kevinb120

You're correct. Exactly. I have no idea why anyone would not get side airbags. If not for yourself, for an innocent passenger sitting next to you.





I really don't understand why people would not get Side Airbags. Its not paranoia. People said the same things when front airbags came out. It is proven to help against injury. [/b][/quote]
you dont want to be an 'i told you so' for not having them either. Smacking the glass with the side of your face doesnt sound too fun to me. :bang:

Badandy

Exactly. I told you so would probably not be taken lightly in this situation



Anyway, the only reason I am not getting the anti-theft is because I am getting Lo-Jac. To me, it is a necessity to have both a good alarm and side airbags.

buschman

Keep in mind Lo-Jack itself can only help you recover your vehicle AFTER it has been stolen or maybe the Lojack sticker will scare away amateurs.

For protection of the contents in your vehicle and to minimize the damage done by potential thieves you might want some type of alarm as well. I haven't checked lately to see if Lojack installs an alarm as well, but if so, it typically doesn't interface with the factory-supplied keyfobs.

usdclark

Does anyone know what the "passive anti-theft system" that comes standard on the mustang is? I read this on the build and price website after clicking on the "standard features"


forddiret.com build and price

harleybill

I know that I ordered it....Sounds fairly sophisticated and like what was pointed out earlier, it is usually a benefit on the insurance premiums (which are ripoffs anyway)... A little extra protection can mean the difference between taking your stang or another? What choice would you make (and it's not really that terribly expensive)..

woody1

B) However, if it's there the one and only time it operates the savings are PRICELESS. Just like a spare tire, extra weight and not normally needed but definately desirable on a cold and rainy night in the middle of nowhere

MissMy67GT350

it's a few dollars more than 3rd party system but you avoid the hassle of install and small chance of a problem with aftermarket.

houtex

After being recently carjacked at knifepoint by two guys at my work as I was leaving on Oct 1, 2004, I am considering the fact that LoJack would indeed let me recover the car after it was taken. Not having it cost me a car, a computer, and my work tools. Plus (and this is pending) the damage those hiney40!35 did to the car (they found it last Sunday) has totaled it, IMO. We will see, of course. And now I am out of a car, having to deal with insurance, where if I had known the ease and cheapness of LoJack, I might not only have the car back, but all the stuff I lost. PLUS no stabbings:

Considering the fact if the car wouldn't have started with the anti-theft (not really knowing how that would work if they have my KEYS, thank you...) and that would likely have gotten me stabbed or something, I am now of the opinion that LoJack is THE way to go, and any active theft is just not good. Alarm, sure, but don't kill the car.

Anti-Theft is just trouble waiting to happen, an extra feature, a bauble that like IRS and air suspensions, some will like, but I won't be one of them. Simpler is better.

And that's all I got to say about that.

/one LoJacked V6 Mustang, please! (pending insurance settlement, and availability of said Mustang)

// GOOD ONE filter! That also get's 'hiney'ed. Nice. So you all can get the rest of that I'm sure...

maverick351ci

were you just

buschman

Passive Anti Theft is the electronic chip in the ignition key which basically tells your engine whether to start or not.

BillP

I'm a proponent for front air bags, but they are proven to save lives ~statistically~.

If you are average height, they absolutely do.

If you are very small or very large, front airbags have been statistically proven to increase the risk of injury. I think that they've fixed it for smaller people by redesiging how they blow, but not for tall people.

With a very tall person (someone who is tall enough that their head approaches the ceiling of the car), the airbag doesn't perform the same.

I think airbags are a good thing, but blanket statements like "it is proven to help against injury" are not detailed enough to make a decision.

A different example would be driving a heavy vehicle. That makes it safer for the driver of the large vehicle, but transfers risk the the driver of the small vehicle. In the same fashion, airbags reduce injury to most drivers, yet increase the risk of injury to children, small adults, and the tallest of drivers. Tall drivers get thrust UP by the airbag, increasing head injuries as they contact the ceiling.

Some facts (I am looking for more) can be found here:
http://www.consumeralert.org/issues/...s/airfacts.htm
http://www.atsb.gov.au/road/rpts/adr...tiveness_b.cfm

Research is now showing that the risk to shorter drivers is not as bad as it first seemed, but the increase risk of injury to tall drivers is still there.

I haven't seen any good data on side air bags and tall/short drivers.

I'm in the "tall" category. I chose not to buy the side airbags, even though they will be mandated by 1998.

BillP

Oh, and the reason why US airbags are dangerous to some people in some circumstances is that the US government requires that they be designed as a primary restraint system (to work properly for unrestrained passengers). People who are smart enough to wear seatbelts are forced to use overpowered airbag systems that are designed to protect unrestrained idiots.

In Europe, they design airbags to work WITH the belt restraint system, so the risk of injury is minimized.