Wenograd, the associate dean for science at the University of Hartford. The dean bought a 1968 Plymouth Belvedere, which he ordered last November 25. He said he elected to purchase the shoulder harnesses as optional features, but, when his automobile arrived, the shoulder harnesses were installed in a very strange manner. Instead of being attached to the roof of the car, as your owner's manual specifies, Dr. Wenograd found his shoulder harnesses attached to the base of the rear seat. This harness made the rear seat virtually inaccessible, and certainly it created a very dangerous situation in case of emergency. How does a car come out of your factory with such a basic fault? ENGINEERING IMPROVEMENTS WORKED OUT Mr. BUCKMINSTER. I think when we first worked out-this shows what you can do with improved engineering as you go along. When we first worked out shoulder belts, we were among the first to have them on U.S. cars as options. When we first worked it out, that was the best system our engineers could work out, because, as has been stated here, and as we stated in the testimony, we had to improve the strength of the roof rails in order to attached the belts to the roof rails, and, as you know, when the safety standards were issued, they were issued and required that we comply with certain specifications, and we had to beef up or improve the structural stability of the side rails and the roof of that car to support those belts in the event of a crash. I guess we just have to say that we improved our method of tiedown on these belts. Senator RIBICOFF. You are not manufacturing that way now? Senator RIBICOFF. What do you do for the people who buy a car like this-how do you fix it up? Mr. BUCKMINSTER. I cannot tell you that offhand. But if he has a problem, we will work with him to see if we can solve it. Reengineering these belts is one of the reasons we had to wait for January to put them on. S. 2865 WOULD NOT AFFECT CHRYSLER PRICING POLICIES Senator RIBICOFF. Now, Senator Javits again asked me to ask: If S. 2865 were enacted what would be the effect of requiring the disclosure of the price of items of saefty equipment upon the pricing policy of your company-pricing as to both the Government and the public? Mr. BUCKMINSTER. It would have no effect on the pricing policy at all. Senator RIBICOFF. Any questions? Thank you very much. Will the representative of American Motors please come to the table? Is there any general comment American Motors would like to make in this entire field, sir? Mr. SECREST. No general comment. I would be happy to answer any of your specific questions. REQUIRED DISCLOSURE WOULD NOT CHANGE AMERICAN'S PRICE POLICIES Senator RIBICOFF. The general objective of what we are seeking to achieve we have done that with the colloquy between all you gentlemen, with the exception of General Motors, who are no longer present. I would ask you the same question on behalf of Senator Javits: If S. 2865 were enacted, what would be the effect of requiring the disclosure of the price of items of safety equipment upon the pricing policy of the companypricing as to both the Government and the public? Mr. SECREST. It would not affect our pricing policy. It would add something to our costs. But I am sure our pricing policy would not be affected. DEVELOPMENT OF PROTOTYPE CAR Senator RIBICOFF. Now, these are questions from Senator Kennedy: Will you join with the other companies and try to find a way to help finance the development of the New York State prototype safe care with Fairchild Hiller? Mr. SECREST. As the other companies indicated, we will be happy to act through AMA and discuss it with the other companies. COST OF SAFETY NOT ISOLATED Senator RIBICOFF. Question: In 1965 American told the subcommittee that it did not segregate its spending for safety, and so it could not give us a figure for how much was spent on safety. Can you do so now? Mr. SECREST. No, sir. We do not isolate our engineering development costs that way. We break it down by functional areas, but not by the cost of developing safety per se. Senator RIBICOFF. What percentage of the American car market do you have? Mr. SECREST. We have about 3.4 percent this year. Senator RIBICOFF. How do you feel about the large number of imports that are coming into the United States? COMPETITION WITH IMPORT MARKET Mr. SECREST. Well, Mr. Chairman, we are very much concerned with this problem, because particularly our volume is in the lower priced end of the American market, and imports affect American Motors particularly. I think we certainly have taken the most dramatic step of any American manufacturers, when in February of 1967 we reduced the price of our American series models, which is our economy compact, that compares with the Falcon, Valiant, and Chevy II-reduced these prices over $200, and they are now priced about midway between the Volkswagen and the other American economy compacts. We think we have made the strongest run at the