67FB Collapsible Steering Column with Tilt
Thread Starter
2nd Gear Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 180
67FB Collapsible Steering Column with Tilt
Hello Everyone-
I started thinking about safety and figured that I should probably start looking into a collapsible steering column for my 67FB. I have Procar seats put in which make room tight and while manageable, the next owner may appreciate a tilt column as well. Any suggestions as to which setup would work best?
I am researching the Flaming River R&P & Ididit kits, but they don't seem to be collapsible. Am I best off trying to locate a 68/69 tilt column and just buying the R&P separately?
Thanks in advance.
I started thinking about safety and figured that I should probably start looking into a collapsible steering column for my 67FB. I have Procar seats put in which make room tight and while manageable, the next owner may appreciate a tilt column as well. Any suggestions as to which setup would work best?
I am researching the Flaming River R&P & Ididit kits, but they don't seem to be collapsible. Am I best off trying to locate a 68/69 tilt column and just buying the R&P separately?
Thanks in advance.
6th Gear Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 10,468
From: California
Collapsible columns are a joke really, they don't help with safety much, if at all. The front of your rib cage is nice soft cartilage that pulls off the rib bones under hard impact. Your chest hits the column at any decent speed, collapsible or not, you end up with flail chest and suffocate to death. Your chest will collapse before the column. You're better off with some type of a seat belt upgrade for safety. I'm running Schroth Racing DOT approved harnesses(the only DOT harness on the planet actually), but most people would find them far too confining. There are 3pnt upgrades as well.
As far as a tilt column, go for quality at a fair price. Also keep in mind that companies that make tilt columns also often make R&P, so if you were to go with their R&P kit it's easier to get their column as well, like TCP for instance. Flaming River is another.
As far as a tilt column, go for quality at a fair price. Also keep in mind that companies that make tilt columns also often make R&P, so if you were to go with their R&P kit it's easier to get their column as well, like TCP for instance. Flaming River is another.
6th Gear Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,162
From:
These cars if crash tested in today's standards would get maybe a 2 star if that.There is no crumple zones,air bags or even abs.Even adding a collapsible column and 3 point seat belts your still gonna get hurt in a wreck.Most aftermarket columns are collapsible or if your not sure email the company and ask.
6th Gear Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 10,468
From: California
This might be a little long, but bear with me as there's some interesting information contained. It might make you think twice about certain "safety" components or buying a certain car just because of a safety rating. And no, I don't have anything against ABS or air bags(well, maybe airbags a little bit, but the newer designs are much better).
ABS and air bags do little to nothing to mitigate collisions and injuries. Crumple zones do help some though, but the reality is that if you get into a collision severe enough to NEED an airbag, whether or not it goes off is the LEAST of your concern. I worked in EMS and I can tell you that newer "safer" cars are really only marginally safer than older cars. There's so many variables in a collision that even a 5 star uber-safe-mobile can still be a deathtrap if the collision happens the right way. There's just so much energy contained in moving vehicles that metal becomes EXTREMELY pliable under that kind of force, and collisions are rarely a straight on clean impact in a confined area.
There's going to be so much intrusion anyway, that while the airbag might save your pretty little face, other parts of you will get squished and you'll be maimed or killed regardless. Your brain is actually one of the best protected organs in the body, your skull is quite strong and even capable of deflecting bullets in some instances. However, your chest no so much, and your abdomen has almost 0 protection. Not to mention that large bone leg breaks can be fatal. Leg and abdominal injuries kill more people in collisions than head injuries do, and those are the 2 most likely parts to be injured in a collision. The only thing airbags do is keep you from breaking your nose in a collision...and if it's severe enough to help prevent a basilar skull or neck fracture, then it gets right back to the rest of you suffering so much injury you most likely die anyway. And the sad reality is that airbags are more likely to seriously injure fire or EMS personal than they are to prevent driver or passenger injury, though newer safety designs in the airbag systems are eliminating that danger.
Modern crash safety ratings are also pretty meaningless, since they only test the cars under very narrow and confined types of collisions in a labs and only at low speeds(31mph for head on), that represent the "worst case scenario." The reality is the types of collision testing the do are the types of collisions that rarely happen because people panic and try and move out of the way at the last minute so the straight on offset frontal collision almost never occurs, it either ends up being a straight head to head(no one reacted in time and both vehicles decelerate to a stop almost immediately), or people swerve and collide at all sorts of odd angles(not even necessarily with the other vehicle).
