Forum Discussion
- One reason we bought our Bluebird. All steel. Certified to school bus standards. Much better at not exploding upon impact!
- Yuppp.. I bet the belts are still attached on this one
frankdamp wrote:
In most(?) Class A's, the seat belts for the driver and front passenger (usually lap-belt only) are attached to the seats, not to vehicle structure. I have no faith whatever in the ability of the Flexsteel seat to even stay on its tracks in an accident, let alone handle the seat-belt crash loading.
The odds are that you'll go sailing through the windshield still strapped to the seat.
In our 2004 Newmar the shoulder belts were attached to the vehicle.- School buses also have shell that will not collapse to 6 inches in roll-over, or after hitting tree branch.
We all did lot of dangerous things in our life. We did survive, but did everybody? I lost several friends in automobile accidents.
Couple of them in parachute accidents as well, so safety doesn't narrows to roads only.
What I would suggest is not to negate the dangerous designs, but simply demand better.
I know better cost more, but how do you put price on your own life and life of your family? msmith1199 wrote:
Executive wrote:
2. Second Best Alternative
Drive the child in a passenger vehicle so they can be properly restrained and follow the RV (Class A, B or C's) .
This one has me shaking my head....someone will read this and secure their child in a seatbelt in their toad....:E......Dennis
I'd question their implication here. Is a smaller vehicle really safer? I don't disagree that if you roll your RV or drive it head on into a bridge pillar that you are in trouble. But how many RV accidents happen like that? I would argue that the vast majority of accidents involving RV's involve the RV impacting smaller cars and in the vast majority of those crashes the RV gets the better end of the deal. It's the very same concept as drivers of 3/4 ton trucks and Suburban's often come out way better in most accidents because they're usually running into something smaller than they are.
I agree with you. This has been my line of thinking ... the odds are the RV would be in a collision with a much smaller vehicle and fare much better.
I had a conversation with a friend who used to design school buses. He said you will notice that the bus portion is attached to the frame via "clips" - designed to slide and use friction etc to take up the force of impact, as usually the chassis is what takes the direct hit. Thus the occupants have a few design "mechanisms" to absorb the crash energy, vs being rigidly belted in attached to the frame for example.
Makes me want to check into my future MH house construction out of curiosity...Executive wrote:
2. Second Best Alternative
Drive the child in a passenger vehicle so they can be properly restrained and follow the RV (Class A, B or C's) .
This one has me shaking my head....someone will read this and secure their child in a seatbelt in their toad....:E......Dennis
I'd question their implication here. Is a smaller vehicle really safer? I don't disagree that if you roll your RV or drive it head on into a bridge pillar that you are in trouble. But how many RV accidents happen like that? I would argue that the vast majority of accidents involving RV's involve the RV impacting smaller cars and in the vast majority of those crashes the RV gets the better end of the deal. It's the very same concept as drivers of 3/4 ton trucks and Suburban's often come out way better in most accidents because they're usually running into something smaller than they are.- I added lap belts for my Flexsteel swivel lounge chair, but also added straps from the chair frame (and seat belts) that are bolted through the floor with large backing plates. We face the seat forward when using the lap belts while moving.
The driver and passenger lap and shoulder belts are well secured to the MH.
The sofa with 3 lap belts is a mere suggestion of safety. - In most(?) Class A's, the seat belts for the driver and front passenger (usually lap-belt only) are attached to the seats, not to vehicle structure. I have no faith whatever in the ability of the Flexsteel seat to even stay on its tracks in an accident, let alone handle the seat-belt crash loading.
The odds are that you'll go sailing through the windshield still strapped to the seat. - I'm higher, heavier and have a greater moving mass. If I am in the mix you will loose. The only way you can hurt me is head on. Because of my size I am very careful of were and how I drive. I don't go through big cites during rush hours. I spend the time to study where I'm going and how to get there. I have driven over a million miles and know when it's time to park the rig for weather or traffic.
- This is the quote that gets me: "For those who own an RV or for those considering in purchasing one, have custom seats built in that meet Federal seat belt standards. "
And who exactly would be willing to install such a thing? I think most everyone is too concerned about liability.
Going to a Class A has given me pause about the whole safety thing, but in the grand scheme the odds are that impacts with other vehicles will be where the MH has much more mass than anything else, and the impact zone will be from their car/truck to my MH chassis, not the house portion.
All bets are off running into a fixed object but not sure the equation isn't much different in a car or a MH.
