<VV> Seats

Bill Hubbell Bill Hubbell" <whubbell@umich.edu
Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:41:01 -0400

Whatever you say, Mr. Keper (I figure if you can drop an "l" from my name, I 
can do the same to yours).  Buckle yourself into that three point harness 
and feel safer knowing that the Bozo next to you talking on his cell phone 
can't possibly penetrate your side-impact air bags.

As for me, I will enjoy my old cars as they were made, and I will drive my 
new cars just as defensively as I do the older ones.  Human beings weren't 
made to go 60mph, and we certainly don't fare very well when we go 60 to 
zero in half a second, and no amount of air bags, dual master cylinders, 
three point restraints, etc. is going to change that.  Yes, you can always 
add things that improve the survivability of a crash, but you can never 
guarantee it, and the idiot drivers out there never seem to realize the 
latter point, so there will always be fatal accidents as long as there are 
idiot drivers.

People following too close for conditions/Driving while 
(Intoxicated/Sleepy/Talking on Phone/Eating/Etc), Driving too fast for 
conditions/Speeding/Hot Rodding/Etc.

Fact is, there are more drivers on the road now, which also means more 
stupid drivers.  Also, Driver's training is less intense then it used to be. 
Your chances of being in an accident are much higher today than they were 40 
years ago.

You take a risk every time you get into a car - old or new.  Ralph would 
have you believe that is unacceptable, and if anything happens to you it 
must be someone else's fault.  I think otherwise.

Enjoy your 'safety net'.

Bill Hubbell

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Kepler" <bigjohnohio@worldnet.att.net>
To: "Bill Hubbell" <whubbell@umich.edu>; "John Miller" 
<jncmiller@mchsi.com>; <virtualvairs@corvair.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 8:12 PM
Subject: Re: <VV> Seats

> .
>> It is all these people who grew up believing that ol' Ralphie was right
> when
>> he said the Corvair and other cars of its generation were inherently
> unsafe
>> and needed all this stuff to protect us from ourselves.
> From ourselves Mr. Hubbel?  Not in this case!  That glass, steel, and
> concrete are harder than skin, muscle and bone, and the fact that F=1/2 
> MV^2
> isn't a political agenda....it's a fact of life!
> Mr. Hubbel, I've met Mr. Nader up close and personal....spent the better
> part of 2 hours interviewing him for the newspaper I ran back in the days
> when we didn't trust anyone over 30!  My reasons for detesting the man are
> based on a lot more than his impact on Corvairs.  That being said, my
> contempt for the man doesn't necessary mean he was wrong!  Just remember
> sir, that my 2100 lb., 110 hp 1966 Corvair Monza has the same miserable
> drum-brakes that were installed in a 3500 lb. 320 hp Chevelle......those
> miserable part-time brakes are a PITA in a 'Vair....they convert a 
> Chevelle
> into a ballistic projectile!  No, while cars of that era have a certain
> amount of charm and nostalgia in late-middle age.....they were ALL a LOT
> more hazardous to your health than they could have been!
> The rest of your statement is in the same logical universe as saying that
> because Bill Simpson hadn't begun building advanced impact-surviving 
> helmets
> in 1949, it's unnecessary to wear a helmet when riding a 1949 knucklehead
> Harley!
> Fact:  ANY 3-point restraint system works BETTER than a two-point 
> restraint
> system.....I don't care if it's mounted in a 2004 Ford GT, a 1966 Corvair
> Monza, or an MTD Lawn Tractor!  Newtonian Physics hasn't changed, and 
> steel
> and glass was just as hard in 1960 as it is today!  If you can fit a 
> 3-point
> belt system into a 'Vair, your impact survival chances are significantly
> improved.
> FWIW, without anyone EVER saying much about it at the time, the late-model
> Corvair has some advanced safety features that didn't appear in the rest 
> of
> the US car fleet for several more years.  It is the first major use of a
> glued-in windshield...5 years before such things were mandated.  The 
> welded
> front fenders and bulkheads form significant crush-zones well outside the
> passenger capsule.  The entire front suspension assembly can deform
> independent of the rest of the body work  The design of the unibody with 
> the
> bulk of the structure at the skin of the rocker will improve side impact
> resistance to near current levels.  The design and engineering safety
> elements of the car are reflected in the "real world" crash injury numbers
> for the car.....the little Corvair was a more "survivable" vehicle than 
> it's
> contemporaries!
> At least among those I know, being a Libertarian doesn't require one to be
> completely brain-dead to the realities of engineering and science.