The exception to that is some of the newer side impact crash testing, since t-bones happen so quickly that no one has time to move and only 1 person sees it coming and by then it's usually too late. Side impact is the worst, and even some of the newer cars aren't that much better than older cars, and it also depends on what you get hit by...a large truck t-boning a small car for instance will result in the bumper going over the structural supports, and the B pillar doesn't have enough strength on it's own to resist impact. THAT is what's changing on newer cars though....ever notice how the door sills on new cars are much wider(makes the car hard to get in and out of) and the doors have smaller windows and sit up higher? That's for side impact safety. A and B pillars are also getting much beefier. The problem with a t bone though is there's almost nothing to stop the other vehicle, and your body takes a large portion of the impact. You're not going to get an older car to have good side impact safety without using a 6pnt bar at least, but that gets into other safety issues.
As far as ABS, it's perhaps one of the most dangerous "safety" devices on a modern car due to a psychological component involved(according to studies done by highway safety institutes, the government etc), as counter intuitive as it seems, and here's why. Both ABS and non ABS have stopping advantages over each other under certain conditions, and for years it was generally accepted that ABS made vehicles safer and allowed them to stop more quickly. The reality, is that ABS won't out stop non ABS UNLESS the non ABS car locks the wheels. Non ABS will stop in most conditions just as quickly or more quickly than ABS will, since stopping relies more on tires and skill than brakes. ABS was developed PRIMARILY to allow people to steer under ABS braking, since most people panic and lock the wheels, resulting in a total loss of steering. The idea was that it would allow people in a panic stop to steer to avoid a collision that they otherwise wouldn't have been able to....ABS's ability to stop more quickly by preventing lockup or perform better on wet roads was really just gravy.
That has actually led to the psychological safety issue. The NHTSA recently(within the last few years) has finished compiling collision stats and data from the last 30 years and found some remarkable things. The first was that ABS equipped vehicles are just as likely to be involved in a collision than a non ABS car, meaning ABS doesn't help mitigate the likelihood of a collision. But what they found about the NATURE of the collisions was much more telling. ABS equipped cars were found to have a lower likelihood of injuring or killing the occupants of THAT vehicle, certainly a good thing. However, what they found was that ABS equipped cars were MUCH more likely to seriously injure or kill occupants of the OTHER vehicle that they struck. They also found that ABS equipped vehicles were FAR more likely to be involved in a single vehicle collision, meaning they lose control and fly off the road without any other vehicle being involved. They also found that collision speeds of ABS equipped cars were higher, and that ABS equipped cars when in collisions often had more negative precipitating factors(meaning they were more likely to be following to closely, speeding or generally not paying attention).
What that showed them was that in general, ABS provides a false sense of security. Many people feel that it makes the car stop faster or less likely to crash, and as a result made them too comfortable with poor driving habits. It's resulted in a psychological factor where people think that because their car has ABS, that they can basically drive more recklessly and be ok. So ABS equipped cars have worse DRIVERS, because of that feeling of greater vehicle capability(which it doesn't really have). They pay less attention, drive faster, follow more closely and take turns and curves too quickly....and while THEY may be safer since they can steer their car while standing on the brakes(remember, ABS is not to stop faster, but to steer under panic braking) and control to a degree what they hit, the people they do hit get screwed because of the higher speeds. They've found that while in general the collision speeds today are higher, you're just as likely to die in a collision today as you were 30 years ago, perhaps even more so as a result of greater energy from higher speeds.
That has actually lead to whispers floating around the insurance rumor mill in the last few years that automobile insurance companies might start charging HIGHER premiums on ABS equipped cars due to the greater likelihood of killing OTHER people, resulting in high liability payouts. If someone kills themselves because of stupid driving they can't sue the insurance company, and neither can their family...but a family member of someone else who was killed, can. That costs more money.
All that proves is in the end, the most dangerous thing about ANY car is the nut behind the wheel. It's also the safest thing as well. How people drive is the single biggest precipitating factor resulting in or mitigating the chance of a collision. And while you can't control how other people drive, you can try to anticipate how they will drive, and alter your driving to compensate. ABS and air bags and crumple zones etc are all nice features, and have their places, but in this technological age we tend to rely too much on gadgets and not enough on common sense. All the technological wizardry in the world can't compensate for idiot drivers.
