Because of the seatbelt warning noise...Originally Posted by Rouxenator
I have seen this in a few cars, mostly when they are parked. The seatbelt is stretched around the back of the seat and clipped in at all times it seem. Makes no sense to me at all
Dont think Opel has it yet.
Ive just overrode by warning noise by changing the settings.
Sorry, but I think you are dating a beauty pageant winner there called Information. As in, Miss Information.
You do realise that the SRS they common prefix to the work Airbag stands for Supplementary Restraint System. In other words it is a Supplement to a Primary Restraint System, or seatbelt as we know it.
You can do something for love, you can do something for money, but there is nothing as satisfying as doing something out of spite - Jeremy Clarkson, 1993
My Corsa has that, but only for the driver. Should have put 1 and 1 together and figure out the answer for myself
My mom C-Class has sensors in the seats that detect which are occupied and then sounds the alarm if the seatbelt is not on.
You can do something for love, you can do something for money, but there is nothing as satisfying as doing something out of spite - Jeremy Clarkson, 1993
My SO's SEAT does that too. Also, the binging doesn't happen until you exceed 15km/h, so it doesn't annoy you when you're reversing or whatever without the belt on.
Nope airbag will deploy even if the seatbelt is not plugged in well on both the cars I crashed it did. Yes I know stupid
"Some people feel the rain. Others just get wet."
Bob Dylan
What you happen to think is rather immaterial to what is true. All the acronym means is that an airbag is meant to work in conjunction with a seatbelt, not that it won't deploy in the absence of one. Whilst a car's systems might adjust the timing of an airbag's deployment dependent on whether the occupant is wearing a seatbelt or not, it will not wholly disable the airbags.
I think it also checks the distance, I once stayed below 20km/h but after a few 100m it sounds the warning regardless of the speed you are going at.
What I meant with SRS is that sure it will deploy regardless, but you really should be wearing your seatbelt or risk spinal and other injuries.
You can do something for love, you can do something for money, but there is nothing as satisfying as doing something out of spite - Jeremy Clarkson, 1993
Might be what you meant, but it's not what you implied... or what you seemed to defend for that matter.
for the same reason i know of how not wearing a seatbelt saved someones life.
This lady was younger and didn't wear a seat belt for whatever reason and they got into an accident, she somehow managed to get under the dash which in the end saved her life, because with a seatbelt she would have died...
So seatbelts arent the safest thing around...
Thats BS my 6 year old sits very hapily with her seat belt on in her booster seat and she is actualy tiny for a 6 year old , the seat belt does anoy her, but she is in such a habit of fastening her belt she doesnt notice
How do you know she would have died, did she try the acident again with a seat belt on?
And before you go and tell me crap, i learnd from personal experiance how important a seatbelt is.
And yes the airbags deployed with no seat belts on.
Im sorry but why would you need to remove your seatlbelt to reverse I have never needed to and no I dont have any fancy PDC im my car?
Some times the internet is so slow, it would be faster to just fly to Google's headquarters and ask them this $h1t in person.!
Well the paramedics said she would have been decapitated had she had her seatbelt on, so obviously you can't try it again...
Safety is a false security.If there's one thing we know about our risky world, it's that seat belts save lives, right? And they do, of course. But reality, as usual, is messier and more complicated than that. John Adams, risk expert and emeritus professor of geography at University College London, was an early skeptic of the seat belt safety mantra. Adams first began to look at the numbers more than 25 years ago. What he found was that contrary to conventional wisdom, mandating the use of seat belts in 18 countries resulted in either no change or actually a net increase in road accident deaths.
How can that be? Adams' interpretation of the data rests on the notion of risk compensation, the idea that individuals tend to adjust their behavior in response to what they perceive as changes in the level of risk. Imagine, explains Adams, a driver negotiating a curve in the road. Let's make him a young male. He is going to be influenced by his perceptions of both the risks and rewards of driving a car. The considerations could include getting to work or meeting a friend for dinner on time, impressing a companion with his driving skills, bolstering his image of himself as an accomplished driver. They could also include his concern for his own safety and desire to live to a ripe old age, his feelings of responsibility for a toddler with him in a car seat, the cost of banging up his shiny new car or losing his license. Nor will these possible concerns exist in a vacuum. He will be taking into account the weather and the condition of the road, the amount of traffic and the capabilities of the car he is driving. But crucially, says Adams, this driver will also be adjusting his behavior in response to what he perceives are changes in risks. If he is wearing a seat belt and his car has front and side air bags and anti-skid brakes to boot, he may in turn drive a bit more daringly.
The point, stresses Adams, is that drivers who feel safe may actually increase the risk that they pose to other drivers, bicyclists, pedestrians and their own passengers (while an average of 80% of drivers buckle up, only 68% of their rear-seat passengers do). And risk compensation is hardly confined to the act of driving a car. Think of a trapeze artist, suggests Adams, or a rock climber, motorcyclist or college kid on a hot date. Add some safety equipment to the equation — a net, rope, helmet or a condom respectively — and the person may try maneuvers that he or she would otherwise consider foolish. In the case of seat belts, instead of a simple, straightforward reduction in deaths, the end result is actually a more complicated redistribution of risk and fatalities. For the sake of argument, offers Adams, imagine how it might affect the behavior of drivers if a sharp stake were mounted in the middle of the steering wheel? Or if the bumper were packed with explosives. Perverse, yes, but it certainly provides a vivid example of how a perception of risk could modify behavior.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...#ixzz20yZOk9EM
its just interesting how we don't allow people to do "risky" things since they may "die" but in the end people have been doing risky things all through time and yet more have lived than died.
Kinda ironic since that alarm/bell is there to tell you to put your seat belt on to save your life in an accident.
I live with these Cretins every day - our "drivers" consider it very uncool to drive with a belt, so I am forever coming back to my demo car to find the belt like this.
The stupidity of non seatbelt wearers knows no bounds. And yes, if you are reading this and don't wear a belt you are a bloody idiot of the ultimate degree.
What happen when traffic cops stop you?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks