John

Thanks for the tip. I found the article 1992B page 31.

I'm thinking more like lap belts linked to the chassis in some way, so as not to rely on the floor or door pillars.

All ideas gratefully received.

Martin

I've fitted three-point inertia reel belts to my daughter's PD two-seater and also to my '55 A30 and my son's '58 A35. None of these were designed to have belts, but they've never been questioned at MOT.

I don't kid myself that they would be 100% effective, particularly in a high-speed crash, but I take the view that in a 20mph urban shunt they would at least prevent collision with the windscreen, or being impaled on the steering column.

I would like to fit belts to the RP, but haven't worked out where I could position the top mounting.

In a high speed collision, any Austin Seven will disintegrate and whether seat belts are fitted or not will be irrelevant. For this reason, I always drive mine in the same way that I ride a motorcycle, very aware that there is effectively nothing between me and extinction!

What a cheerful thought for a sunny bank holiday weekend!

Location: Herefordshire, with an "E" not a "T".

Location: Herefordshire, with an "E" not a "T".

I can see that the problem Martin B will face will be, "Where do you stop?". The Pearl won't have much strength in the door pillars for a 3 point harness. Roll cage? 4 point harness might be feasible but you might have to take the rear seat squab out....Good luck!
I confess that, like Martin P, I am very aware when driving my special that the outcome of any impact will be deeply unpleasant for me. It does concentrate the mind.

Regards,
Stuart

I come from the approach that if it wasn't in the initial design be very very careful.
The only place I can see that could be belt mount points is directly on the chassis.
Otherwise they will simply rip out and getting clouted around the back of the head with a belt mount even at 20 mph is gonna hurt bigtime. Bearing in mind that unless you have some sort of headrest/high backed seat then there is an increased risk of neck injuries if the body is restrained as the head moves forwards and then too far back. This is why modern cars all have high backs and/or headrests.
I also think that belts may give a false sense of security.

Personally, as mentioned above, treating driving a 7 like riding a motor bike is far safer in my book.
(Should say that I'm no longer allowed a motorbike as I fell off them too often according to she who must be obeyed. :-)

Phil

Location: On top of the Chilterns

Can I just chuck in my two pennyworth, given my past history in law enforcement & accident investigation...

I seriously doubt, as has been already mentioned, that the structure of an Austin Seven is EVER going to be strong enough to sustain the upper mountings for a 3 point seat belt. The energy exchanges in a serious collision even at Austin Seven speeds would likely result in the top mount parting from the car's structure,unless we're talking about SERIOUS body upgrades.

Fitting a single lap belt in my opinion is not a good idea. They use them in aircraft not to save your life but to identify your body after the plane has crashed. Using a lap belt only serves to restrain the hip/pelvis but does nothing to prevent the rest of your upper body from flying forward and making contact with the windscreen, steering wheel or other parts of the cars structure.

The fact that a modified A7 with seat belts has passed an MOT is no indicator whatsoever of the suitability of the device under extreme conditions. Unless it's type approved (which it won't be) then it's probably as much use as a chocolate fireguard.

And what is "a chocolate firegard" please RR?
(Just for bettering my english understanding)

Have to concur with RR on this.
When I think of all the reinforcing I did on my 105E to fit lap and shoulder just for road use, and a heck of a lot more for racing, and taking into account how vehicle construction had improved since the Seven was designed, doing so on 'ours' would be nigh on impossible.
Have looked at my Ruby construction, only chassis mounting would suffice as already mentioned.
Sevens are flimsy, as the cans before Jerry came along.
We just have to drive with the thought that ALL others are determined to do us an injury. Not nice on a day out, but I would hazard a guess that most drivers in moderns think they are completely safe from injury and drive accordingly.
I have friends that wouldn't get into my '67 MM for just that reason.

Geoff - Tidy up time as SHMBO is back from her two week jolly tonight. Proper home cooking back

Edit:
Unnecessary word removed

Location: South Norfolk - Next to Suffolk

Renaud,

A fireguard is placed in front of an open fire to catch sparks - you can imagine how a fireguard made from chocolate might work!!

Tony.

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

I had three-point seatbelts professionally installed in my Mk 1 Ruby some years ago.
Obviously you can't use the door pillars for the shoulder mountings, and the installer attached them to the rear wheel arches instead.
The belts have yet to be put to the test, but I do feel safer with them than without them.
I'm surprised to hear that it's illegal to fit them to very old cars since I don't see how they can do any harm and possibly they could save lives.

Pour notre ami Renaud: " un pare-feu chocolat? C'est comme p isser dans un violon ou cautère sur une jambe de bois..."

