “live” mode. Shut off radio. Extinguish any tobacco products. Cellphone use will be permitted but only via handless devices and only after vehicle has been in drive for more than 5 minutes and reached a minimum speed of 30 mph. Make any NAV changes/requests now and press the enter button. Be mindful of any pedestrian or other vehicle traffic in the vicinity before moving the gear shifter out of Park. Please check and set your TripWatcher driver monitoring system. This system should always read ‘connected/monitoring’, if not, please stop and call your local dealer as monitoring updates cannot be sent to your local driver monitoring authority. Continuing to drive unmonitored is against the law and may result in temporary or permanent disablement of your vehicle. GM takes your safety seriously. To see what is new, please visit your local GM dealer. You may now move the gear selector…”

    Funny? Dont think so.. I am surprised it has not gotten to this point already.

  • avatar
    Stumpaster

    may beating dead horse here but I certainly am looking forward to this system locking up spontaneously due to shifting weight in the seat and causing the car to stall unexpectedly in the middle of a highway.

  • avatar
    319583076

    This may not be a great idea and I’m not exactly a huge fan of GM nor their engineering but…these comments all reek of anti-intellectualism. I’m sure you’re all very pround of yourselves for identifying worst-case scenarios and system failure modes that you’re just positive will occur – implicitly disparaging 100’s of folks that have engineering degrees and do their best to implement management’s decisions with the resources available to them.

    You’re proudly ignorant, and likely believe that your lack of formal understanding is more than made up for by your common sense. You couldn’t be more incorrect.

    • 0 avatar
      CJinSD

      Now I know what people are thinking when they do something that is foreseeably wrong. Thanks for the insight into the sort of arrogance that constantly leads people to overestimate their own intelligence to the point that they disregard all human experience counter to their ambitions.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      What can we say, we are the Best and Brightest(TM).

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      +100

    • 0 avatar
      DC Bruce

      Maybe you’re not old enough to have been around when this idea was first introduced . . . in 1974 by government mandate. The number of people who could not start their cars, even buckled up, was substantial.

      Either that, or you’re a mechanic or garage owner rubbing his hands together over the prospect of a lot of new business.

      And when GM cheaps out on its ignition switch to the degree that the weight of too many keys on the key chain can torque the switch to the “off” position, the prospect of yet another device that will cause an unexpected shut down is not attractive. At least with the ignition switch, a fast-thinking driver could switch on and probably re-start the car.

      A malfunctioning interlock that shuts off the engine isn’t going to be corrected by the driver on the fly,

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Sorry, but my engineering degree is no less applicable than any of GMs engineers.
      GM makes faulty cars so GM adds unwanted technology to relieve their inability to use quality components where needed; no?

      Sorry but your wearing blinders if you think I need a seatbelt to traverse miles of privately owned FLAT dirt roads at speeds <30 mph.

      Why don't you have it added to your vehicle if you want it, every single driver in America knows the risks of driving without seatbelts, that is a FACT. When someone doesn't use them they know the consequences and accept them, whether they're 18 or 118 years old.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      In your efforts to be a bunch of smart-alecks, none of you has addressed 319’s actual comment. He said that this “may not be a great idea”—which I am inclined to agree with—but that your comments about it being an inherent point of failure or demise to the driver are quite ridiculous.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        I never insinuated the technology or lack there of, was dangerous or beneficial to the survival of the driver and passenger. I went after his need to attack multiple opinions based on his belief of how everyone else needs to live their lives.
        In fact I think you misread something, 319 is the one perpetuating that unlikely scenarios are a big deal by calling attention to them, the others are just finding holes in an unpopular idea.

      • 0 avatar
        redav

        Actually, they did:

        “these comments all reek of anti-intellectualism.”
        Response:
        “I’m not exactly a huge fan of GM nor their engineering”
        (Anti-intellectualism = hostility/mistrust towards intellectuals)
        The author of the criticism himself is critical/mistrusting of GM’s engineers and/or decision-makers, i.e., their ‘intellectuals.’
        Furthermore, “Maybe you’re not old enough to have been around when this idea was first introduced . . . in 1974 by government mandate. The number of people who could not start their cars, even buckled up, was substantial.”
        Clearly, the complaint is not with any intellectual approach, but with actual history, data, and experience.

