The Diet Thread

[OldSkoolToys]

Originally Posted by ToyotaObsession

Since this federal law was enacted.


http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/adap...e_ask_Ques.htm

Unless I'm missing something, that is aimed at companies that alter or change a vehicle before it has been sold to the public, not private citizens regarding their property (the car).

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by OldSkoolToys

Unless I'm missing something, that is aimed at companies that alter or change a vehicle before it has been sold to the public, not private citizens regarding their property (the car).

I don't know if that matters, I still think it is illegal to remove safety equipment on a car. Especially if you car needs to pass safety tests annually along with an emission test. But this could be state to state. But it seems Federally you can't remove safety equipment. Not sure why you would anyways on a DD/street car.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/30/bu...rtner=rssyahoo

[OldSkoolToys]

Originally Posted by tranzformer

Sounds like a Darwin award waiting to happen to me. If you are only tracking your car, sure. But why risk your life in a DD? Airbags help save lives.

Are you saying I should be given a Darwin award because I DD'd my AE86 for 6 years, which has no ABS, no TCS, stability control, Front Airbags, Side bags, side curtain bags, enhanced crumple zones in the chassis, etc. ?

Still kicking, still living, and will drive the AE86 on the streets again once I get it back up and running. Safety is a personal concern and responsibility. The gooberment needs to kindly fuck off and let people decide their level of interest in safety equipment with their vehicles.

The only safety device thats hard-proven to save lives in nearly any situation where NOT using it would have caused death, are seat belts. Airbags are for morons that sit toooooo close to the steering wheel. If you're properly seated, and belted, your face shouldn't smack the wheel, barring a catastrophic belt lock failure.

Edit: From your posted article:
"We're actively pursuing several others," Mr. Tyson said, "It's not only a bad idea to disable the air bag, it's against the law. Air bags are there for a purpose, to protect you. If you have a DVD player there instead of an air bag, it's not going to protect you in a crash."

I don't understand how this level of personal prodding from the gubment can't disgust more people. The airbags are about PERSONAL safety, not public safety. Who are they to tell me how to protect myself? Where is it THEIR responsibility to hold my hand and put me in a bubble everytime I step outside into scary bizarre world? I'd like to see the line the constitution that says the government has the power to tell people how to live their lives concerning personal safety and their vehicles.

Arrrrghhh....hate washington bureaucrats.

[tranzformer]

Originally Posted by OldSkoolToys

Are you saying I should be given a Darwin award because I DD'd my AE86 for 6 years, which has no ABS, no TCS, stability control, Front Airbags, Side bags, side curtain bags, enhanced crumple zones in the chassis, etc. ?

Still kicking, still living, and will drive the AE86 on the streets again once I get it back up and running. Safety is a personal concern and responsibility. The gooberment needs to kindly fuck off and let people decide their level of interest in safety equipment with their vehicles.

The only safety device thats hard-proven to save lives in nearly any situation where NOT using it would have caused death, are seat belts. Airbags are for morons that sit toooooo close to the steering wheel. If you're properly seated, and belted, your face shouldn't smack the wheel, barring a catastrophic belt lock failure.

Edit: From your posted article:
"We're actively pursuing several others," Mr. Tyson said, "It's not only a bad idea to disable the air bag, it's against the law. Air bags are there for a purpose, to protect you. If you have a DVD player there instead of an air bag, it's not going to protect you in a crash."

I don't understand how this level of personal prodding from the gubment can't disgust more people. The airbags are about PERSONAL safety, not public safety. Who are they to tell me how to protect myself? Where is it THEIR responsibility to hold my hand and put me in a bubble everytime I step outside into scary bizarre world? I'd like to see the line the constitution that says the government has the power to tell people how to live their lives concerning personal safety and their vehicles.

Arrrrghhh....hate washington bureaucrats.

Wouldn't give you a Darwin award since that is how your car came from the factory back in the 80s. That is the car you drive and you haven't had any issues, so that is great. However to take a new 2012 car and pull out all the safety features to save a few pounds in a car that will be driven daily just doesn't make sense to me. Those features are there for a reason. Now if the car is going to be trailered to the track and raced only, sure gut the whole car if you want. At the track you will have a roll cage, helmet, 5/6-pt race harness...etc. Just don't see the point in pulling out airbags.

