Tahoe seats $40

[tomatocity]

"I personally will be using 67/68 CST buckets with 3 point harness into factory locations."

I can agree with what you are saying except for the above sentance. When did 67/68 trucks come with 3 point harnesses from the factory?

I have to add a little humor into this discussion because it is actually very serious. I am guessing that the factories don't install 5 point harnesses is because the people would not wear them. Think of how many people would survive crashes everyday if they used 5 point harnesses.

I am going to build the floor box and under-floor braces along with mounting the seat connecting hardware adn i will post pics as I do this. The only thing that will change my mode is if I can find a Tahoe second row seat at a reasonable price. The Tahoe third row seats can become excellent shop seats especially at $40. Bench racing at its finest, where is the cup holders

StingRay I commend you for being committed to your science and practicing it with your hobby. Can you do me a favor and let us see pics the installation of your seat(s) and seat belt harnesses. Surely all of us can benefit from seeing where the factory location point should be.

Its fun having them in the garage but it is funner driving 'em.

[tomatocity]

"You might try them on the front porch as well, but be careful about the leather getting wet."

wet with beer and dripping hamburgers while I watch Jr. kick booty.

[Dean23]

I understand all the logistics that are said about proper seat mounting etc....but how many of us truck owners havve a 400 plus hp engine in our trucks with out upgrading brakes....be honest. this is as big a s a problem as not having seats mounted properly......reinforce the seat mounting area as much as you can to providde the safety....go to you local gm dealer and take a look at how seats are mounted....look under a truck like a potential customer....lol. every upgrade that is done to our trucks needs to be considerd for safety reasons. not just seats.......thats my 2 cents..

[StingRay]

Tomato I politely suggest that you might want to learn a little more about the 67-72 series of GM trucks.The hole up in the B pillar of all 67-72 cabs with a plastic plug in it is for the factory shoulder harness mounting (was an actual option) designed and engineered for a standard 7/16 NF seat belt bolt. With the gas tank removed from behind the seat both factory floor holes can be used with an aftermarket or modern 3 point retractor on both sides. If one were to leave the tank in place suitable stamped oval washers are an acceptable compromise if carefully positioned close to formed shapes in uncompromised material for the drivers side. Such a washer has a shape that is soft and will not punch through the metal. Use of such a washer is only an educated guess without testing. It wouldn't scare me if I personally knew the condition of the metal and the proximity to the cab support and other formed areas of floor metal. If you are going to use the Tahoe seat use ALL of the factory rear seat and belt anchor points and build that box with steel or aluminum such that it spans and is attached to the entire front floor side to side in effect creating a rib that will spread the load and dramatically stiffen the front floor area.
Most of the people are just bolting these things into the four factory bolt holes and then drilling and fastening to the floor sheetmetal which isn't even close to being safe. Stiffen it up real good.

Please don't get me wrong and think I am against upgrading seats, belts and other components to better standards. I'm not. My beefs are with ANY kind of modification that does not consider the health and safety of those that may ride in the vehicles unaware of substandard modifications and those that have to share the road with the same vehicles. I have seen many mods done to frames and suspensions here on the board that fall into those categories. The integral belt seat is not a good upgrade candidate any more than the air bags and antilock brakes in the same donor vehicles. Our vehicles are not suitable recipients without significant modifications. Just because something can be made to fit doesn't mean it should be and just because somebody else has done it that it's a good idea to do it.

[Dick Dale]

I guess the question that I have is what do those of us do that have rotted out floors and are replacing floor pans and supports? Do we replace them or go without? How do we make sure they are up to standard. I want to use 2nd row seats and lapbelts.

[XXL]

Originally Posted by StingRay

Add integral belts and now you ask the mounting to handle in some case say 3 300lb adults ( this is a real and easy possibility) now you have 1000 lbs times the number of g's of force.

BTW, US Regs only require seatbelts to hold up to 215# person (97.5kg)... given the fast food world we live in, that means even new vehicles may not be sufficiently engineered in this regard .

and...

ouch!

[StingRay]

Very good point XXL but I am never one to build to a minimum standard. In my own vehicles and anything I lay my hand to I always try to build in as much overkill as I can get. Something to consider is the methods of testing for seat belts that are integral vs ones that are not. Also if seating positions are within a certain distance of eachother all positions are tested simultaneously vs individually. We are not just talking FMVSS 209 but also 208 and 210. If any of those same seats have child restraint anchors from the factory and somebody actually uses them in one of our trucks then legitimately for the safety of a child then even 225 would want to be considered. Center of gravity of the seat and the individual seating reference point are also variables in testing. Alot of the stuff can actually only be determined with a fixture at a testing facility. 208,209 and 210 are alot of language and tough to wade through. In the end I base alot of what I do on the results of previous destructive testing. I build it overkill so it passes the first time and saves my boss another 50 grand in testing on a second go around. If I can keep it acceptably light with a it'll never break angle on design I find I get a good nights sleep. I have been doing this for 8 years and( touch wood) have never failed a destructive test or had a failure in the field.

