Third Row Seat Installed

[Soggybottomboy]

Mad fab skilz. Looks nice, I like it.

SBB

Sponsored

 

[XX4XEXX]

This is a joke right.... in our days my Pops would throw us in the back of his Jeepspeed and Baja the piss out of it we would be bouncing around like dice on a hot table. Not only but rolling through the 70s and 80s in a hopper seat in the back of his PU when sitting in the back no seat just got outlawed was normal. ? good old days standing up in the bed holding on for dear life taking bets with your cousins who's fingers would get smashed in the top of the doors when pops opened the door. Now we have roll air bags.

So getting rear ended while puttering around a small town or on the way to the beach is okay?

 

[BuyHold]

For those mentioning rear collision being a factor, have you seen what the factory rear seat in a 2-door looks like??? It's no safer.

That may be true but NHTSA crash test ratings are an effective legal shield, to a degree, against certain "safety" lawsuits. Therefore, it is somewhat irrelevant from the perspective of this fabricating wizard if his garage hack back seat is more or less safe than a 2 door jeep's back seat.

EDIT: A single accident with a kid in that back seat (who else is going to be in those) will wipe this guy clean, regardless of how much fault another driver may have. That is how attorneys pay their bills. At best he could set up some LLC that is designed as a legal firewall from this but that won't prevent a lawsuit from happening in the first place.

EDIT2: The seat is cool. Just sharing thoughts on the commercial viability of it in context of product liability.

 

[martoaj]

So getting rear ended while puttering around a small town or on the way to the beach is okay?

You're obviously far less likely to get in a dangerous high-speed rear-end collision when you're going 10 mph in a residential area. You're almost guaranteed not to have such a collision on the beach or in a campground. So, I suppose if people only used it for these cases, things would be OK. But we know people would use this on the highway and that’s just dumb.

You're making light of this concern and deflecting away from the real point here, which is you're for some reason willing to risk your childrens' lives just so they can sit in the back of your Jeep. Which is just sad.

 

[Hennessey17]

I'm not sure he'd want the liability. One accident, if he was somehow liable, would bankrupt him.

I'm wondering if he'd be better off selling the idea to a larger company that could handle potential lawsuits.

 

[sentience]

Hell, I still remember riding around the open bed of trucks in college. Not sure how I survived my twenties, if I’m honest.

It’s a great build, but a risky business proposition. All the warning labels in the world won’t stop someone from suing you. Or save you from idiots like (younger) me.

 

[AcesandEights]

I think it's a cool idea, but the market is too small. Didn't Jeep already show this as a concept at SEMA, the Overlook or something?

The liability isn't an issue if you have liability insurance, which all manufacturers do (most anyway). Your buddy would just need to see if the potential revenue was worthwhile, to pay his insurance premiums and put some money in his pocket. My guess is the revenue generated wouldn't be enough to bring it to market. I think his costs would be too high for a quality product, and the number of buyers would be too small...but it's a cool idea for a handful of people.

For a lot of us, we look at vehicles that fit our needs. The Wrangler isn't really a family truckster and people-hauler. It's a niche off roader that doesn't really do the people-hauler thing that well. You're not going to get kids or car seats in that third row very easily, and you're not going to get adults in there either. So, neat idea without being very practical. That means limited sales, and limited sales means cost of manufacture without the product sales to support it.

 

[BuyHold]

You're obviously far less likely to get in a dangerous high-speed rear-end collision when you're going 10 mph in a residential area. You're almost guaranteed not to have such a collision on the beach or in a campground. So, I suppose if people only used it for these cases, things would be OK.

I think the opposite is true. When is the last time you heard of someone going 100mph getting rear ended?

 

[martoaj]

I think the opposite is true. When is the last time you heard of someone going 100mph getting rear ended?

I continue to be blown away by some of the responses in this thread.

The assumption is that if you're in a small town going 10 mph (arbitrary number, just using it as an example), it's because that's the appropriate speed for the road and others will be doing the same. Nobody is claiming it's "safe" to go incredibly slow on a fast road; I'm just saying that if someone were to try and justify putting this seat in their car, it'd likely be because they're only going to use it in very slow-speed situations.

But you can't control other peoples' actions; if someone is driving fast, it doesn't matter how safe and cautious you are, you can get hit and there are more likely to be serious injuries when you have a non-crash-tested 3rd row seat in your Wrangler.

 

[BuyHold]

I continue to be blown away by some of the responses in this thread.

I was joking with you.

IMO: The seat is cool but would likely involve significant risk of getting destroyed through product liability litigation. Doesn't matter how safe it is (absolutely or relative to 2 door rear seats), how safe the driver is, how safe other drivers are, the safety of the roads and/or neighborhoods that the vehicle travels on, or how much insurance the fabricator has or does not have. One accident with a child in back who gets "hurt" will create a scenario with potential litigation nightmare and effectively kill the product and the owner's business (if not more).

 

[martoaj]

I was joking with you.

Thank goodness. Sorry, some people clearly aren't joking here and it's pretty wild.

 

[BuyHold]

Thank goodness. Sorry, some people clearly aren't joking here and it's pretty wild.

To be fair, I should have said. "haha", added a , or a /s/. The loss of subtlety in written language from live conversation is one reason the internet is filled with so much vitriol. Misunderstanding on misunderstanding devolving into hostility.

I will be more obvious next time. Thanks for rolling with it after my clarification.

 

[YJdude]

You're obviously far less likely to get in a dangerous high-speed rear-end collision when you're going 10 mph in a residential area. You're almost guaranteed not to have such a collision on the beach or in a campground. So, I suppose if people only used it for these cases, things would be OK. But we know people would use this on the highway and that’s just dumb.

You're making light of this concern and deflecting away from the real point here, which is you're for some reason willing to risk your childrens' lives just so they can sit in the back of your Jeep. Which is just sad.

The real point here is there is no concern, nor light to make of it. The dude made a great third row option. It's way better than just riding in the back like we did as kids.

 

[YJdude]

Thank goodness. Sorry, some people clearly aren't joking here and it's pretty wild.

You being one of them.

 

[cornercanyon]

You all are describing the need for torte reform very well.

Most of us likely started driving our grand father's jeep, ranch truck, out board skiff, ski boat, etcetera long before we had a license. And we rode untethered in the back, bed, or bow of all down the highway, across the lake,...

As a society we have forgotten life unfolds and is not guaranteed—

Sponsored