56 Chevy Seatbelt Installation

[Guest BillTee]

I bought an aftermarket set of seatbelts from the local auot parts store and do not have a clue as to how to feed them through the seat cushion on my 56 belair sedan bench seat. Can anyone offer help or advice. Thanks in advance!!!

[rocketraider]

You're probably going to have to separate the cushion and the back on the seat and look at the seat structure to see how to feed the belts thru.

A factory or dealer installation would have had metal or plastic sleeves to guide the belts thru the cushion and to the floor anchors. If needed you should be able to get those out of a 60s GM bench seat car.

Goes without saying- find a GOOD solid anchor point. At the very least a couple of large washers on both sides of the floorpan to spread the dynamic load over a larger area. Seat belt bolts can and will pull right thru the sheetmetal.

Edited September 6, 2013 by rocketraider (see edit history)

[joe_padavano]

Goes without saying- find a GOOD solid anchor point. At the very least a couple of large washers on both sides of the floorpan to spread the dynamic load over a larger area. Seat belt bolts can and will pull right thru the sheetmetal.

I'll echo what Glenn said. Factory seat belt anchors were attached to the reinforcing crossmembers under the floor pan for exactly this reason, with large thick washers in addition to the added metal of the crossmember.

[Guest BillTee]

I'll echo what Glenn said. Factory seat belt anchors were attached to the reinforcing crossmembers under the floor pan for exactly this reason, with large thick washers in addition to the added metal of the crossmember.

Thanks for your reply and help. I have not tried to separate the seat back from the cushion so I will start there. The seatbelts did come with large washer that are supposed to be anchored on each side of the floor. Also, I will look for the anchors mentioned on the underside of the floor pans. We will be driving our belair to Turkey Run in November and will feel safer with the seatbelts installed.

[trimacar]

I've stated this before and guess will continue to do so, as adding seat belts can be dangerous.

Make sure the seat itself is anchored as well or better than the seat belts.

You'd really regret it, in a sudden stop, if the seat belts held and the seat ripped loose....

Although we're used to seat belts in modern cars making us feel safer, a car not engineered for restraints can be hazardous when features are added....

[joe_padavano]

I've stated this before and guess will continue to do so, as adding seat belts can be dangerous.

Make sure the seat itself is anchored as well or better than the seat belts.

You'd really regret it, in a sudden stop, if the seat belts held and the seat ripped loose....

Although we're used to seat belts in modern cars making us feel safer, a car not engineered for restraints can be hazardous when features are added....

I was waiting for this post...

I've said it before and will continue to say it also - your statement makes no sense. First, if the seat was going to rip free of the floor (an EXTREMELY unlikely occurrence), it would do it whether there were seat belts or not. Or is there something magic about adding belts that makes the seat more likely to rip loose? Would you rather go through the windshield with the seat pushing you through, or have a few broken bones from having the seat "crush" you against the belt.

More to the point, for someone who stayed awake in physics class, even if one assumes the extremely unlikely occurrence that the seat could come loose, the use of a belt makes it much LESS likely. The inertia of the seat is absorbed by the stretching of the belt. This spreads the force that supposedly is ripping the seat loose over a much longer time and gradually absorbs it (similar to the concept of crumple zones).

Finally, a very high percentage of deaths in auto accidents come not from flying through the windshield but being thrown from the car and having the car roll over you. Seat belts reduce the probability of that scenario to near zero.

I will say that for 2dr vehicles that do not have latching seatbacks, there is a higher likelyhood of injury from the seatback folding forward. In my book this is STILL preferable to having my skull hit the windshield. We also haven't addressed the issue of the non-collapsing steering column pointed at your chest.

Do what you want, it's your life. I put belts in all my old vehicles.

[rocketraider]

You won't find the belt anchors in a 1956 GM product. Ford was one of, if not the only, carmakers to push them in the 1950s. Even as late as 1962 GM belt anchors were basically a stout eyebolt with reinforcing washers, and I think I've seen some 1963 GM cars with that arrangement. 64 they used weld nut anchors and a 1/2" anchor bolt that was retained with some type of strong gray threadlocker compound. I had to change the belts on one of the Starfires several years back and that stuff was a mortal pain to get loose. Hated to use an impact gun on a nice chrome-plated bolt head, but that was what it finally took to loosen that stuff.