So what does all that mean for vehicle safety? The biggest things are tires, brakes, steering and skill. Keeping the steering/suspension in good maintenance and having good tires and good brakes will allow the vehicle to perform better increasing the chance of avoiding a collision, but the single biggest factor is driver skill. Performance driving classes and defensive driving classes are probably the single biggest thing you can do for vehicle safety. Knowing how to anticipate a collision and avoid the need to avoid it....and knowing how to avoid it should the need arise. If we invested enough time and money into teaching people how to drive, we'd save a lot of lives and a lot of money.
And in case some of you are wondering, I drive about 70,000 miles a year, collision and ticket free.
And yes, that's miles, not kilometers. And no, all he miles aren't on my Mustang.
ABS and air bags do little to nothing to mitigate collisions and injuries. Crumple zones do help some though, but the reality is that if you get into a collision severe enough to NEED an airbag, whether or not it goes off is the LEAST of your concern. I worked in EMS and I can tell you that newer "safer" cars are really only marginally safer than older cars. There's so many variables in a collision that even a 5 star uber-safe-mobile can still be a deathtrap if the collision happens the right way. There's just so much energy contained in moving vehicles that metal becomes EXTREMELY pliable under that kind of force, and collisions are rarely a straight on clean impact in a confined area.
There's going to be so much intrusion anyway, that while the airbag might save your pretty little face, other parts of you will get squished and you'll be maimed or killed regardless. Your brain is actually one of the best protected organs in the body, your skull is quite strong and even capable of deflecting bullets in some instances. However, your chest no so much, and your abdomen has almost 0 protection. Not to mention that large bone leg breaks can be fatal. Leg and abdominal injuries kill more people in collisions than head injuries do, and those are the 2 most likely parts to be injured in a collision. The only thing airbags do is keep you from breaking your nose in a collision...and if it's severe enough to help prevent a basilar skull or neck fracture, then it gets right back to the rest of you suffering so much injury you most likely die anyway. And the sad reality is that airbags are more likely to seriously injure fire or EMS personal than they are to prevent driver or passenger injury, though newer safety designs in the airbag systems are eliminating that danger.
Modern crash safety ratings are also pretty meaningless, since they only test the cars under very narrow and confined types of collisions in a labs and only at low speeds(31mph for head on), that represent the "worst case scenario." The reality is the types of collision testing the do are the types of collisions that rarely happen because people panic and try and move out of the way at the last minute so the straight on offset frontal collision almost never occurs, it either ends up being a straight head to head(no one reacted in time and both vehicles decelerate to a stop almost immediately), or people swerve and collide at all sorts of odd angles(not even necessarily with the other vehicle).
The exception to that is some of the newer side impact crash testing, since t-bones happen so quickly that no one has time to move and only 1 person sees it coming and by then it's usually too late. Side impact is the worst, and even some of the newer cars aren't that much better than older cars, and it also depends on what you get hit by...a large truck t-boning a small car for instance will result in the bumper going over the structural supports, and the B pillar doesn't have enough strength on it's own to resist impact. THAT is what's changing on newer cars though....ever notice how the door sills on new cars are much wider(makes the car hard to get in and out of) and the doors have smaller windows and sit up higher? That's for side impact safety. A and B pillars are also getting much beefier. The problem with a t bone though is there's almost nothing to stop the other vehicle, and your body takes a large portion of the impact. You're not going to get an older car to have good side impact safety without using a 6pnt bar at least, but that gets into other safety issues.
As far as ABS, it's perhaps one of the most dangerous "safety" devices on a modern car due to a psychological component involved(according to studies done by highway safety institutes, the government etc), as counter intuitive as it seems, and here's why. Both ABS and non ABS have stopping advantages over each other under certain conditions, and for years it was generally accepted that ABS made vehicles safer and allowed them to stop more quickly. The reality, is that ABS won't out stop non ABS UNLESS the non ABS car locks the wheels. Non ABS will stop in most conditions just as quickly or more quickly than ABS will, since stopping relies more on tires and skill than brakes. ABS was developed PRIMARILY to allow people to steer under ABS braking, since most people panic and lock the wheels, resulting in a total loss of steering. The idea was that it would allow people in a panic stop to steer to avoid a collision that they otherwise wouldn't have been able to....ABS's ability to stop more quickly by preventing lockup or perform better on wet roads was really just gravy.