        “I’m sure you’re all very pround[sic] of yourselves for identifying worst-case scenarios and system failure modes that you’re just positive will occur”
        Response:
        “when GM cheaps out on its ignition switch to the degree that the weight of too many keys on the key chain can torque the switch to the “off” position”
        This is not a worst-case failure that anyone is positive will occur. It is a failure that HAS occurred. Again, this is fact-based, historical, and data-driven. And, the GM response has indicated a systemic problem within the company. I, personally, don’t have a problem with believing that “If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got,” which is exactly what the responses are.

        “implicitly disparaging 100′s[sic] of folks that have engineering degrees and do their best to implement management’s decisions with the resources available to them.”
        Response:
        “Sorry, but my engineering degree is no less applicable than any of GMs engineers. GM makes faulty cars so GM adds unwanted technology to relieve their inability to use quality components where needed”
        Again, are GM’s engineers and management noble, or do they deserve criticism? When I was a TA, I graded lab reports that were in short, bad–incompetent-level bad. Nearly everyone failed. When they got their papers back, they (nearly) all exclaimed that they “worked hard” and “did their best.” The prof’s & my response was: “Your employer doesn’t care if you do your best. They care about results, and if you can’t deliver, then your best isn’t good enough.” Respect is not given; it’s earned. Cynical? Perhaps, but true. Has GM’s engineers and management earned respect? Based on their historical & recent behavior, not so much.

        “You’re proudly ignorant, and likely believe that your lack of formal understanding is more than made up for by your common sense. You couldn’t be more incorrect.”
        Response:
        “Maybe you’re not old enough …” and “my engineering degree is no less applicable …”
        These responses are by educated and experienced commenters. Personally, I have no problem with people being snarky in response to a vacuous and whiny complaint.

    • 0 avatar
      wsn

      @319583076 “implicitly disparaging 100′s of folks that have engineering degrees and do their best to implement management’s decisions with the resources available to them.”

      I have my own engineering degree, and I would say it’s a stupid idea. It’s wrong at the use case stage, long before any engineering kicks in.

      BTW, those 100s of GM engineers designed an ignition system that would be shut off due to the weight of the keys? I would know that’s a no go even when I was in grade 1.

    • 0 avatar
      jjf

      It is ridiculous to explicitly disparage commenters for being critical. Those “100′s of folks that have engineering degrees” follow orders to meet a specification, and don’t necessarily have customer’s or even GM’s best interest in mind. There are many examples of this in GM products.

      The fact that credentialed GM engineers may have worked hard on this doesn’t make the criticisms invalid. Do you work for GM?

    • 0 avatar
      chuckrs

      Actually, this reeks of common sense, and if you are old enough, of experience with interlock systems in the early 70’s.
      The decision to implement this PITA feature probably occurred much higher up the chain than the engineers. So, not anti-intellectualism, more like andi-Dilbert-boss-ism. I’d certainly like to hear the basis for the decision to offer this.

    • 0 avatar
      319583076

      quod erat demonstrandum (with one exception)

    • 0 avatar
      Elena

      I’ve been designing, troubleshooting and repairing circuits down to component level since 1984. I’ve seen more than my fair share of naive designs and lost that blind faith you show in 100s of folks… I really hope you are very, very young. If not, good luck. Trust me, you’ll need it.

    • 0 avatar
      FusilliJerry

      I know right? Next these goofballs will be saying GM will screw up something as simple as a key and say it will cause the car to shut off when someone bumps it. People are really going off the deep end.

  • avatar
    Toad

    If I had teenage drivers I’d want this system. Young drivers are generally bad drivers and every week (in my area) there is a news report of a young driver killed or seriously injured in an auto accident because they were not wearing a seat belt.

    As a grown up I don’t care either way since I wear my seat belt out of habit. If I had kids I would assume the worst and want all the auto nannies I could get my hands on.

  • avatar
    danio3834

    They’re debuting this in trucks? Dumb. I use my truck for shunting trailers around all the time and be damned if I’m going to buckle the belt just to shift out of park to move a trailer in the lot or yard at low speed, climbing in and out of the cab frequently. If I somehow end up with a truck with this feature in the future, it will promptly be disabled.

    • 0 avatar
      Domestic Hearse

      A few years ago, my brother owned a Ford F-150 that would ding thrice to warn you to buckle up, then after waiting patiently for a minute or so, ding incessantly until the driver and front passenger complied by fastening their buckles.

      My brother, who uses his truck for both transportation and for work (sometimes making local deliveries, which require pulling in and out of the dock and warehouse area, and maneuvering around the yard), found the dinging intolerable. Like you say, you jump in, move the truck 100 yards, jump out, pick up one item, drive it another 100 yards, pick up the second item, etc. And all the while…ding, ding, ding, ding!