[chickenwing]

Tim: I meant no offence. This post is shaping up well. The post I remember had some good info IMO of how to reenforce to limit downward travel of the fwd seat mounts. If anyone has a link, please post it.


Edit: you posted again. I am refering to post 29.
StingRay: thanks for your last post. Did not feel you were rude at all. I was hoping to generate constructive input on how to best strengthen the floor pan/seat mounts. BTW, turns out I was ignorant as to what year the sholder anchors started. I was guessing 70. Wish I knew your opinion of the aftermarket sholder harnesses sooner. I was scared off by the whole washer thing and went to 2nd row burb belts.

Dean23: Bravo!!! That is the spirit of HOTRODDING!!! I totally agree that the quest is to customize safely.

I hope Tim will let me assist or at least watch what he does with this. Turns out Tims idea on how to proceed mirror StingRays suggestion closely. I am wondering if using numerous spot welds in addition to the fwd seat mounts for the side to side mount would be of benefit. As for the aft mounts, I was not too impressed by them either. Am of the opinion to use the same technique as the front.

[tomatocity]

Please don't get me wrong and think I am against upgrading seats, belts and other components to better standards. I'm not. My beefs are with ANY kind of modification that does not consider the health and safety of those that may ride in the vehicles unaware of substandard modifications and those that have to share the road with the same vehicles. I have seen many mods done to frames and suspensions here on the board that fall into those categories. The integral belt seat is not a good upgrade candidate any more than the air bags and antilock brakes in the same donor vehicles. Our vehicles are not suitable recipients without significant modifications. Just because something can be made to fit doesn't mean it should be and just because somebody else has done it that it's a good idea to do it.[/QUOTE]

If you are concerned with, "My beefs are with ANY kind of modification that does not consider the health and safety of those that may ride in the vehicles unaware of substandard modifications and those that have to share the road with the same vehicles.", then let me ask you and the others if they have taken a defensive driving class in the last 10 years? Have you taken any kind of driving class? Do you know the correct way to correct a vehicle from over and under steer? Have you practiced it? What about braking in wet, snowy or icy weather? I am more concerned with driving (poorly) than I am with some modification that might or might not affect a driving situation. StingRay don't go to So*Cal to see the RatRods. Some of these are to dangerous to sit in a parking lot. I don't think any of this board would make a major change to a vehicle without thinking it through or posting a thread to the 67-72 Board to get positive input from the other members to help the project be sucessful. It has been asked ore than once during this thread for answers or solutions to the problems. So what are some solutions. What size and strength of metal should be used for the straps under the floor board? What size and strength of metal should be used for the floor box? How should the mounting hardware be mounted? We know the seats work since GM produces them and bolts them in Tahoes. The problems are there. What are the solutions. How can we make them work? Not everything is done how we like it and we have to make the best with what we have. If there was one way to do it we would all have a blue and white 1972 Chevy C10, tilt column, A/C, 3 point harness, 350 / 350, posi, SWB, 4 core radiator, rally wheels, dual exhaust, etc. Difference is what makes the world go around.

My apologies for being curt. Long very hot day in Sacramento.

Josh I also apologize to this board and its members.

[sixty8chev]

Well guys I have to agree with the other engineers on this one. I work as a workplace safety consultant and the majority of what I do is in fall restraints, not quite seat belt engineer but it does give me a decent background in the forces being created here and you really don't want to mess with them.

But ya know if I had those seats and I was going to make a center console, I could do it in matching leather, and then at the same time, I remove the integral belts, get the seats patched, and use those seats with a stock three point belt, and reinforce the floor as well.

And for reinforcing the floor, while safety equipment and original design modifications are not recommended, what I am going to make sure i do in my truck when i install newer seats is to spread the force out as much as possible, ie, one bolt through the sheetmetal in the bottom of the cab will rip out quite easily, multiple correct grade bolts with large washers bolted through a piece of c-channel that ran the width of the cab and was tied into the frame would tend to help a bit, you get the idea, but i still don't recommend anybody do it.

I know it would be a lot easier to bolt the seat in and use it as, but is it really worth risking your life over.

And just to make this drag on a little longer, lap belts do work, I'm living proof, I drove my 74 nova into a pole, fast enough to push the passenger floor board into the seat, And I limped away and was well enough to pull the motor and tranny out of it and put them in a beautiful 68 pickup I found the next week .
So buckle up.

[chickenwing]

The post are getting out of order? PM'd Rod to try and fix it.

Really hate to see anyone getting ruffled over this. Calm down. A lot of good info can be shared from this post.

[Long Roof]

Agree Chickenwing. Lets see some love all.

Aaron