Do airbags save lives? That is a debate I have heard many people argue both sides for. Just did a search on google and the NHTSA estimated that 27,840 lives were saved from 1987-2008 because of airbags. However that is a statistic that is hard to measure/gauge. I won't argue that airbags can also cause injury. They do. But as a medical student, on my emergency medicine and trauma rotations, I can tell you that there was a significant difference in those MVA that had an airbag deploy vs. those that did not. If given a choice for my DD, I would take the car with airbags hands down. Saving a few pounds just isn't worth my life or those of my family/friends.

http://www.rmiia.org/auto/traffic_sa...ts_Airbags.asp

One thing that I will say, if given a choice to be in your AE86 or a 2011 Corolla in a severe car accident, I would take my chances in the 2011 Corolla. No offense to you as you might be a great/awesome driver, but accidents still happen and I would hate to be in a AE86 and get nailed by an "urban assault vehicle" driven my a mom putting her makeup on while texting and trying to drive. No thanks.

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by ToyotaObsession

Since this federal law was enacted.


http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/adap...e_ask_Ques.htm

The link you posted only bans businesses and organizations from performing these modifications. Individuals are not included.

OST, I believe it's been scientifically proven/accepted that airbags save lives and reduce injury just like seatbelts and headlights etc. I believe it's the mandated safety that is the problem not the technology/equipment.

Now the first gen airbags were downright scary because they were designed to prevent a person without a seatbelt from being ejected or suffering injury. I grew up with a fear of sitting in the front seat in some of the newer cars, even when I was plenty tall enough, simply because of how powerful the airbags were. Thankfully the second generation of airbags are designed for people wearing their seatbelt and therefore not as powerful.

I for one would be glad if we could eliminate all government regulation of the auto industry for more self-regulating industry groups instead. Government has no reason for interfering in business or industry.

[Random_Art]

Originally Posted by Allch Chcar

The link you posted only bans businesses and organizations from performing these modifications. Individuals are not included.

OST, I believe it's been scientifically proven/accepted that airbags save lives and reduce injury just like seatbelts and headlights etc. I believe it's the mandated safety that is the problem not the technology/equipment.

Now the first gen airbags were downright scary because they were designed to prevent a person without a seatbelt from being ejected or suffering injury. I grew up with a fear of sitting in the front seat in some of the newer cars, even when I was plenty tall enough, simply because of how powerful the airbags were. Thankfully the second generation of airbags are designed for people wearing their seatbelt and therefore not as powerful.

I for one would be glad if we could eliminate all government regulation of the auto industry for more self-regulating industry groups instead. Government has no reason for interfering in business or industry.

I, for one, greatly appreciate government regulation of industry. Our waterways aren't really the cesspits they once were and no longer catch on fire. As a whole, our air is cleaner to breathe because the government forced industries to clean up emissions from their plants. Without these regulations they would have no reason to voluntarily clean up the waste that comes out of the factories since the tech to do so costs a lot of money that eats into their profits. And we've all seen how the lack of regulation and oversight led to banks abusing the low income and ignorant with high risk loans for homes.

I would love to keep the government out of business and industry, except when the industry in question has proven time and time again that is incapable of regulating itself.

But since this thread has gone horribly off topic, start talking about carbon fiber and gutting cars again. Or, so help me, I'll turn this forum around and leave you all on the Ohio turnpike.

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by Random_Art

I, for one, greatly appreciate government regulation of industry. Our waterways aren't really the cesspits they once were and no longer catch on fire. As a whole, our air is cleaner to breathe because the government forced industries to clean up emissions from their plants. Without these regulations they would have no reason to voluntarily clean up the waste that comes out of the factories since the tech to do so costs a lot of money that eats into their profits. And we've all seen how the lack of regulation and oversight led to banks abusing the low income and ignorant with high risk loans for homes.

I would love to keep the government out of business and industry, except when the industry in question has proven time and time again that is incapable of regulating itself.

But since this thread has gone horribly off topic, start talking about carbon fiber and gutting cars again. Or, so help me, I'll turn this forum around and leave you all on the Ohio turnpike.

The problem I have with your point is that you require the government be the one doing it. Private industry can and should regulate itself and corporations have responded to pressure from citizen groups like environmental groups to make changes. And citizens should push industry to keep clean, it's amazing what a boycott of a company can do to change things.

I feel consumer education is an important factor here since the government is the one doing the work and just sending us the (tax) bills so people have become lazy and ignorant to what goes on.

On topic?
Do we really want to have a discussion on dieting? Because we can, but this isn't exactly the right sub-forum for that.

[bofa]

Originally Posted by Allch Chcar

The problem I have with your point is that you require the government be the one doing it. Private industry can and should regulate itself and corporations have responded to pressure from citizen groups like environmental groups to make changes. And citizens should push industry to keep clean, it's amazing what a boycott of a company can do to change things.

I feel consumer education is an important factor here since the government is the one doing the work and just sending us the (tax) bills so people have become lazy and ignorant to what goes on.

On topic?
Do we really want to have a discussion on dieting? Because we can, but this isn't exactly the right sub-forum for that.

