510 seat belt anchor points

[nzdatman]

My WOF man questioned the location of the top anchor point for the front belts in my 1600. They are back behind the pillar (above the rear door) a few inches. I have noticed that a lot of 1600s have the B pillar drilled with a bolt going through there, just wondering how many have the anchor point further back like mine? Even better is someone has a race car or a 1600 with the headlining removed to see what is there?
Would like some piece of mind that the belts are legit and not going to kill me in a crash (whether or not it'd make much difference I'm not sure...)
My 1600 is a late one, maybe the seat belt anchors were redesigned through the model life? My chassis ID tag is the 100hp one which only seems to be on the late 1972 cars.
This is not my car but belts mount in the same place

[classicdat]

I have both on the passenger's side it is on the roof like your's, but the drivers has been drilled into the B pillar, the roof one is blanked off. This is a '72, NZ assembled.

[nzdatman]

Interesting... I take it your headlining is still fitted?
Just had another look- my belts are mounted further forward than the ones in the pic. I hope they haven't just drilled the inner roof frame and bolted it on there somehow... was hoping it's a factory designed anchorage

[broke]

Mine are mounted like yours. No holes in the B-pillar. Jap assembled 72 model.

[68p510sss]

I have two NZ assembled shells here, one my race car and the remains of a race car that came to an unfortunate end in the wall at Manfield. One is a 1972 100 horsepower shell, the other I think is a 1970. On both of these shells there are factory threaded mounting points on the pillar and above the rear door the top mount is about 95 mm behind the rear edge of the pillar. From memory early cars and jap new used the pillar mount but for NZ where the average customer was taller they went to the rear mount. I have seen the pillar drilled and again I think this was done higher up to suit taller drivers. Remember in the 70's you could do that without having to worry about certs etc.

You should be able to pull the trim around the door down and peel back the edge of the headlining enough to check the mount. If it helps I am happy to send a photo of the naked metalwork.

Good luck Andrew

[torqued]

If you look at the seam of the roof lining mine is more forward than yours.

New_Zealand_Datsun_Club_•_View_topic_-_510_seat_belt_anchor_points.jpg

[nzdatman]

Thanks guys. Yeah mine would be about 95mm behind the b pillar, that photo I posted is not my car, just one I found on the net.
This is a photo of my belt mounting. Where my finger is pointing is the factory pillar mount. Like most people over 5'9" I have the seat right back and if the belt was mounted on the pillar my torso would move forward a couple of inches before the belt would do anything. I prefer the current mounting position but my WOF guy is suggesting the pillar mount would be stronger.
I would appreciate a photo Andrew if you could as I would like to see what the structure at the upper mounting point is like.

[chris_g1]

Both our cars have belts mounted on the b pillar in factory mounts.
Datsport do an inertia belt for the further back mount point.
I thought the mounting point further back was for two door versions of the 1600 (510).
Orange car has inertia belts front and rear even though it doesn't need them as is first registered in '69 and the blue one has 'you adjust' belts but no rear ones but will fit some as I'm not keen on rear seat passengers coming over the seat in the event of an 'immediate' stop.

Bernie and Chris .

[68p510sss]

These photos are from a 72 NZ new shell, the roof has been cut off. Both mounting points are factory. I agree for a taller person the top mount is better. I would also add that to make a call on which mount is stronger is the terrain of a structural engineer. The shape of the steel the angle of the load etc would all come into it. Anyway as it is a factory mount I believe all that is irrelevant. On the subject of safety NZ 510's did not have collapsible columns. US cars did. Australia bought in ADR in the early 70's and stopped selling 510's for that reason. The was a gap before the released of their 180b's with collapsible columns. I'm not sure if NZ 610's have collapsible columns. After wearing a steering wheel in the face during a head on collision in a rally my race car now has a collapsible column ex a 160j sss. This would not be easy on a road car as the pedal box is much more substainial on a 710 to suit. On the race car it was easier as it was part of the build with a Willwood pedal box and the roll cage.

[nzdatman]

That's awesome, thanks for that Andrew!
Looking at those pics the roof mount looks at least as strong as the pillar mount (although I am not a structural engineer ). I will show this to the WOF man and see what he thinks. I would rather have the belts in the existing location.