      His fix (until he found a tech who shared the secret steps for permanently disabling the chime feature) was to fasten both front belts, sans driver or passenger, then shove the belts deep into the seat back hinge crease as possible. The belt stayed buckled behind him for a year or so and his Ford truck was none the wiser.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        I’m fairly sure my 240 doesn’t ding (although I always fasten my belt because I’m big on that), but every other car from 98 up that I can recall did ding in some way.

      • 0 avatar
        anti121hero

        On the older ford trucks with the buzzer you could simply unplug it under the dash. The silence was beautiful

      • 0 avatar
        danio3834

        The procedure to turn off the seatbelt chime was probably printed in the Owner’s Manual. Ford included it in the manuals of models from the last 15 years or so where I disabled them.

  • avatar
    Acd

    I’m willing to pay extra not to have this system in my next car. I just hope that the next batch of GM rental cars does not have it.

  • avatar
    sproc

    It seems like there’s a middle ground here: how about a speed limiter of around 10mph or so until the belts are buckled? Golf cart speeds seem reasonable to me at least to get the car rolling, shift it in your driveway, ease it onto a lift, etc.

    • 0 avatar
      jmo

      How would that work? Once you hit 11 the car would shut off?

      • 0 avatar
        danio3834

        It throws itself into park. haha.

      • 0 avatar
        sproc

        Easy: Just like any electronic speed limiter. The same software that prevents you from going over, say 130, can also control the engine at much lower speed.

        That’s not to say it you couldn’t bump it into the teens for a short period, but you’d have no power until you coasted down.

        • 0 avatar
          redav

          That’s a bad idea.

          It permits someone to start moving their car without their seat belt, but it then prevents them from being able to further use their car–likely when they need it to–until they perform an action that is likely too hands-intensive and time-consuming to be done.

          For example, a person gets in their car, does not fasten their belt, pulls out of their driveway / parking space, approaches the road (all this time not exceeding the 10 mph limit), and then when they need to go, the governor prevents them. In that situation, I don’t want to compound the problem by making the driver remove their hands from the wheel to fasten their belt. Similarly, if there is a failure of the passenger’s seat sensor, the governor could kick in when it should not.

          The approach of the interlock, which prevents the vehicle from moving at all, is closer to a fail-safe, and if such system is to be implemented, that is a better method. If you do permit the driver to use their car a little, let them use it a lot, but make it unpleasant to do so (chimes, flashers automatically come on, etc.)

    • 0 avatar
      KixStart

      I don’t think I’d be in favor of “even more complicated.”

  • avatar
    Ubermensch

    ITT – this guy…

    http://s3.vidimg.popscreen.com/original/28/eGtwOWNvMTI=_o_saturday-night-live-dana-carvey-as-grumpy-old-man.jpg

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    Owners will just ‘dummy click it’, and use seat belts even less. Frackin’ annoying every time you have to move the truck 2 ft. And it’s not hard to figure out how to ground the belt sensor.

    But GM should focus on building cars that don’t assassinate their owners 1st.

  • avatar
    Kendahl

    For a while in the mid 1970s, a system like this was mandated by the federal government. It was highly unpopular. There were so many complaints to Congress that the mandate was rescinded. I’m appalled at GM’s poor judgment in proposing its reintroduction.

    People got around the 1970s interlock by permanently buckling the seat belts behind the seat or bypassing the system entirely. Today, it would be integrated into the software and would be much harder to defeat.

  • avatar
    mcarr

    This is just dumb. Unless GM is getting ahead of upcoming Federal regs, what is the purpose of adding “features” that will turn away some buyers? This is definitely something I do not want on a truck.

  • avatar
    OneAlpha

    Easy answer. Just buckle the seatbelts and sit ON them. And that’s coming from a guy who gets real uncomfortable if he doesn’t buckle up.

    We were once promised flying cars – a fusion of automotive and aerospace technologies. We hoped for the best, but got the worst.

    Instead of getting roadable aircraft that would let us escape traffic jams and go off the beaten path – literally – what reality dumped in our laps were road cars that could still get stuck in traffic, but were saddled with all the annoying, cumbersome, deadly serious rules of the airline industry.

    Like this.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      +100

    • 0 avatar
      DC Bruce

      Since the default operation of an airplane is to fall out of the sky, I’m not going to complain about “annoying, deadly serious rules of the airline industry.” All too often we learn of a general aviation pilot who equates flying a plane to driving a car . . . with fatal consequences. Like John Denver flying a plane in which he did not know how to switch fuel tanks, running out of fuel and crashing.

