Sawstop cabnet saw nearing reality

Page 2 of 6  

wrote:

used. Seatbelts save lives. Shoulder harnesses safe faces. Airbags go a bit further. I've been absolutely amazed at the level of damage to some vehicles with no serious injury to the occupants of the vehicle. That's not to say there wasn't the famous shoulder harness stripe down the chest, but certainly no head impact.
The only injury I've seen from airbags is a burn or abrasion. One fellow had the reverse image of his car logo impressed into his arm from the airbag cover. I'll take that level of injury any day.
Michael (also an emt)
I strongly suspect that the reason airbags started to be popular in the late 80's and early 90's is that the patent (probably mid 60's) ran out and so no one would have to pay royalties.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Perhaps my memory is failing me, but I seem to recall a car commercial (Mercedes, Volvo?) a while back that talked about having the patent on airbags but choosing not to enforce it.
todd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Herman Family wrote:

The reason airbags became popular is that in 1984 the NHTSA enacted a regulation requiring all new cars to have passive restraints, and in 1993 amended that regulation to require airbags. Had nothing to do with patent expiration and everything to do with being forced by the government to install them.
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yep, had some of those "automatic" seatbelts which qualified, initially. Now, of course, the law has been modified.
As we know from recent M$oft legislation, you've gotta give it away if it becomes popular....

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

another motorist who had just hit a deer. He'd been holding the steering wheel by the spokes instead of by the rim. When the airbag deployed, it threw his right hand back into his face, giving him a fat lip and a cut on the back of his hand (from his teeth). He had no other injuries, despite squarely hitting a good-sized doe at about 70 mph. Neither the deer nor the car survived.
The real irony here is that we were on our way out to the forest to go deer hunting -- and that was the only deer we saw all day. :-(
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
George wrote:

And how many people die because they think the airbag is a substitute for a seat belt? And if it's such a good idea then why couldn't the airbag manufacturers sell it to the FAA or the various racing organizations? Has there been a reduction in highway fatalities since airbags were mandated?

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

My WAG is that people who think an airbag is a substitute for a seat belt wouldn't be wearing the seat belt even if the airbag was not present.

Maybe there's a difference between a 60mph crash and a 160mph crash that changes the usefulness of the airbag.

Well, the fatality rate per 100 million vehicle miles traveled was at a historic low of 1.51 in 2002. I don't know when airbags went into widespread use, but the fatality rate has dropped or stayed the same every year since at least 1994, which was the earliest table I could find in the 60 seconds I searched for it. From 1994 to 2002, the fatality rate has dropped 13%. Is all of the decrease due to airbags? I doubt it. I'm sure you can factor in safer vehicles and increased seat belt use (it's gone up from 61% in '97 to 79% now), plus a few other effects.
todd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Working strictly from memory, I seem to recall that during the '50s and '60s there was something on the order of 50k highway fatalities per year in the US. Nowadays, I believe it is closer to 30k. If those numbers are correct, I'd say the highways are somewhat safer today than they were 50 years ago. I'll leave it to someone else to attribute the reason for the improvement.
Tom Veatch Wichita, KS USA
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
And with more miles and vehicles, too.
MI just went to primary seatbelt enforcement a year or so ago, because that, as I mentioned earlier, is the best restraint.
I'm sure that remark about what idiots think about is really tongue-in-cheek. Something is still better than nothing, and idiots seldom have any thoughts which interest me, anyway.
wrote:

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

caused by fire, either directly or by smoke inhalation, not by impact injuries.
Why not racing organizations? Pointless again. It's evidently escaped your notice that fatalities in auto racing are actually rather rare events; roll bars and five-point harnesses do a pretty good job of protecting the drivers. Furthermore, racing crashes tend mostly to be sideswipes, either with another car or with a retaining wall. It's difficult to see that airbags would provide any meaningful additional protection. Particularly in collisions at 200+ MPH.
Whether there has been a reduction in highway fatalities since airbags were mandated is irrelevant: most collisions occur on secondary roads.
In the United States at least, fatalities from automobile accidents have been declining for a number of years, even though the number of cars and the number of drivers have been increasing, and the distance driven per driver per year has been increasing even faster. I won't claim that's due entirely to airbags; obviously other factors such as mandatory seat belt laws, seat belt education, and numerous improvements in the design of both vehicles and roads have contributed to the decline as well, but it would be silly to think that airbags have had no effect.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Doug Miller wrote:

No, it has not "escaped my notice". My point obviously escaped yours.