How'd that work out for all of us with the banking industry having that responsibility?

But agreed, we are getting a bit

[OldSkoolToys]

Originally Posted by tranzformer

One thing that I will say, if given a choice to be in your AE86 or a 2011 Corolla in a severe car accident, I would take my chances in the 2011 Corolla. No offense to you as you might be a great/awesome driver, but accidents still happen and I would hate to be in a AE86 and get nailed by an "urban assault vehicle" driven my a mom putting her makeup on while texting and trying to drive. No thanks.

None taken, the AE86 isn't exactly a steel fortress on the road. The entire root of this conversation is government intervention, and how they've overstepped, basically saying we can't do things to our own cars when it only effects us and no one else. So what if you think its Darwin worthy? Its his life, and his car. He pays his wheel tax (state, county, or both) just like the rest of us, so thats basically all thats needed to be allowed to drive his vehicle on public roads. I think what is VERY humorous is that you can basically put together a kit car, complete with working headlights, tail lights, turn signals, horn, and a seat belt, and damn, its street legal!

And for the love of all that is holy, regulation is not oversight. Its a two-sided fence....the private sector can't regulate and the government is now over-regulating. Give too much power to either side and it happens. You can't use an example from say an industrial waste corporation and government regulation as you would on the fed's passing a law making it illegal to remove your own damned airbag if you so desire. The two are completely different....one effects the entire ecosystem and quality life of residents and wildlife miles, and up to hundreds of miles, away from the plant. The other is about personal choice, personal responsibility, and your own regard to safety within your private property (the car).

Somewhere in these safety standards that are passed basically every year, there's money being made by the government. Behind every asinine agenda these agencies have, $ is being made on their part somehow.

I don't consider this OT, quite opposite, we're talking about lightening up the car. One of the easiest ways to do so is removing unwanted shit from it. Mainly because its cheap (elbow grease is basically free). Can't do that though. Big brother says he's going to protect you from yourself. And they can all go fuck themselves up in an oak tree with a grizzly bear, I'm putting a Nardi wheel on my car. Or maybe an oldschool TOM'S TRD wheel...they pop up occasionally on club4....just gotta get lucky.

[ToyotaObsession]

I see several problems here, first of all the government usually paints with a broad stroke. So they safety devices, and that means all of them, ABS, traction control, Stability control, etc. Airbags just happen to get tossed in there with the rest.

It is a fact that ABS and Stability control has saved a lot of lives. It's also saved a lot of people from crashing. That's where it gets sticky. You see when you remove something that might otherwise help you from crashing into oncoming traffic it's not just you that's being affected. It's affecting other people driving on the same road who did not choose to have you modify your car in such a way.

Also it can affect people who might buy the car after you. There's a lot of crooked people in the world who would sell a car that isn't up to snuff.

Second industry can't regulate itself. They will screw you every chance they get. You know Volvo? The brand I grew up as the "Safe" brand. They don't do that great here in the states. Safety doesn't sell. The illusion of safety does though.

I also work for Boeing. Upper management often tells the FAA what were gonna do to make Airplanes better, without any prodding from the FAA. Then they make sure we do it. There's countless stories of things we told the FAA we would do, and then promptly didn't do it because it was expensive, unreasonable, etc. So then the FAA starts to fine Boeing because they aren't doing what they said. If Boeing had their way, it would be done as cheaply as possible without risking people's lives. They do take that very seriously. But some of the processes we have in place would probably be different without the FAA.

Hell remember the whole Firestone/Ford fiasco? Execs knew about the problem and did nothing! Afraid it would eat into profits. Sure after the fact some people didn't buy Ford, but now it's a faded memory. If companies can't self regulate now with little oversight, what would they do with none?

Sure it seems intrusive that they regulate safety devices, but it's for the protection of the vast majority of people. Because for every 1 person who could remove the ABS and be fine, there's 30 more that wouldn't be. You have to make laws that some people don't agree with to protect the majority.

Third, it has to be the government to provide the oversight.

You're going to let some special interest group who has an agenda make the rules? Yeah that's going to go well. The system we have now isn't perfect, but nothing is. At least now there's a certain level of checks and balances. Most of the agencies don't make any of the rules. They just enforce them. Congress makes the laws.

For the people who think government agencies get something out of the industries/businesses they regulate you're a fool. Nobody gets a bonus if they manage to fine an industry an X amount of dollars. All money from fines goes into the general pool, the agency doesn't see any more money or less money based on fines taken in. So there's no incentive to try and bring as much money as possible in. Unless you think companies are bribing some middle man desk jockey. Which does happen and they usually get caught. But that's not the top brass getting anything, or even the government. Even with the fines, there's checks and balances, the companies can challenge them in a court.