Volkswagen and the other imports that have been made by American manufacturers, and we are also concerned about this problem in our future product planning. Senator RIBICOFF. Why do you think the foreign car continues to be increasingly attractive to the American public as against the American automobile? Mr. SECREST. I think the price spread between the American cars and the imports is the principal reason, coupled with the lower operating costs. That is why we have attempted with our American series to narrow this price differential, so we think in this car, that sold for not much more than $200 over the imports, we offer so much more in the way of engine performance, interior package, styling; compared with the imports, we think we have very good customer value versus these cars. Senator RIBICOFF. Can you sell that idea to the consuming public? Mr. SECREST. Since we reduced the prices on the American series, it has about doubled our sales of this series. So there is a definite relationship. Senator RIBICOFF. This is again Senator Kennedy: What is the most important step you can take in the next 2 to 3 years to improve the safety of the cars you manufacture? Mr. SECREST. Mr. Chairman, the areas we are working on are the same as those itemized by the others better interior protection, side impact, occupant restraint, particularly concerning children--the same general areas where the other companies feel most improvement can be made-we concur. Senator RIBICOFF. You have 3-plus percent of the American market-what do you do abroad? Do you sell any of your cars abroad? Mr. SECREST. Yes, sir; we sell them abroad, but not through a 100percent-owned manufacturing facility. Basically our overseas operations, where we have manufacturing, we are coupled with companies of primarily-run by nationals in the countries involved. In certain countries, such as Mexico, Iran, Argentina, South Africa, other countries like this, we have a relatively strong position in there. But it is through this medium of cooperating and working with nationals in the countries involved-we do not have a 100-percent-owned manufacturing facilities overseas. Senator RIBICOFF. Senator Hansen. Senator HANSEN. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman. Senator BAKER. I have no questions. Senator RIBICOFF. I want to thank the gentlemen very much for coming here. While much of the information you talked about is given to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, yet this information basically hasn't come to the public view. And the feeling I have, listening to the three gentlemen that have spoken today, is that together we might be able to give the American public the information that I believe they are entitled to. It will be for the benefit of the public, and I think for the benefit of the car manufacturers, and will save the necessity of trying to pass another piece of legislation. I want to thank you gentlemen for your cooperation with the subcommittee. If there are no further questions, this subcommittee will stand adjourned subject to further call of the Chair. (Thereupon, at 3:05 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned, subject to the call of the Chair.) (The following material was submitted to the subcommittee in response to a request for the year in which the companies first met the 1968 safety standards. This equipment or features were not necessarily continued as standard on subsequent models.) EXHIBIT 32 INTRODUCTION OF SAFETY FEATURES RELATED TO FMVSS-GENERAL MOTORS CORP. 1 Indeterminate means there is a reasonable chance that compliance to some aspects of the MVSS existed in an earlier year than any shown, but no documentation is available as proof. As an example, many parking brakes probably met the 30 percent hill requirement prior to the 1967 date shown. But parking brake tests prior to 1967 were conducted on a 27-percent grade; therefore there is no existing proof they would also hold the car on a 30 percent grade, though in our engineering judgment they probably would. * Changed from RNLH to NDLR in 1940 to PRNDL in 1965. 1963 1966 1968 1967 1948 104 Added identification to certain controls, 1968. Met by Thunderbird and Lincoln in 1966. do. 1967. 107 111 201 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 301 Redesigned and retooled windshield wiper arms, Met by Ford, Mercury, Cougar, and Mustang in 1968. Prior to 1966. Incorporated antiglare requirements in newly de- Incorporated windshield mounted interior mirror Met by Thunderbird and Lincoln in 1966. Redesigned front seat back, redesigned and re SAFETY CHANGES MADE IN CHRYSLER CORP. CARS, 1966-68 MODELS Group I-Changes to meet Department of Transportation Standards Changes in 1966 to meet regulations. Changes in 1967 to meet regulations_ Changes in 1968 to meet regulations_ Changes in Chrysler Corp. cars to meet regulations__. 6 8 14 28 Group II-Safety changes other than those required by Department of Transportation |