That has actually led to the psychological safety issue. The NHTSA recently(within the last few years) has finished compiling collision stats and data from the last 30 years and found some remarkable things. The first was that ABS equipped vehicles are just as likely to be involved in a collision than a non ABS car, meaning ABS doesn't help mitigate the likelihood of a collision. But what they found about the NATURE of the collisions was much more telling. ABS equipped cars were found to have a lower likelihood of injuring or killing the occupants of THAT vehicle, certainly a good thing. However, what they found was that ABS equipped cars were MUCH more likely to seriously injure or kill occupants of the OTHER vehicle that they struck. They also found that ABS equipped vehicles were FAR more likely to be involved in a single vehicle collision, meaning they lose control and fly off the road without any other vehicle being involved. They also found that collision speeds of ABS equipped cars were higher, and that ABS equipped cars when in collisions often had more negative precipitating factors(meaning they were more likely to be following to closely, speeding or generally not paying attention).
What that showed them was that in general, ABS provides a false sense of security. Many people feel that it makes the car stop faster or less likely to crash, and as a result made them too comfortable with poor driving habits. It's resulted in a psychological factor where people think that because their car has ABS, that they can basically drive more recklessly and be ok. So ABS equipped cars have worse DRIVERS, because of that feeling of greater vehicle capability(which it doesn't really have). They pay less attention, drive faster, follow more closely and take turns and curves too quickly....and while THEY may be safer since they can steer their car while standing on the brakes(remember, ABS is not to stop faster, but to steer under panic braking) and control to a degree what they hit, the people they do hit get screwed because of the higher speeds. They've found that while in general the collision speeds today are higher, you're just as likely to die in a collision today as you were 30 years ago, perhaps even more so as a result of greater energy from higher speeds.
That has actually lead to whispers floating around the insurance rumor mill in the last few years that automobile insurance companies might start charging HIGHER premiums on ABS equipped cars due to the greater likelihood of killing OTHER people, resulting in high liability payouts. If someone kills themselves because of stupid driving they can't sue the insurance company, and neither can their family...but a family member of someone else who was killed, can. That costs more money.
All that proves is in the end, the most dangerous thing about ANY car is the nut behind the wheel. It's also the safest thing as well. How people drive is the single biggest precipitating factor resulting in or mitigating the chance of a collision. And while you can't control how other people drive, you can try to anticipate how they will drive, and alter your driving to compensate. ABS and air bags and crumple zones etc are all nice features, and have their places, but in this technological age we tend to rely too much on gadgets and not enough on common sense. All the technological wizardry in the world can't compensate for idiot drivers.
So what does all that mean for vehicle safety? The biggest things are tires, brakes, steering and skill. Keeping the steering/suspension in good maintenance and having good tires and good brakes will allow the vehicle to perform better increasing the chance of avoiding a collision, but the single biggest factor is driver skill. Performance driving classes and defensive driving classes are probably the single biggest thing you can do for vehicle safety. Knowing how to anticipate a collision and avoid the need to avoid it....and knowing how to avoid it should the need arise. If we invested enough time and money into teaching people how to drive, we'd save a lot of lives and a lot of money.
And in case some of you are wondering, I drive about 70,000 miles a year, collision and ticket free.
And yes, that's miles, not kilometers. And no, all he miles aren't on my Mustang.
6th Gear Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,896
From: Elk Grove, CA
While I generally agree with most of that, especially the parts on ABS, I would like to add a side-story about ABS-equipped vehicles.
Last year while driving to the NHRA drags out at Sears Point, my buddies and I almost ended up eating the bumper of the car in front of us. We came around a corner and the driver was paying marginal attention to the road (we were playing with the dash-mounted GPS, which is one of the reasons I don't like them) when we came upon a lot of stopped cars. My buddy slammed on the brakes in his wife's Scion xA with not nearly enough space to stop the car before hitting the car in front of us. As the car was stopping he managed to swerve to the right of the stopped car in front of us, onto the cordoned off extra lane on the shoulder. The only reason this worked was because the car has ABS. I don't know if he would've had the sense to lift the brake when he swerved, but if he didn't (most people I know wouldn't) and the car didn't have ABS, we would've slid right into the back of the next car.
