• BenLeMan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    Looks like if you ever hit a pebble on the road it would probably flip and kill you. Note also the conspicuous absence of a seat belt. Cute little death machine.

    • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Yeah but not instantly. It would drag you around the road grinding your meats and bones into a nice pasty consistency.

      • BenLeMan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        I mean, I could see a modern version being made with a rally harness-type restraint system and a windshield frame that doubles as a rollover bar. In this case the biggest danger would be to the driver’s limbs.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        Preston Tucker designed his Tucker Torpedo with a safety belt (and a lot of other safety features) in 1948.

        And then was driven out of business by the Big Three automakers in the U.S.

        There’s a good movie about it.

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Volvo filed a patent for some sort of seatbelt in 1889. SAAB became the first car company to make any sort of seatbelt standard in 1958. Volvo became the first car company to install modern 3 point belts as standard equipment in 1959.

        So yes, but actually probably not.

        • AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          So a patent existed prior, but that doesn’t mean they were made. SAAB made them standard 14 years after this car. Do with no other data, I’d say no and no.

          • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 days ago

            Well the key word there is standard. I’m guessing that seatbelts were optional equipment prior to that, because I have seen a '50 SAAB 92 that had a driver’s side lap belt, which I believe was original equipment. I have also seen a '45 Chevy truck that also had a lap belt, but I’m unsure if that was original equipment.

            That’s why I said yes, but probably not.

            • BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 days ago

              I think the popular argument against seatbelts was a long the lines of guns cars don’t kill people, reckless drivers kill people. Which, I guess, is the same argument that we use for anything that’s a bad idea for society as a whole, but is lucrative.

      • BenLeMan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        No, that was before Ralph Nader made a whole ruckus about car safety (and rightly so). Still, we’re looking at this from the year 2024 so you can really tell this vehicle doesn’t make sense in our time.

        • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          Velomobiles are a modern thing. Speed records are over 80kmh from human power only, but ebike motors can achieve that easily.

          While most are not this “delta trike” format, and instead have 2 wheels in front, the stability is not crazy bad for deltas. Most are weather proof.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          I sometimes think about Ralph Nader, and the overall balance sheet of lives he is directly responsible for saving, vs lives that he is (I guess indirectly) responsible for ruining and/or ending due to spoiling the 2000 election.

          Interesting thought experiment. I guess.