I'm pretty sure GM was using weld nut anchors for the seat attachments by then. If those are there and the floors are in good shape, I don't think you'll have to worry about the seat ripping loose from the floor.

[D Yaros]

Well now, my 1962 Olds Dynamic 88 has seat belt mounts (weld nut anchors). In fact, I thought the presence of the same was mandated in 1962 by the feds? If that is so, all cars would have had to have had the mounts.

Yes, Ford led the way with seat belts in 1956. Suspect they were optional, not standard equipment?

[joe_padavano]

You won't find the belt anchors in a 1956 GM product. Ford was one of, if not the only, carmakers to push them in the 1950s. Even as late as 1962 GM belt anchors were basically a stout eyebolt with reinforcing washers,

Actually, both my 62s have the weld nut provisions for front seat belts. The rear seats only have welded reinforcing washers with through holes.

[trimacar]

Yes, Ford started "selling" safety in the 1950's. The reaction of the American public was to buy fewer Fords, since the assumption was that they must be unsafe if Ford is putting all the padded dashes and such in them. So, they backed off the safety as a selling point, until the public opinion changed.

Front seat (lap) belts weren't required by law until 1965, and that year no rear belts were required. In 1968, rear lap belts were required also.

I never stated NOT to put in seat belts, just that you need to think of the safety aspect as a whole, not just bolting in a set of belts. Newer cars are engineered to be safer, and adding safety to a car that didn't have those engineering features to begin with is tricky.

For example, I recently worked on a mid-50's Studebaker sedan. The front bench seat was held in by four 1/4" or 5/16" bolts, and that's it. Not much holding it to the floor, and in a violent enough crash it could very well tear loose. As far as the belt absorbing some of the energy, THAT argument makes no sense, since the energy is being absorbed by your body, not the belt....

I don't disagree with adding belts, I added some to my Pierce for my young son when we were touring. Just use some common sense.

Another example, I had a fellow come to me and ask me to cut some belts to make shorter, and re-sew them, for use in a hot rod. NO WAY was I going to do that. No belt should be modified from a factory condition (again, the engineering aspect, a certain thread in a certain pattern) just to make them fit.

[trimacar]

If you search the forums, there was a November 16th 2010 discussion in the Oldsmobile forums, this topic was beat to death then so no use doing it again....

[joe_padavano]

Another example, I had a fellow come to me and ask me to cut some belts to make shorter, and re-sew them, for use in a hot rod. NO WAY was I going to do that. No belt should be modified from a factory condition (again, the engineering aspect, a certain thread in a certain pattern) just to make them fit.

And here we are in violent agreement. DOT-approved aftermarket belts are available in a wide variety of lengths. One simply needs to buy the belts in the correct length. Shortening and resewing is a mistake unless one has access to the machines and stitching patterns and proper thread used to gain DOT approval in the first place.

As for the belt absorbing the load, yes, load is carried through your body and into the belt. The belt stretches, absorbing the load. Try towing with a chain as opposed to a strap. The shock load from the strap is MUCH less. Same for belts - the nylon stretches. This has been proven in tests by the DoD and the DOT. Since in your hypothetical scenario, the seat will break loose anyway, would you rather have this seat pushing your body and head through the glass or get bruises on your stomach and possibly a broken pelvis? I'll take the bruises and broken bones over a cut throat any day.

[trimacar]

Wow, never been in violent agreement before, I like it!

Joe, with all your cars being 1962 and newer, I fully agree that adding seat belts is a good thing, as those cars were built when safety was beginning to be engineered into cars.

I still believe that it gets tricky on the older cars (50's and back). Again, I'm not saying DON'T add restraints, just think of all the issues first, and if the seat mounts need reinforcing, then attend to that matter also...

[poci1957]

DanchukSeatBeltInstall.pdf

Hey Bill, take a look at this guide from a Chevy parts house, Todd C