I normally don't like ABS. It does weird things compared to how I think the car should act (I won't even get into stability control), and, as stated, it actually increases stopping distance most of the time. But this one time it was definitely a good thing. So it's not ALL bad
Last year while driving to the NHRA drags out at Sears Point, my buddies and I almost ended up eating the bumper of the car in front of us. We came around a corner and the driver was paying marginal attention to the road (we were playing with the dash-mounted GPS, which is one of the reasons I don't like them) when we came upon a lot of stopped cars. My buddy slammed on the brakes in his wife's Scion xA with not nearly enough space to stop the car before hitting the car in front of us. As the car was stopping he managed to swerve to the right of the stopped car in front of us, onto the cordoned off extra lane on the shoulder. The only reason this worked was because the car has ABS. I don't know if he would've had the sense to lift the brake when he swerved, but if he didn't (most people I know wouldn't) and the car didn't have ABS, we would've slid right into the back of the next car.
I normally don't like ABS. It does weird things compared to how I think the car should act (I won't even get into stability control), and, as stated, it actually increases stopping distance most of the time. But this one time it was definitely a good thing. So it's not ALL bad
Thread Starter
2nd Gear Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 180
Thanks guys for all the input....I still think I am going to go with the collapsible column as I am also looking for the tilt option, so it can't hurt. I never thought of safety as an issue as I have always been responsible with my driving, but that doesn't mean everyone else on the road is.
This is the video that got me thinking about all this in the first place:
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com...sh-test-9-2009
This is the video that got me thinking about all this in the first place:
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com...sh-test-9-2009
6th Gear Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 6,417
From: Cork, Ireland
the best free training for that you can have is driving on snow a lot :-)
6th Gear Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 10,468
From: California
Yeah, that's EXACTLY what ABS is for. People have a tendency to panic suddenly in situations like that and lock the brakes when they stab the pedal, so ABS lets them steer while panicking. Obviously the best way is to not panic and lock the brakes in the first place, but good luck reprogramming people's psyche. It's great for that, and ABS combined with good driving provides a wide safety margin, but the driving skill is still nearly all of the safety factor.
As far as collapsible columns, it's not needed, so I'd go for what you want(tilt, cost etc) first, and if it's collapsible that's fine. But I wouldn't make a collapsible a priority over a seat belt arrangement that restrains the upper body. Better than a column that collapses when you hit it, is to not hit it at all. That's why I went with a steel framed seat in mine and Schroth's Rallye 4 harness. DOT approved(meaning it's a street legal replacement for the factory belts) but prevents you from impacting the column. But like I said before, most people would find them too confining.
And that safety video is kinda meh, there's parts of the story that aren't being told. You have to keep in mind that it was a chassised car, so the body panels were little more than bolted to it for looks and to be separated from the environment. So a newer car just rides up over the chassis and crushes all the flimsy body panels. Unibody cars are actually quite strong in collisions, because the bodywork of the car is the structural integrity, so the body panels actually help to resist damage because they're designed with strength rather than to just be loosely fitted. If they had crashed the new Chevy into something like a classic Mustang or Camaro, both of which were unibody, I guarantee you it would have been an entirely different outcome(though I'm sure the newer car would have fared better, but it wouldn't have been nearly as brutal). Remember that energy follows the path of least resistance, and on a chassised car it's the body panels because they have almost 0 strength and deform easily. On a unibody car, body panels are designed not to deform easily, so if you collide 2 vehicles with equal strength, they each take an equal beating. Haven't you noticed that since the introduction of unibodies that nearly ALL vehicles are now unibody with the exception of large vehicles that need a stable platform for heavy weight loads?
Remember that vehicle safety is driving first, vehicle performance second, and impact mitigation 3rd. Driving skill is number 1 for safety, then tires/brakes/steering/suspension, and restraints/air bags/crumple zones etc is last...impact mitigation is really the safety device of last resort to try and protect you when 1 and 2 fail. While newer cars are THEORETICALLY safer than older cars, it's lead to people driving worse because of a false sense of security, which is why you're just as likely to die in a collision today as you were 30-40 years ago.