:)

I am not aware of any specific legislation relating to seat belts in cars which are legally exempt. Front seat belt fitting became compulsory for all cars registered from 1965 onwards. However, both car makers and parts suppliers are bound by Construction & Use regulations that require seat belts (when fitted) to be fit for purpose. This is usually determined by Type Approval where car manufacturers submit new models to places such as MIRA for them to be crash tested in order to determine whether the vehicle meets the required standard of passenger protection. Obviously one can buy type approved seat belts that meet British Standards, but nowhere is there any way of type approving a retro fitment to an Austin Seven, or for that matter to any car not fitted with seat belt mountings as part of its initial Type Approval. What this means is that IF you fit seat belts to your Austin Seven you may well be and probably will feel safer with them. However, in this modern age of punitive litigation you could well be leaving yourself wide open to claims for damages from anyone who might be injured in an accident whilst wearing a non type approved device, especially if it fails.

I understand the sentiment of wanting to improve your in-car safety, but there is no way you can verify whether a retro-fitted device is going to be up to the job, unless you crash the car. The sentiment of fitting them I am sure is well meant, but please beware of what could happen. The legal profession would have a field day, AND moreover, the modification may well nullify your insurance unless you've declared the modification to them. Remember, your A7 never was built for seat belts and the law does not require them to be fitted. It is far better to drive defensively in the knowledge that Austin Seven passive safety isn't what it is in a 'modern', and accept it for what it is.

The problem these days with air bags etc is that people feel cocooned in an impenetrable safety cell which will protect them no matter what. I can tell you that I have seen it more times that I care to remember that that is certainly, sadly, not the case.

It's probably more adviseable to think that there's a great big metal spike going to shoot out of the steering column and impale you - it certainly might deter you from taking silly risks...

At least in the Austin Seven the steering column is rather more vertical than most - not much consolation in a crash where the body and chassis - as suggested- offers about as much protection as a motor bike.
Unfortunately (or fortunately) we have to consider all other road users (in moderns that is of course) as totally incompetent and a threat to our safety.
Even well fitted lap belts tied to the chassis would be very dangerous, throwing the wearer into the screen/dashboard under sudden braking

Tony.

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

I replied to a similar inquiry somewhere recently much as follows but cannot find!

Obviously cannot protect from a high speed crash but belts can hugely assist in lesser events. I am a Jowett enthusiast but still do not relish the prospect of the permanent pattern of a flat twin wiper motor in my forehead.

A major problem with the Seven is being ejected. The door catches release with the slightest body distortion. Various dog type chains, hooks, pinned hinges, pinned studs, latch arms etc can be contrived to reduce the risk. When the door of an RP rips out its woodscrews or otherwise opens or departs it leaves a huge aperture.

I fitted belts in my RP in the late 1960s. At the time many fittings utilised a round head bolt through the pillar and I used this; does not meet current requirements but vastly better than nothing. The strong almost sub chassis reinforcement behind the running board was used with a bolt shaped to fit into the pressing, and the drive tunnel, reinforced, formed the 3rd mount.

It is difficult to locate the top mount within the recommended range. Seems to have to be higher.

In NZ new installations are supposed to meet latest standards (written largely for vehicles with all tin foil construction). Some understanding inspectors will pass, and once OK only have to maintain. For cars with lapsed registration an old looking new installation can be presented as existing and again OK.

Can also wear a Pommy enthusiast motoring cap with packing to help protect the head!

For those who carry children very secure lap belts can be fitted in the rear. If tucked under the seat arguments about legality are avoided.

Initially I had the top mount to the rear seat front. I suspect this would roll the spine into a ball backwards! Luckily it was never tested.

Bob Culver

Location: Auckland

Sitting here recovering from a very serious accident in my Austin I read this post with great interest. I understand the desire to ensure that one is safe in modern traffic and legal issues aside, if solid mountings can be found there may be some merit to seat belts in a saloon. But in an open car consider this....I hit oil at speed in a corner, the car started to slide then came off the oil and suddenly found grip, at this point it flipped and rolled four times. I was thrown clear on the second roll and escaped with extensive bruising, a broken neck, shoulder and arm, had I remained constrained in the car I may not have survived. This was a racing incident I grant you, and I was very well looked after by medical staff, but it makes you think.... similar things could easily happen on the road.

I guess seat belts are debatable in an open car, esp if no roll bar.
I used to enjoy watching American cop chases on TV. These often ended in a very high speed prang; it was amazing the number of times the unbelted occupants were tossed clear and survived relatively unscathed. Many old time racers survived by being thrown clear. And many fell onto obstacles. And many were rolled upon.

I attended a race meeting in the early 1960s. A driver stood his A40 Farina on end in slow motion in front of me; the driver fell out the open door in slow motion and was seriously injured. I was convinced of the merit of belts then.
Similarly early stock cars used to strike the retaining posts head on, stop abruptly in a cloud of steam with the belted driver unharmed.

I am somewhat bemused by the solidity of mounting now required. The body of a Seven is less securely attached to the chassis! I am not sure that it is prudent to be anchored to the chassis rather than the body!

Bob Culver

Location: Auckland