• Hi Guest!
    You can help ensure that British Car Forum (BCF) continues to provide a great place to engage in the British car hobby! If you find BCF a beneficial community, please consider supporting our efforts with a subscription.
    There are some perks with a member upgrade!
    **Upgrade Now**
    (PS: Subscribers don't see this gawd-aweful banner
Tips
Tips

What is this?

Share this page

T

terriphill

Darth Vader
Offline
When we pulled the seats out of our new "shell" under the drivers seat was this little doo-dad. It was plugged into the seat belt wiring harness, but not attached to anything and just sitting there.

It says:
Made in England SPARTO ref no. 7471-2

It is REALLY corroded on the bottom.
 

Attachments

  • 15763.jpg
    15763.jpg
    22.6 KB · Views: 420
Buzzer?
 
Seat belt "warning switch"... Eeee-vile device.
 
I guess I should mention, you can press on the top part and it does depress (my guess was a buzzer too)
Where would the noise come from? And does sitting in the seat make it quit when it is pressed?
If its a buzzer warning, I'm sure it will be lost soon (I hate those things)
 
Deep six it. Hateful device!
 
Perhaps that's why we've never found one in any of the other cars we've disassembled :wink:
 
It's a "sitzpillow" to activate the seatbelt buzzer and light. All of which were federally ~mandated~ to keep English cars from "polluting" Dee-troit sales domestically. Like the "swept area" rule for 'windshields'. But at least THAT rule was circumnavigated by adding a third wiper...


:devilgrin:
 
Did you get my PM about your steering wheels?
 
It depends on the year of the car. If it is a '74 or so, then it might be a weight on seat switch for the interlock. Does anyone else remember this evil :devilgrin: device? It senses the weight on the seat and then prevents starting unless the seatbelt is hooked up. I was a mechanic at a MoPaR dealer in the 70's and we had many complaints and problems with these. I have even heard that "some other dealers" actually disabled the interlock. Of course I would never do anything that might violate federal law.

Have a nice day :cheers:
Steve
 
Actually, about six months after the infamous seat belt interlock came out with the 1974 models in the fall of 1973, NHSTA pulled it, those cars so equiped could have the system disabled as long as the seat belt light & warning buzzer still functioned. Ford had a service bulletin on this; you connected two wires under the interlock bypass switch in the engine compartment to accomplish this. Most just unplugged them from under the seats & were done with it.

Colin
 
Yes, Doc said that is what is was...and that is what it is. There were many problems with them and most were just diconnected over time. Mine are still there after my seat recovering, keeping the car original, but somehow they don't do anything anymore...maybe because they are not hooked up to the harness? Hmmmmmm I don't need them as I am religious about using my seatbelts and don't need to be forced to use them by some government interference.

Bruce
 
Amen, Bruce!

"Protect us from ourselves" legislation is about as effective as... err...


Oh, rats!


I ~like~ it here. :devilgrin:
 
I don't use seatblets in MG's but the setup in my '79 works perfectly - it's just disconnected.
 
tony barnhill said:
I don't use seatblets in MG's but the setup in my '79 works perfectly - it's just disconnected.
Click to expand...

:iagree:Good thinking! It is one of the cars where it is safer to be "thrown clear" of the accident.

Have a nice day
Steve
 
Doc, you kill me, I would/'ave chuck the bugger and move on.

Pat
 
smcmanus said:
It is one of the cars where it is safer to be "thrown clear" of the accident.
Click to expand...
I hope you're joking! The only way you're going to be thrown clear is if the car rolls, in which case you do NOT want to be outside of the vehicle. Better to use the vehicle's impact absorption than your own flesh, or worse yet your skull. There's a reason motorcyclists wear body armor and full-faced helmets with neck support. And they still get severely injured when hit by their own bike. Imagine getting hit by your car, or hitting a tree unprotected at 40MPH.

The most common accident by far will be a standard front impact, in which case you definitely want a safety restraint in place. M.G.s have a lot of things in them that can injure a person being thrust forward with great force against the controls and windscreen. Some people worry about rollovers in convertibles and the concern is warranted. If this is the case, the best solution is a roll bar, but a reasonable compromise is lap belts which will not prevent you from ducking during a roll. It is not without sacrifice of course, since you may end up hitting your face on the windscreen.
 
As I told a state trooper at a license checkpoint one day when he was going to issue me a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt, <span style="font-style: italic">" Let's see, I'm sitting maybe 6" from a steering wheel that's gonna puncture both my lungs in an accident, a door handle that's gonna puncture my left leg & a gear shift lever that could puncture any part of me even if I were wearing a seatbelt; plus, I'm talking to you over the top of a windscreen that'll either take my head off in a roll-over or ensure I'm pinned inside the car. With or without a seatbelt, if this car is in a serious accident, I'm dead."</span>

His answer? <span style="font-style: italic">"Here's your license and registration, sir. Everything's in order. Have a nice day and drive safely."</span>
 
Tony, with due respect I feel you may have an exaggerated view of how things might hurt you in the cockpit. I think you'd have a really hard time puncturing any part of your body with a gear shift lever. Most door handles are flush, but even the early ones are made of plastic which theoretically should break if impacted by something like a knee. Funny story though. :smile:

The steering column is the biggest threat, followed by the windscreen. Both of these can be avoided in all but the worst head-on collision by simply wearing a seat belt.

If nothing else, anyone driving an M.G. the way it was intended to be driven should welcome the greatly improved control of the vehicle offered by a proper restraint, especially fixed styles as found on earlier cars. This is of course personal preference and depends on driving style. Lazy drives on straight country roads don't require an unusually high level of control, unless of course an emergency comes up. In that case a seat belt can potentially save you from an otherwise ugly accident. When seat belts were first used for racing, drivers noticed an immediate and very large improvement in lap times due to greater vehicle control.

Just my 2.34 cents USD, I guess. We're all free to set our own levels of risk, unless of course you live in a state that requires seat belts.
 
Just to put the phrase,"It's better to be thrown clear." As an accident investigator, I have seen too many people seriously hurt or dead IMHO, that would be up and walking if they had their seat belt on. Granted, our LBCs are not the pillars of survival at 1300 to 1500 lbs. The laws of momentum are not on our side. But please, in any old, new or whatever vehicle, put in seat belts and use them. There are three impacts in a collision, the first between the car and the object, the second between the occupant and usually an interior object, and last, the impact of your organs with the outer covering. In many times it the the third one which is lights out.
Drive safe,
Scott
 
I posted the comment "safer to be thrown clear" in jest.

One dark night, long ago, I was high above another country taking pictures. For some reason it was easier to move around and reach the switches than usual. It wasn't really a conscious thought at the time, but I was really enjoying the flight. About half way through the mission, I hooked my parachute risers to my ejection seat! YIKES! I've often thought what the ride would have been like if I had to eject that night. True story. I've never been comfortable with my belts off since.

Have a nice day
Steve
 
Back
Top