As far as collapsible columns, it's not needed, so I'd go for what you want(tilt, cost etc) first, and if it's collapsible that's fine. But I wouldn't make a collapsible a priority over a seat belt arrangement that restrains the upper body. Better than a column that collapses when you hit it, is to not hit it at all. That's why I went with a steel framed seat in mine and Schroth's Rallye 4 harness. DOT approved(meaning it's a street legal replacement for the factory belts) but prevents you from impacting the column. But like I said before, most people would find them too confining.
And that safety video is kinda meh, there's parts of the story that aren't being told. You have to keep in mind that it was a chassised car, so the body panels were little more than bolted to it for looks and to be separated from the environment. So a newer car just rides up over the chassis and crushes all the flimsy body panels. Unibody cars are actually quite strong in collisions, because the bodywork of the car is the structural integrity, so the body panels actually help to resist damage because they're designed with strength rather than to just be loosely fitted. If they had crashed the new Chevy into something like a classic Mustang or Camaro, both of which were unibody, I guarantee you it would have been an entirely different outcome(though I'm sure the newer car would have fared better, but it wouldn't have been nearly as brutal). Remember that energy follows the path of least resistance, and on a chassised car it's the body panels because they have almost 0 strength and deform easily. On a unibody car, body panels are designed not to deform easily, so if you collide 2 vehicles with equal strength, they each take an equal beating. Haven't you noticed that since the introduction of unibodies that nearly ALL vehicles are now unibody with the exception of large vehicles that need a stable platform for heavy weight loads?
Remember that vehicle safety is driving first, vehicle performance second, and impact mitigation 3rd. Driving skill is number 1 for safety, then tires/brakes/steering/suspension, and restraints/air bags/crumple zones etc is last...impact mitigation is really the safety device of last resort to try and protect you when 1 and 2 fail. While newer cars are THEORETICALLY safer than older cars, it's lead to people driving worse because of a false sense of security, which is why you're just as likely to die in a collision today as you were 30-40 years ago.
6th Gear Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,162
From:
That crash video has two things most people don't see.You see all the dirt looking stuff coming off the impala that is rust being knocked loose.The 58-64 b body used a x frame which rode smooth but in a wreck would kill you.I wrecked a 65 impala i had i t boned a 97 crown vic cop car.I hit him maybe 30mph is that the two doors on the passenger side where smashed.My car just needed a bumper and a head light.I wasn't wearing a seat belt the car didn't have any and i hit the steering wheel.Even with the solid column in it i didn't get hurt was more mad about the wreck.
3rd Gear Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 678
From: Smyrna, TN
I swapped out my solid '67 column for a collapseable '68, there are only plastic 'plugs' that need to snap in order to allow the inner shaft to collapse or slip inside of itself allowing it to shorten to ~1/2 it's length. I would like to have a tilt also but can wait until I find one affordable original, it'd be an easy swap now that I've installed the short steering box.
I have seen a pic of a '66 that hit an immovable object (bridge abutment) and the wheel came in and up towards the roof into the drivers chest/neck/head. The driver survived but spent quite a while in the hosptial - shattered jaw, teeth out, shattered facial bones, neck injuries, etc. I would rather have the chance that the column would collapse when the plastic plugs give and lessen my injuries possibly. I'm also installing 3pt. retractable belts, PDB and other items I feel may offer me any safety over the original equip. I've seen/worked 10yrs. worth of bad accidents close up, stood next to cars during crashes, pulled people from wrecks, etc. and seen injury free as well as fatal crashes. It's amazing how many times one little safety feature saved someones life or lessened their injuries to survivable or full recooperation. I'll take my chances with more safety features, to each his own.
Jon
I have seen a pic of a '66 that hit an immovable object (bridge abutment) and the wheel came in and up towards the roof into the drivers chest/neck/head. The driver survived but spent quite a while in the hosptial - shattered jaw, teeth out, shattered facial bones, neck injuries, etc. I would rather have the chance that the column would collapse when the plastic plugs give and lessen my injuries possibly. I'm also installing 3pt. retractable belts, PDB and other items I feel may offer me any safety over the original equip. I've seen/worked 10yrs. worth of bad accidents close up, stood next to cars during crashes, pulled people from wrecks, etc. and seen injury free as well as fatal crashes. It's amazing how many times one little safety feature saved someones life or lessened their injuries to survivable or full recooperation. I'll take my chances with more safety features, to each his own.
Jon