Series 2 or 3 with Softtop owners pls...

**Lotz-A-Landies** · 17th January 2008, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by wannalandy

Hi Diana . No doubt that the sash belt is a lot better than the lap belt . But isn't any seat belt better than none at all . I don't have to get them in my 2a but i'm putting them in anyways .

Actually lap only belts are almost as bad as no belts.

The injuries caused by lap belts are quite different. With the lap belt the upper body is unrestrained while the hips are restrained and this itself causes BIG problems.

For the driver the upper body pivots at the hips and this brings the forehead down onto the steering wheel and significant risk of skull fractures and cervical spine injuries - death.
For all lap only belt wearers the contents of the abdomen are squashed into the thoracic cavity: lung injuries, liver and spleen lacerations, rupture of the stomach with emptying of stomach or bowel contents into the thoracic cavity and lacerations to major blood vessels.
Whiplash injuries are also worse because of the extra momentum of the upper body (which would otherwise be restrained by the sash belt).

Without any belt the driver's chest and abdomen absorbs the energy as it folds around the steering wheel. The potential for fatal consequences of an unrestrained driver hitting the steering wheel is probably less than for lap belt restrained driver.

In any case I would not fit lap only belts to any vehicle I own. There are always options for 3 or 4 point harnesses.

Diana

**Davo** · 17th January 2008, 04:01 PM

Could you post a photo please? My SIII came with 2-point belts in pretty bad condition and it would probably be a good thing to replace them with something safer.

I still haven't worked out how to post photos yet . . . I thought you had to have them stored on some site like Photobucket or something. Can someone give a quick explanation?

**PAT303** · 17th January 2008, 06:05 PM

I have a soft top for a SWB ute cab if anyone is interested. Pat

**JDNSW** · 17th January 2008, 06:46 PM

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

Actually lap only belts are almost as bad as no belts.

The injuries caused by lap belts are quite different. With the lap belt the upper body is unrestrained while the hips are restrained and this itself causes BIG problems.

For the driver the upper body pivots at the hips and this brings the forehead down onto the steering wheel and significant risk of skull fractures and cervical spine injuries - death.
For all lap only belt wearers the contents of the abdomen are squashed into the thoracic cavity: lung injuries, liver and spleen lacerations, rupture of the stomach with emptying of stomach or bowel contents into the thoracic cavity and lacerations to major blood vessels.
Whiplash injuries are also worse because of the extra momentum of the upper body (which would otherwise be restrained by the sash belt).

Without any belt the driver's chest and abdomen absorbs the energy as it folds around the steering wheel. The potential for fatal consequences of an unrestrained driver hitting the steering wheel is probably less than for lap belt restrained driver.

In any case I would not fit lap only belts to any vehicle I own. There are always options for 3 or 4 point harnesses.

Diana

While not disputing anything you say, I still hold the view that they provide more protection than no belt - any accident that results in the injuries you describe with a lap belt will result in worse injuries when the non belt wearer hits the interior of the vehicle or is ejected from the vehicle (very likely in a Series Landrover with no antiburst locks). The driver is only one of the occupants, the others do not have the steering wheel to hit. Then there are the large number of minor accidents (or even severe braking) where a lap belt means the difference between no injury and significant injuries - I have been in one of them in a Moke, for example neither myself nor the passenger were injured when I ran into the back of another car.

John

gumby190 · 17th January 2008, 08:12 PM

Seatbelts???

Hmmm...
Been thinking about putting some lap belts in Daisy.

**Lotz-A-Landies** · 17th January 2008, 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by JDNSW

While not disputing anything you say, I still hold the view that they provide more protection than no belt - ...John

John

I absolutely respect what you say and I have a friend who suffered significant injuries after being thrown from a Moke Californian rear seat with no belts.

On the other hand, on a number of occasions, I have been in the trauma room of emergency departments when patients were admitted with life threatening injuries caused by lap belts. On most of these occasions the passengers wearing lap sash belts walked away with minimal or no injuries.

My philosophy now is that any car driven on the road (or off road for that matter) should have seat belts. AND those seat belts should be either 3 point, 4 point or 5 point harnesses.

There is very little extra work fitting a 3 point harness than there is fitting a 2 point harness. In the series 2 and 3 Land Rovers, the transom behind the front seats is an adequate (but not ideal) height for a 3rd point anchorage.

If we are talking about a series 1 Land Rover soft top, where the tub sides are too low for a 3 point harness and where there is no roll bar, I would be suggesting a 4 point harness with the anchor for the shoulder straps going right back to the rear of the tub.

Diana

olmate · 17th January 2008, 08:38 PM

I totally agree with you Diana. Whilst olmate has only lap belts I have thought on numerous occassions why I have been 'only' too lazy to fix the ptoblem and fit - at least - a three point belt. It takes nothing to do this. Many times I have been concerned as the lap belt only holds you in situ whilst the rest of you gets clobbered in an accident.

Better pull my finger out I reckon.