I don't think this has been discussed before ? I was just going over this photo, and noticed that the seat belt seems to be coming from the B-pillar. I was hoping that we would see something like the concept.

 

hope its adjustable.

 

It's still possible... I don't think we've seen the "camaro seats" yet in any of the spy photos and the car has to have seat belts to be tested...

...but... that *probably* is the final location

 

Wow

I've been thinking

and thinking

and thinking

about why seatbelt configuration became a thread.

What's next, position of the ash tray? and the depth of that ash tray?

Would GM please release this car earlier so that we can discuss real issues!!!!!

 

Slow week for news/spy pics ......

 

There's an ash tray?

I don't see Chevy putting the seatbelts on the seats like in the concept. Does GM have any production vehicles that use a system like that?

 

Seatbelts in the seat > Pillar

Makes the back seat usable.

 

seat belts in the seat suck!! I hate getting into a car with them. Whats the point? I bet in an accident, that teh B pillar will be stronger and able to hold more weight then the bolts holding the chair in. I wont be climbing into the back, so im not worried about it on the bpillar. My little brother might be though...

 

cars I don't know but the trucks do

 

There are several GM cars that are in production now or have been in the past with seat mounted belts. Most newer Caddies, 2nd gen Aurora come to mind...

My first car with SIR's (seat integrated restraints) was my 2001 Olds Aurora. I never thought I would care about belt location but I thought the seat mounted ones were WAAAAY better (more comfortable, don't accidentally swing outside the car and chip paint, won't get slammed in the door, look less cluttered, etc). I know some think this is a stupid thread, but I am glad to see that people are willing to discuss EVERY detail of this car.

I would guess that the convetible (my choice for my next Camaro) will have the SIR's. Otherwise, they would have to do something similar to the early 90's Cavalier/Sunbird convertibles with that goofy short b-pillar thingy. What an abomination!

 

well its important to some as a seatbelt must be comfortable to use. my mustang one sucks as it chaffs my neck bad but i can't do anything about it.



its all about the details.

 

Let's cross our fingers for an ATD option, to save weight of course.

 

GM seems to always be goofing with seatbelt locations. The Camaro belts have come from the roof in previous generations which I would think is a huge concern in the event of a rollover--Wouldn't the belts slack up when the roof is crushed?

A lot of W-Bodies and J-Bodies had them in the doors. That's great until you get hit in the door, especially before side impact bars, etc were required. Seems like a big safety concern.

Now a lot of newer Suburbans/Tahoes and TB's have them in the seat, and they're not exactly adjustable other than a bigger slat for the belt to be pulled through. I think the law requires 5cm of adjustment, which that would allow for...just seems goofy. I'd imagine they provide a better fit for odd sized occupants because all the points move with the seat when it's adjusted. I guess Chevy wanted a way to better protect all those who gangster-lean into the backseat. Problem is--requires a big bulky seat to house the retractors.

I think the new Camaro should have them mounted in the b-pillar with an adjustment. That way, the rear seat occupants won't get tangled on entry/exit, so long as GM does a good job of sucking the belt up against the pillar when it's not in use.

 

When was the last accident you saw that the seat bolts broke? I've seen cars torn in half that still have the seats bolted to the floorboard.

 

for some of us it would be a concern because Heck it will also let us knwo if we can even own the car due to how tall we are & how fat some of us are lol.


I have problems driving my husbands 95 Camaro due to the fact that I am so short Its hard to fit behind the wheel & be comfortable in the car.