Rear seatbelt mount frame: structural support or ok to cut off?

[crazypete]

Hi everyone!

After another night of tearing up tar crap from the floorboard of my interiorless mustang. I was thinking than in 2 1/2 years of owning this stang, only 3 people have ever sat in the back and 2 of them didnt belt up....why am I lugging around those big heavy rear seatbelt pods (ever lifted one?) and attachment frames? In the name of weight loss, I would like to cut the entire rear seatbelt "frame" out ...that thing that the upper seatbelt module rests on. It doesnt looked like it's shaped to be a frame support but I was wondering if this adds to the structural intergrity of the rear cabin by bracing it or if it is only there to hold up the seatbelt unit and resist forward motion.

Thanks for looking!

~CrazyPete

 

[90mustangGT]

Never thought of that. I don't know the answer to your question, but what would it support? I'll go take a peak at those myself, because if it doesn't make it faster, it has to go.

 

[Mavrick]

87-89 mustangs did not have them.. i doubt they have much structural integrity to them?

 

[crazypete]

hehehehehehehe!

DREMEL!!!!

Off they come. I love weight reduction.

Hey everyone that has a winter driven car...tear up that tar crap. Even with a perfect underside, there will be some rustspots under the tar crap. Luckily, this is the same area where the tar comes up real easily.

 

[Michael Yount]

While you probably won't care - if the back seat remains, and you've removed the seat belts, and someone does ride back there and is injured in an accident....well, you can probably fill in the blanks. If they choose not to put a seat belt on, that's one thing. If they CAN'T put one on because you removed it, well I suspect their insurance company's lawyers will want to have a chat with you. Remove if you want - but take the back seat out too. I presume you're taking out the back seat too if you're in that much of a weight reduction mode.

 

[crazypete]

The "no rear seat" look does not appeal to me that much. I think I'll rig some crazy 1 piece strap-lapbelt or something to work but keep the rear seat. It doesnt weigh that much (foam bench and 2 seatback with center pivot) and keeps the interior looking stock.

 

[Michael Yount]

I agree on the seat removal issue. Of course, if you've altered the belt system to remove weight, but "look" like it's working, the liability issue remains. Don't let anyone sit back there if you've altered the belts - unless you're willing to take the risk. By the way, in case you think they're the only ones at risk, have you ever seen what happens when a 100-150 lb. human is launched head first into the back of the driver's head at about 50 mph? It ain't pretty for either one of them. Safety first - always.

 

[Mavrick]

I suppose you could take lap belts from an 87-89 car.. they should work. The coupe's had lap belts 87-89 or 90.. not sure on the hatches though?

 

[crazypete]

Mr Yount, you seem to know your "collision tech". Exactly how deeply do inspectors dig after a collision? I dont think I could see someone unbolting rear seats and digging that deep. Dont they just walk around the outside more or less (unless something draws their attention).

Now during use, the lap belts just "lock up" so would it be the same as having a belt with no adjuster drum, just a flap with a latch on one end. I would envision just slicing some of the belt and wrapping it around one of the sidebeams with a double knot. Ok, it's not glamorous or showroom but it would functionally be the same and would keep someone from getting killed and causing the "inspection of the backseatbelts". Am I totally wrong here?

 

[MisterCMK]

i think that if someone was not seatbelted in, they would take a look inside of the car. When the inspector sees no seatbelts, thats when i think they would start asking questions.