Usage of the automatic belt systems supplied by six large-volumeautomobile manufacturers to meet the federal requirements for automatic restraints were observed in suburban washington, dc, chicago, los angeles and philadephia. The different belt systems studied were:ford and toyota (motorized, nondetachable automatic shoulder belt), nissan (motorized, detachable shoulder belt), vw and chrysler (nonmotorized, detachable shoulder belt), and gm (nonmotorized detachablelap and shoulder belt). Use of automatic belts was significantly greater than manual belt use in otherwise comparable late-model cars for all manufacturers except chrysler; in chrysler cars, automatic belt use was significantly lower than manual belt use. The automatic shoulder belts provided by ford, nissan, toyota, and vw increased userates to about 90%. Because use rates were lower in ford cars with manual belts, their increase was greater. Gm cars had the smallest increase in use rates; however, lap belt use was highest in gm cars. The other manufacturers supply knee bolsters to supplement shoulder belt protection; all - except vw - also provide manual lap belts, which were used by about half of those who used the automatic shoulderbelt. The results indicate that some manufacturers have been more successful than others in providing automatic belt systems that result in high use that, in turn, will mean fewer deaths and injuries in those cars. (a).
Abstract