[JDaPP]

Looks like someone in the back of a 2 door would suffer the same fate, so don't let them sit in the back of your 2 doors!!!

 

[Espo78]

Uhh...are you having technical difficulties over there?

 

[JDaPP]

If that was a 2 door the rear tire would not have impeded on the area of the passenger seat. Plus the rear seat in the 2 door is anchored a lot better than bolting through the sheet metal for the third row and using non DOT compliant seat belts. if it was a safe idea Jeep would sell it that way. Seating for 7 would be a great selling point, don't you think? But it's not safe enough for Jeep to pass crash tests in that configuration. I'm really surprised any company is willing to step up and offer a product for this conversion. The liability is far to great to outweigh the profits on selling this in my opinion. One kid dying in a seat that was converted by a companies kit would bankrupt the company.

Looks like someone in the back of a 2 door would suffer the same fate, so don't let them sit in the back of your 2 doors!!!

 

[Espo78]

I'm not sure what kind of reaction you're trying to get from me, but you're making yourself look pretty stupid repeating the same sentence in 3 consecutive posts. At first I thought it was an error but you obviously don't have anything constructive to add to this post. If this was in Chit Chat I'd have other words for you. Have a good day.

 

[JDaPP]

Actually you were the one that was adding nothing constructive by inserting an opinion that no one asked for. If the post goes back to talking about what the gentleman was asking for then that is the reaction I was looking for. Good day to you as well

 

[Espo78]

The great thing about forums is that not everyone has to share the same opinion. My opinion is that adding a 3rd row seat to a vehicle not designed for it or tested for it is unsafe. I provided pictorial documentation, and what I got in return was 3 replies with the same nonsensical sentence. If you would like to have an "adult discussion" about it, by all means go ahead. But if you want to act like a kid with your hands over your ears yelling "LA LA LA LA" then kindly piss off.

 

[JDaPP]

Actually you were the one that was adding nothing constructive by inserting an opinion that no one asked for. If the post goes back to talking about what the gentleman was asking for then that is the reaction I was looking for. Good day to you as well

 

[JeepUpKeep37s]

Actually you were the one that was adding nothing constructive by inserting an opinion that no one asked for. If the post goes back to talking about what the gentleman was asking for then that is the reaction I was looking for. Good day to you as well

I am having a déjà Vue !?

:koolaid2:

 

[Guruman]

I've never owned a 2-door, but don't they share the same rear body/frame design. Looking at my 4-door it looks like Jeep just inserted some extra length in the middle, as you can see the seams in the body. if that's the case, then how is mounting a seat in the rear portion of a 4-door any different than the one mounted in the same position of a 2-door?

I guess it could be argued that the mounting points or brackets might not be as strong as the factory 2-door provisions, but that's just a small engineering exercise to fix. If the small rear crumple zone is sufficient for a 2-door rear seat, why would the same not be true for a 4-door with a seat mounted in the same position relative to the rear of the Jeep?

Am I missing something? I've got a set of these brackets and a 2-door seat sitting in the shop to go in. I just have not done it yet due to the upholstery not matching.

 

[Demlockian]

Not that my opinion was asked for either, but...

Manufacturers design crumble zones in vehicles in order to pass crash safety tests. In the two door model they have to stop the crumble before it reaches the passengers by some means. I assume they may have done the same thing with the 4-door version. Basically, you are possibly putting your kids INSIDE the crumble zone.

I am not an engineer and this could be completely safe.

People should reply no matter what the original poster wants if it relates to safety of a life, especially a child.

 

[JDaPP]

That's the point. You have no idea how it effects the vehicle, because they have not tested it. They also don't test 4" lifts and 40" tires which changes everything from braking distances to handling, but people don't go into those threads and Sally Struthers it up under the guise of "the children"

If the title or subject was "Is a third row seat a good idea or give me your thoughts on the Teraflex 3rd row seat" I would 100% percent say fire away with your opinion. Since it is not, why don't we stay on topic as this is a write up post.

If you want to discuss the merits of the third row just hit the "New Post" button and fire away.

 

[Demlockian]

You missed my point JDaPP. I do not wish to argue with you or anyone on this forum, it serves no purpose.

