19 replies to this topic

[mini_79]

hi so i put the car up for its mot its a 1979 mini 1000 and it got pulled for a few things main one was the seatbelts ie front they dont lock 

 

so whats the best way around this what car would be best to take them out of that would fit the mini i only need too front ones as i dont have any in the back 

 

many thanks 

[rally515]

I think i have two metro ones in the loft you can have, they are grey though i think.

 

Or as another option im 99% sure you could go to a scrappy an get any inertia seatbelt and replace yours with the parts ?

[Jordie]

http://minispares.co...|Back to search

[mini_79]

thats a good price that would prob be better for me easy bolt on and easy bolt off thanks for ur help people

[Nu2mini]

This topic has been discussed before on the forum and replies were received from those who appear to be qualified MOT testers.

 

I am not qualified, but I think I am right in saying that "tug the retracting mechanism until it locks" check!! is not a valid part of the test. Things the belt must do is obviously 'Clunk Click' when you fasten the belt into the buckle, and if it's an inertia belt it must the belt must retract to take up any loose belt when worn.

 

Here is the link to the previous thread, and note their advice was to challenge the Fail on the MOT.

 

http://www.theminifo...s/#entry2603178

 

[tiger99]

I would be very seriously worried if I was driving a car in which the seat belts could not be shown to lock when required, MOT fail or not. Maybe I am somewhat biased, because I went out and got a pair of belts for my ancient Minivan in about 1971, long before the morons who fiddle their expenses to buy duck islands saw fit to save lives by making them compulsory, and when that was scrapped, transferred them to my Triumph Herald, and I really did feel a lot safer with belts. I absolutely always wore them, as did my passenger.

 

Actually, I have always preferred manually adjusted belts, done up firmly but not too tight, as I feel that I can drive better when fairly well restrained, but all modern cars have inertia reels. I have been told that it is illegal to repair the mechanism yourself, although before knowing that I did successfully fix one many years ago. Best to just replace them. Otherwise your insurance may be invalid, so when you or your passenger is more seriously injured than they might have been in a minor shunt, there will be no pay-out, and who wants their face bashed in anyway?

[Dan]

While I agree that it's not wise to keep belts that can't be shown to lockup, yanking the belt is not a good or effective way to test them. The belt mechanism is primarily designed to react to deceleration of the vehicle, not acceleration in the belt. This is especially the case with older designs, more modern belts respond to both conditions but older types don't. To test if they lock up appropriately you have to move the reel unit, not the belt. Which is why tugging them is not the MOT test for belts. If you want to test your belts, unbolt the reel and tilt it a little. If it locks, the belts is fine. BUT, replacing them with a more modern belt which responds to webbing acceleration also would offer improved safety. Unless you go and get them from a scrapper as you will have no idea about the history of them and they may be unserviceable. New seat belts are about £30.00 each.

[Tamworthbay]

I would be very seriously worried if I was driving a car in which the seat belts could not be shown to lock when required, MOT fail or not. Maybe I am somewhat biased, because I went out and got a pair of belts for my ancient Minivan in about 1971, long before the morons who fiddle their expenses to buy duck islands saw fit to save lives by making them compulsory, and when that was scrapped, transferred them to my Triumph Herald, and I really did feel a lot safer with belts. I absolutely always wore them, as did my passenger.
 
Actually, I have always preferred manually adjusted belts, done up firmly but not too tight, as I feel that I can drive better when fairly well restrained, but all modern cars have inertia reels. I have been told that it is illegal to repair the mechanism yourself, although before knowing that I did successfully fix one many years ago. Best to just replace them. Otherwise your insurance may be invalid, so when you or your passenger is more seriously injured than they might have been in a minor shunt, there will be no pay-out, and who wants their face bashed in anyway?

try old spitfire belts. The ones on mine never locked no matter how hard you yanked them. Sadly I can comment on how they worked in an accident and they did just what they were supposed to, as Dan says above it all comes down to the mechanism involved. MGB belts can be notoriously fickle as the angle they sit at is different to most of the applications the unit was used in. In the case of the MGB it means that they are over sensitive and can lock up with the slightest movement. Sounds good, but is a pain when they keep locking and you can't extend them enough to use them.

I would be concerned about the type of person who does this in an MOT, they obviously don't understand how the belts work.

[CityEPete]

My daily driver is exempt but it has static belts fitted, probably worse than not wearing one, lol

[tiger99]

No, static belts are every bit as safe in an accident as inertia reels, in fact safer, if properly adjusted, because they dont't need any movement to lock. Just enjoy using them as a part of your classic!

[minidaves]

seatbelts as i am aware dont have to lock, so if thats the only thing its failed on go back and get him to right your ticket or appeal the test and let him get points on his mot licence 

[CityEPete]

No, static belts are every bit as safe in an accident as inertia reels, in fact safer, if properly adjusted, because they dont't need any movement to lock. Just enjoy using them as a part of your classic!

It has lap belts in the back though!

[tiger99]

What worries me greatly is the utter negligence, not for the first time, by some pen-pusher at VOSA, because a belt that does not work is a potential killer, so for safety's sake it is ESSENTIAL that they are tested for correct operation. If it needs something special, such as tilting the car to activate a deceleration sensor, well a suitable test rig needs to be devised and incorporated into the test.

 

No other safety-critical industry would accept the situation where a vital item was untested, and it would never have been allowed to be fitted in the first place if its design made it untestable. The fact that we are debating this here, as intelligent adults, is an utter disgrace, because there should be nothing to discuss. Shame on you, VOSA, yet again....

 

Now can the sensible people here (which includes everyone in this debate so far) think up a good way of testing it properly, other than standing the car on its nose?

[tiger99]

CityEPete, yes, lap belts are very, very bad, and why they were ever allowed is well beyond my comprehension. But there again I don't understand how the mind of an average duck island builder works, and every law that they make is invariably fatally flawed.

 

I would seriously advise fitting the proper mounts and a set of full belts, if you ever carry rear passengers, not only to protect the rear passengers, but to protect the front seat occupants by being killed by those in the rear. Proper belts are the best safety enhancement that can be made to any car.

 

But if you never carry rear seat passengers, there is no point in butchering the car, obviously.

[CityEPete]

I have two small spaniels that go in the back sometimes,lol