RALPH HOAR
IN MEMORIAM

Raging Hoar Moans
Easier to Get Off Than Bill Clinton,
Airbags and the Threshold for Profits

Controversy has marked airbag development since their introduction more than three decades ago. During those 30 years, there have been more myths, lies, hopes, false hopes, spins and counterspins about airbags than about any other issue in automotive history.  During the 1970s and early 1980s, I headed a coalition of about 60 organizations that was formed to lobby Congress not to kill airbags. Enthusiasm in these quarters for the lifesaving devices is undiminished. Although it's getting to feel a little bit like standing up for Bill Clinton these days: He's done a lot of good but there are some troubling things about him. It's easy to wonder about the replacement part windfall that manufacturers reap by keeping airbag deployment thresholds unnecessarily low. The billions of dollars so far?and that is a conservative estimate?is enough to raise eyebrows. This much is clear:

Airbag related deaths and injuries occur when airbags deploy unnecessarily in low speed crashes. 

Automakers, by their own admission, say that they can protect people from death or other serious injuries without airbags at speeds well above 15 miles per hour. 

NHTSA tests show that cars with gentler, kinder airbags with higher deployment thresholds would pass the mean old FMVSS 208 requirements. 

There seem to be a billion or more reasons to keep airbag deployment thresholds low. A few dozen kids and a couple of short old ladies don't stand a chance against those numbers. Call me a cynic. I suppose that's marginally better than miserable, fat-assed, sonuvabitch, though not nearly as endearing.

OPTSF342

9/24/98