People should reply no matter what the original poster wants if it relates to safety of a life, especially a child.

Do I know for a fact it puts the life of a person in danger (regardless of age). No, neither do you or the original poster. However, if you look at the provided photo it appears that it could do so (we don't know the details of that accident). If somebody is considering to follow this write up they need to be aware of that risk.

For the sake of not arguing a pointless battle I will not post again in this thread. I feel I have made my point and do not wish to continue.

 

[BigMike]

Need a minivan, but a minivan. No ******* way I'd put kids in that third row seat. I'm sure Chrysler does spend money on engineering the vehicle to protect passengers. Just waiting for the massive law suit to hit TF when someone gets killed using this idiotic product.

 

[Guruman]

OK, so if the frame and body in the rear of a 4-door are identical to the rear section of the 2-door, and the seat is factory, it located is the same position relative to the rear, the mount is as strong or better than the factory 2-door mount, assuming whatever seat belts you use are as adequate as the stock 2-door ones.

Exactly how is the product idiotic? The engineering does not change just because Chrysler didn't do it for us. It seems to me that the steadfast clinging to the idea that somehow it's just not safe seems a little superstitious and idiotic to me.

To the OP, and others in the thread, thanks for the helpful information. I think I may give this a try.

 

[BigMike]

OK, so if the frame and body in the rear of a 4-door are identical to the rear section of the 2-door, and the seat is factory, it located is the same position relative to the rear, the mount is as strong or better than the factory 2-door mount, assuming whatever seat belts you use are as adequate as the stock 2-door ones.

Exactly how is the product idiotic? The engineering does not change just because Chrysler didn't do it for us. It seems to me that the steadfast clinging to the idea that somehow it's just not safe seems a little superstitious and idiotic to me.

To the OP, and others in the thread, thanks for the helpful information. I think I may give this a try.

The rollbar is different. The crash protection the rear is different. One lawsuit for this product will bankrupt Teraflex.

 

[Guruman]

The rollbar is different. The crash protection the rear is different. One lawsuit for this product will bankrupt Teraflex.

How is the rear section of roll bar and crash protection different?

 

[Guruman]

Oh, now I see. the 2-door roll bar is actually a weaker design having a 90 degree bend it in, as opposed to the 4-door's relative straight section up until the rear horizontal and with a 45 degree angle rather than a 90. Not exactly making the case that it's somehow less safe.

What's different about the crash protection? I can see that a third row position would have less protection than the 2nd row of a 4-door, but how would the third row in a 4-door differ from the rear seat position in a 2-door? Looking at the frame there is no crumple features hydroformed into it. Plus the added mass of the 4-door provided some inherent protection, which may actually make the third row in a 4-door safer than the rear seat in a 2-door, at least for rear impacts.

 

[JKUnlimitedSport_2010]

I did the install in mine and have lap belts. It is a great seat and with the evo tire carrier it helps beef the rear a little more. As with all custom things I know there is risk, but lifted up I know it helps!


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

[Dutch]

Sorry, but I have to agree that this seat (minus belt and bracket differences) isn't going to be any less safe than the stock position is a 2dr JK. The frame rails are identical between the 2dr and 4dr JK with the exception that the 4dr has a longer straight section in the middle. With as flimsy as the sheet metal is on the JK's the only crash protection/crumple zone you're getting is in the frame itself.

Also, look at that picture of the wrecked JKU. It was obviously hit hard by something big and tall. Other than the spare tire being pushed in it looks like the main point of impact was above the rear bumper and below the tail lights. The whole jeep is pushed in and you can see the 2nd row seats have been moved out of position by the impact. The rockers are distorted under the front doors as well. You basically took a worse case scenario picture and tried to present it as a common instance. If that same rear impact had happened to a 2dr JK the damage would have been all the way up to the A-pillar. You might as well have shown a picture of a JK being crushed in a car crusher and then said it was why you don't trust OR-Fab's cage kit.

 

[Dutch]

Also, crash testing for the NHTSA is a frontal impact against a solid barrier at 30mph and side impact at 30mph. They don't do rear impact testing. Its actually interesting that they don't considering typically on the other end of the frontal impact is the rear end of another vehicle.