      Or an unknown (to me GA pilot) who “got lost” in Atlanta and flew into the airport airspace and collided with a corporate jet on takeoff climb (steep enough that there is no visibility directly in front of the plane), killing 4 of my law partners in 1990.

  • avatar
    Curt in WPG

    So finally GM is admitting they use buyers as beta testers! I imagine all the first year Vega, X-car, GM10 (lather rinse repeat) buyers will be thrilled they admit they use the public to test their products rather than doing it themselves ;-)

  • avatar
    seth1065

    Just a quick question some of the posters say the have a car wo the annoying chime , how old are these cars. I thought everything since the 70s had the annoying chime

  • avatar
    Mikein08

    Yet another reason not to buy a GM product. As if all the recent recalls
    were not enough …

  • avatar
    buck__wheat

    A lot of interlocks have quietly been added to vehicles in the past 20 years that have not materially affected the reliability of cars, to the best of my knowledge. How about the interlock that requires the brake pedal to be depressed before shifting out of park? On my latest car, the clutch has to be fully depressed before the starter will engage (something GM had incorporated back in the 1980’s). Also, if I step on the brake while I have my foot on the throttle, it automatically cuts the throttle to idle. Not ideal for hooning, but I’ve never had it cause my car to go into a limp-home mode.

    As for the 1973 experiment, almost no one wore seat belts back then, and switches were much less reliable. How many of you are driving around right now with your “fasten seatbelt” light illuminated while buckled up? Good thing no one said we tried turbocharging on the 1963 Corvair and it was unreliable, so turbos have no place in an automobile.

    Of all the things I get worked up about on new cars, this is not one of them.

    • 0 avatar
      Elena

      Reliability is indeed affected by interlocks, even if we look at non-GM vehicles. I’ve seen a Nissan Maxima fail to start because it was unaware Park was engaged. Will start in Neutral. Same problem found in a BMW. Anti-theft mechanism preventing a Ford from starting (factory anti-theft, not aftermarket alarm). I’m not in the automotive industry: found them all asking for help at parking lots.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      Have you ever heard of Passlock/Passkey? Otherwise functioning vehicles end up in the junkyard because of it.

  • avatar
    JK43123

    Plus somehow it will catch fire.

    John

  • avatar
    Roader

    A Proposed Rule by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on 08/29/2013

    ACTION: Denial Of Petition For Rulemaking.

    SUMMARY: This document denies a rulemaking petition submitted by BMW Group, BMW of North America, LLC, to amend the Federal motor vehicle safety standard on occupant crash protection to permit optional certification using a seat belt interlock for front seat occupants as an alternative to the unbelted crash test requirements.

  • avatar
    matador

    Putting a seatbelt interlock on trucks is stupid. I use a 1987 Chevrolet and a 1995 F-150 on our farm. Often, I am loading hay bales on a trailer or on the bed of the trucks. I will NOT buckle my seatbelt thirty or forty times in my own field, to load bales. I will not use a seatbelt to back up a gooseneck.

    If people don’t want to wear their seatbelts, fine. If they die because of it, we’ll hire grave diggers. We have to have a certain amount of freedom to act. This is a little stupid.

  • avatar
    ajla

    I had zero confidence in GM being able to successfully implement this.

  • avatar
    fishiftstick

    Not wearing a seatbelt in a car increases your chance of dying in a crash by 40%. Driving a motorcycle instead of a car increases your chance of dying by 31 times.
    Should we ban motorcycles? Repeal seatbelt laws? Install seatbelts on motorcycles? I don’t know. My point is, our approach to legislating safety is far from rational.

  • avatar
    grinchsmate

    In Western Australia there are legal reasons for not wearing a seat belt, I assume the US would have similar exemptions. Are these people supposed to pay for a customised to carry out a legal activity.

    Exemptions are.
    >the driver of a vehicle traveling in reverse
    >in possession of a current medical certificate authorising exemption
    >doing work which requires getting in and out of the vehicle frequently, and the vehicle does not travel faster than 25 km/h

  • avatar
    troyohchatter

    I swear, this day in age, if it wasn’t for chainsaws and motorcycle we wouldn’t have any way of thinning out the herd. Darwin’s law only works if stupid people are afforded the opportunity to expire as a result of their own actions. Safety this and interlock that. Where does it end??


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States