I'm sorry but I just don't think our government is slick enough to pull off a scam job like that and keep it under wraps. Just look at Wikileaks. If there was some scam going on, all it takes is a flash drive to expose it.

Plus lets not forget that cars nowadays are designed in such a way to protect you with the airbag. It's possible you can risk greater injury taking out the airbag because now in the event of a crash the system will not operate the way it was designed. You've got crumple zones, foam, and speed sensing airbags, etc. It's just something to think about before you take out your airbag on a DD. Is losing 5 pounds really going to be worth it in the event of a crash? Especially on something like this were you know you'll be driving fast and pushing it.

So remember it's not big brother cramming shit down your throat to protect yourself from yourself because YOU can't handle it. It's probably because there's 50 million other idiots who can't.

[OldSkoolToys]

Originally Posted by ToyotaObsession

So remember it's not big brother cramming shit down your throat to protect yourself from yourself because YOU can't handle it. It's probably because there's 50 million other idiots who can't.

That line of thought is void because it is not the government's job to dictate our personal safety in our private property. That's what I've been saying this entire time.

The best they could do is "we strongly recommend not tampering with safety devices that have been put on vehicles based on our research."

not

"It is now a law stating you CAN'T remove safety devices, and you will be punished and fined if caught doing so." It's not their car and its not their road either. Its -your- road, built and maintained through taxes you have paid into the local (wheel), state (wheel and gas), and federal (income), with the fed's allocating to states funds for road management if they meet certain law criteria.

They would only have an argument if such regulation effected a general populace based off your 'bad' decision of tampering with your car's reactive safety devices. Purposely running around with no brakes is a danger to society, and also, extremely stupid. Yeah, agreed, that should be illegal. Removing the airbags effects you, and only you. Its not about what's smart, or who's stupid, its about a line that should not and must not be crossed by the government. Yet it has...and once you give them that leeway, it'll spread to other areas. It already has.

[serialk11r]

ToyotaObsession mentioned:
"You see when you remove something that might otherwise help you from crashing into oncoming traffic it's not just you that's being affected. It's affecting other people driving on the same road who did not choose to have you modify your car in such a way."

This extends to airbags actually. An airbag can prevent an injury which would cause you to lose the ability to control your car. If you hit something and the airbags deploy, keeping you conscious, you can steer your way out of harm and keep other people from hitting you as well. If there were no airbag and say your head hit the steering wheel or side pillar or window or something knocking you out, your car could still be moving and that would be a problem.

That said I don't know how much you can compare airbags to ABS in that way. If it were me, I'd want as many airbags as possible to prevent serious injury in a crash, knowing that on the street there is no harness, helmet, etc. to protect me. As many as possible meaning, front, side, knee.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by OldSkoolToys

That line of thought is void because it is not the government's job to dictate our personal safety in our private property. That's what I've been saying this entire time.

The best they could do is "we strongly recommend not tampering with safety devices that have been put on vehicles based on our research."

not

"It is now a law stating you CAN'T remove safety devices, and you will be punished and fined if caught doing so." It's not their car and its not their road either. Its -your- road, built and maintained through taxes you have paid into the local (wheel), state (wheel and gas), and federal (income), with the fed's allocating to states funds for road management if they meet certain law criteria.

They would only have an argument if such regulation effected a general populace based off your 'bad' decision of tampering with your car's reactive safety devices. Purposely running around with no brakes is a danger to society, and also, extremely stupid. Yeah, agreed, that should be illegal. Removing the airbags effects you, and only you. Its not about what's smart, or who's stupid, its about a line that should not and must not be crossed by the government. Yet it has...and once you give them that leeway, it'll spread to other areas. It already has.

In Canada I would disagree with you since we would be all contributing to the medical costs incurred by that stupidity, assuming the stupidity doesn't lead to immediate, instant death.

So even people that are a hazard to only themselves, end up costing me money. In the US, if they're paying for their own heath care, have at it.

That being said, the Canadian government has no trouble letting people drive around with cars with the steering wheels on the wrong side, from an era with no airbags. Go figure.

[Aki]

Assuming the FR-S comes with front/rear side curtain airbags on the pillars, I don't think it's that serious to take out the seats (assuming those have airbags), save 20-30 lbs a piece by putting in airbag-less aftermarket seats.

Honestly I don't see a lot of compelling weight-cutting I can do to the car while keeping it street-friendly. The most likely things would be wheels, lighter exhaust, header. The rest don't give a lot of bang for buck imo... it's expensive to cut weight while keeping it street-friendly. If it's under 2800 lbs I'm not going to be that focused about weight-cutting.

Btw, taking out airbags isn't against the law afaik. But I won't be tearing em out of the A/C pillars.