Re: Shoulder harness mounting options

[Simon Favre <simon@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Part of the answer depends on what you intend to do with the car.  If
this is a car you really intend to race, then a roll bar is the most
appropriate way to go.  If you intend to drive it on "track tours" or
"open track" days, then perhaps you are correct in looking at lesser
alternatives.  If this is a strictly street driven car that you just
want to be safe and comfortable in, then by all means consider the
alternatives.

The reason I bring this up, is because like they say, been there, done
that.  I have a 67 GTV that I intended to use for time trials and
occaisional track tours.  The local ARA gets to play "follow the leader"
at Sears Point when the racers in CSRG take a lunch break.  I went with
a harness bar, and it only cost me about $75.  There are advantages and
disadvantages to this approach.

The harness bar I use is basically a straight piece of roll bar tubing
with "ears" on the end.  The ears each have a hole for a bolt that
secures it to the factory front seat shoulder belt mount points right
behind the door and just below the 3/4 window.  This has the advantage
of being less expensive and less intrusive than a full roll cage or even
a floor mounted roll bar.  It also has the advantage of making the
shoulder straps VERY short.  I use the adjustable wrap-around type of
shoulder harnesses.  Keeping the straps short means they will stretch
less in a frontal collision.  I never liked the idea of having immensely
long straps going back to the rear parcel shelf or removing the rear
seat altogether just to get to the bulkhead.  In my 67 GTV, the parcel
shelf and trunk bulkhead are pretty flimsy.  The harness bar bolts into
factory hard points.  You're more likely to deform the rest of the car
very badly before they give out. The other place people mount harnesses
is the rear seat lap belt mount points.  I'm not crazy about that one
either.

The main disadvantage of a harness bar is that it makes the rear seat
very hard to get in and out of.  Of course, if you had the rear seat
removed, or a massive roll bar put in, the car really WOULD be a
2-seater as the later decals indicate.  ;=) Having long harness straps
in the back also precludes using the back seat for much more than cargo.
With the harness bar, I can actually use the back seat.  One minor
disadvantage of the harness bar is that is does not allow the fancy
aftermarket seats I put in to recline all the way.  The long harnesses
to the rear would allow this, but you wouldn't want to let anybody
actually ride in the car in that position.

The other consideration is that the harness bar may not allow you to
take part in racing activities in your area.  It would be a shame if you
put in a harness bar and later decided to go racing where only a full
roll cage will pass inspection.  The big question is, what do you want
to do with the car?  I know the harness bar is legal in AROC time trials
as run by the SOCAL club.  It's also legal in SCCA Solo II in the CSP
class (where a GTV would run).  It may be legal in some vintage racing
organizations, but not all.  Check with any local clubs you may want to
race with.

Just to reiterate, I think $300 is WAY too much for just a harness bar.
It only cost me $75 to have a professional race car fabricator make one
to my specifications. I could have had a friend do one for even less.

John Christensen wrote:

>I am putting 5-point harnesses in my '69 GTV and am a little confused about
>the best way to mount the shoulder harnesses.  One option is an AutoPower
>roll bar modified to accept harnesses on both the driver and passenger
>sides.  ... {SNIP}
>
>A local shop that does great work can make a very strong roll bar for about
>$600.  Alternatively, they can build a harness bar designed to handle the
>stress of direct harness attachment for about half that amount.  ...{SNIP}
>
>The last option is to remove the rear seatback, use 4"x4" metal backing
>plates (as per SCCA regulations) to reinforce the metal panel that blocks
>off the trunk and then attach the harnesses to these new mounts.  I like
>this approach since it's a LOT cheaper than any of the above.  ...{SNIP}

------------------------------