SOrry to bother people with this because I know I have read it before on the forum, but what is the correct location for the rear seat belts on a 1969 Firebird Convertible with deluxe belts. I tried to search it and couldn't find it

Thanks Mike

Here's the thread.

/forums/ubb...on&topic=0&Search=true#Post44767

Mike, mine is a 67 and from the previous thread, I'm not sure if 69's had 3 sets or not, but here's a quick shot of mine for general reference:
[img] Picture of my rear seat & Belts [/img]

Brett!

The only thing three belts in the rear were good for is if you had three small kids.I have personally tested the back seat of my firebird and there isn't enough room for two people let alone a threesome
My 68' has two sets in the rear.

David

I respectfully disagree David -- I've driven my bird to some business conferences, etc., and have taken 4 passengers on several occasions.

The trick is to put a guy in the middle of the back seat; I've always found the guy is more than happy to sit wedged between two women. He usually looks like this:

Searching for the seat belts seems to add to the fun.

I believe the third belt was an option in '67.

my 69 came with 3 in the back....and I have succesfully tried what Dave says, one guy in the middle, two cuies , one on ea side...!

my 69 came with 3 in the back....and I have succesfully tried what Dave says, one guy in the middle, two cuties , one on ea side...! just have to be careful with the suspension ,as mine sits a little low...

I think the only way to have 5 seat belts in a 67 would have been with a front bench seat option

I've had myself and 5 women in the car (formally known as a player,could come out of retirement if neccessary) Now being a "married dad" when the kids sit in the back there is barely any room.I now know why my father bought the 442 convertible instead of the 68' mustang convertible with the blower coming out of the hood.It just wasn't practical to carry 3 growing kids in it.I'm glad i think he made the right decision.

David

Lol... David, I knew there was something more I liked about you!

In HS, I was painting my 68 Bird, and often borrowed my Dad's 78 GMC Sprint (El Camino) I often gave a group of girls a ride home and while they fit fairly comfortably in the bird, it was a tight squeeze in the Sprint. (6 girls and myself driving... all INSIDE the vehicle, none in the back) Not to say "I" was not very comfortable... but it was a tight squeeze! BUT, in the bird, we also ran out of seat belts, but they did all fit in the car a little better... still a tight squeeze...

Yeah, for cruising the family around, I think they will fit in the bird right now (only two kids) but I'd better get the GTO as a back up I think...

Brett!

Having owned mine since '69 and drove it as the daily driver for the first 13 years, I've had five in the car many times. The center rear offers a place for knees that the sides don't but the ride on the hump is terrible the way the seat is designed. I always hated to have that many in the car because the original stock springs coupled with the low stance caused a lot of bottoming. I know why the pinion and axle bumpers were designed into the car.

I agree Jim, I had Bjorn, his son and his son's friend in the car, and got on it a few times... once hit a dip in the road while accellerating, and there happened to be a man hole cover there with a slight rise to it... bottomed out and scrapped... but it was still fun. But if someone were in the center in the back, they might have had a sore backside!

Brett!

I remember...!

Thanks for the info everyone, finished the project this weekend. I appreciate the picture Brett helped alot. Just kids riding in the back for now. They don't complain to much about being cramped or I just tune it out.

Mike