Never mind, if you are picking at points this trivial I'm not wasting any more time on you.

I notice that you do not mention the increased quality and availability of trauma care.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I guess it did. I wasn't completely sure that you had one there to begin with.
My point was that the merits of using airbags in passenger automobiles are not diminished in the least by the failure to employ airbags in other situations where they are manifestly far less useful.

Perhaps you should have been more precise with your terminology. :-)

So I missed that one. Doesn't change the final conclusion: it would be silly to think that airbags have had no effect.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:01:58 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:

and consider the consequences of a false deployment of that air bag at 200 MPH in a cluster of cars when one bumps into another....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Senseless statement. About as bad as saying that seat belts are dangerous because you might accidentally choke yourself with one.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message

Are you friggin' kidding? Have you ever watched a NASCAR race? How often do the cars bump each other from behind? I'll answer it for you...it happens a lot. There's a very real danger of having a false deployment under those conditions. And at this point, I'd hazard a guess to say the additional safety to be had by an air bag in a Cup car is minimal on top of four-point harnesses and a HANS device. I'd also say it's dubious that an air bag would even be an effective aid in a 160mph collision
todd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

stock car racing? Seems like those guys bump into each other all the time. Some of those bumps are surely hard enough to deploy airbags in a car so equipped. And it's got to be thoroughly disconcerting to have one of those things go off in your face when you're not expecting it. Being startled at 200 mph is a Bad Thing.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's not why air bags aren't deployed in race cars. They're not used because of a combination of three factors. Those factors consist of cost to develop, engineering difficulty and that fact that race car driving is supposed to be dangerous. That's what draws the crowds. Nobody would attend a 5 mph race with everybody driving bumper car protection. Too many safeguards and people would quickly lose interest in the racing scene. Race car drivers' images would suffer and that's a "no, no" for any professional sportsman.
For a number of years, professional hockey goalies didn't wear masks, solely because they felt it would effect their macho, tough guy image on the ice. It stayed that way until one person made the change, then the others followed.
It's entirely possible to construct an air bag than can offer a measure of protection in a serious crash and yet still withstand all the rubbing those race car endure without going off. It's just difficult and costly.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I suppose that's why they use a 5-point harness system that is infinitely more effective than a standard passenger car seat belt. I don't know where you came up with your theory, but aside from the cost to develop/deploy, the rest of your point sounds like pure hogwash.
I would suggest that the real reason they don't use airbags is that they don't need them. The driver is already restrained in the car by the harness system, and when it's properly installed, coupled with head and neck restraint systems found in all forms of racing today, it's extremely effective.
--
-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@sprintmail.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ok Mike. Reconcile that with my example of goalies not using face masks all those years. What would be your explanation for that? Catharsis is alive and well in race car driving as much as any other sport. There's any number of improvements that could assist race car drivers, but it doesn't fit the image of this dangerous sport.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message news:WHCCc.25011

Well, I think I can reconcile it - but I'm not sure that upholds your point. Whether it can or cannot be reconciled does not prove or disprove either of our points. These are different sports, and a face mask does not equate to an airbag - perhaps to a helmet, but not to an airbag. However... to address the point of change taking a while and then being embraced upon some pivotal event, that has already occurred within racing. Witness the advent and overall acceptance of the head and neck restraint systems. Witness the almost complete acceptance of the closed face helmet over the open face helmet. Witness strict adherence to manufacturer's spec on safety harness installation. You obviously don't follow motor sports in order for you to make the assertion that safety does not fit the image of this dangerous sport. You'd be well served by doing a quick google search on safety improvements over the past 5 years in stock car racing alone. Your assertion that image prevails will fall under its own weight.
--
-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@sprintmail.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.