head and neck restraint required

[mlytle]

bmwcca just announced tonight that for bmw club racing,
"Effective April 1, 2006, all racers must use a Head and Neck Restraint meeting SFI 38.1 standards. As of December 1, 2005, the following devices have been approved under the SFI 38.1 standard:

HANS - (888) 426-7999 - www.hansdevice.com

R3 Device - (800) 731-4404 - www.lfttech.com

Hutchens II - (800) 731-4404 - www.hutchensdevice.com"

marshall

[lateapex911]

Well, that SUCKS! Chicken $#@$.............

I PRAY and HOPE the SCCA has more balls...

[dj10]

Originally posted by mlytle@Dec 15 2005, 11:07 PM
bmwcca just announced tonight that for bmw club racing,
"Effective April 1, 2006, all racers must use a Head and Neck Restraint meeting SFI 38.1 standards. As of December 1, 2005, the following devices have been approved under the SFI 38.1 standard:

HANS - (888) 426-7999 - www.hansdevice.com

R3 Device - (800) 731-4404 - www.lfttech.com

Hutchens II - (800) 731-4404 - www.hutchensdevice.com"

marshall

68423

? Marshall, didn't that guy who died @ the BMW club race in the NE have a hans on?
dj

[JamesB]

Are you referring to the driver that died not of the crash but of medical condition? I believe yes, he did have a H&N on.

[dj10]

Originally posted by JamesB@Dec 16 2005, 11:37 AM
Are you referring to the driver that died not of the crash but of medical condition? I believe yes, he did have a H&N on.

68478


I didn't hear that he died of a med condition. FMI, what did he die of?
Making everyone in a club buy a $800.00 item X how many members? Someone is making a killing! No pun intented. I don't believe that these should be manditory!
dj10

[JamesB]

yeah, making it mandatory does give someone a killing, I would say all 3 listed will benefit. I need to find the board where someone posted up an artical with information in it. its eluding me at this time and well work is beconing me a lot this week.

[mlytle]

Originally posted by dj10@Dec 16 2005, 04:26 PM
? Marshall, didn't that guy who died @ the BMW club race in the NE have a hans on?
dj

68476


everything i saw on the incident clearly said he did NOT have any h&n restraint on.

and since there was apparently no autopsy, the cause of death was not determined, so it is not known if a medical condition was an issue either. an "official" report has yet to be released.

[mlytle]

Originally posted by dj10@Dec 16 2005, 04:51 PM
I didn't hear that he died of a med condition. FMI, what did he die of?
Making everyone in a club buy a $800.00 item X how many members? Someone is making a killing! No pun intented. I don't believe that these should be manditory!
dj10

68481


not all of them are $800, and if more sanctioning bodies required them, then the volume would go up and cost would come down.

maybe i am biased, as i have been using a hans for two years, but i think this is a great move and scca should follow. most all pro series alread do, and i think nasa has some sort of requirement too. scca is behind the power curve on this one.

[pgipson]

i think nasa has some sort of requirement too.

Actually NASA doesn't have a requirement (as of 3 days ago) although they have indicated an SFI approved device may be required beginning 1 July 06. I don't know that any other marque clubs have instituted a requirement yet.


scca is behind the power curve on this one

Not sure I agree with that statement. Requiring the SFI approval leaves out a number of marketed products that are already in use by drivers. Such an action may actually leave a sanctioning organization open to more criticisim and potential liability. A driver that prefers the original Hutchens or the Wright or ISSAC or G-Force is now prevented from using those systems.

It might be that the time isn't right to start mandating additional safety equipment for club racers.

[dj10]

Originally posted by mlytle@Dec 16 2005, 12:39 PM
not all of them are $800, and if more sanctioning bodies required them, then the volume would go up and cost would come down.

maybe i am biased, as i have been using a hans for two years, but i think this is a great move and scca should follow. most all pro series alread do, and i think nasa has some sort of requirement too. scca is behind the power curve on this one.

68491


For me I can't stand the thought of something hindering my head movement! Something like claustrophobia I guess? To me it's like pro choice, it's my life and my body, let me choose. Let's all put on 5mm restrictor plates and just go 40mph. :D . Next they will be telling us we have to wear a jock strap and a cup!

[OG Racing]

Deleted

[JamesB]

Originally posted by mlytle@Dec 16 2005, 01:34 PM
everything i saw on the incident clearly said he did NOT have any h&n restraint on.

and since there was apparently no autopsy, the cause of death was not determined, so it is not known if a medical condition was an issue either. an "official" report has yet to be released.

68490



I found the thread, I had this and another incident confused. your right, the NHIS incident has no mention of a H&N in any of the articals, threads, or recounts from drivers at the event. Its been a crazy year with fatal incidents, sadly enough for me to get my facts crossed.

As for SFI or not, I don't know how I feel. I think the BMWCCA fear is that joe racer to design his own rather then buy a proven design and in the end prevented nothing in the case of an incident or impeded the driver when it should not have. I consider that BMWCCA required SFI as a CYA of its own.

[latebrake]

Originally posted by JamesB@Dec 16 2005, 02:26 PM
I found the thread, I had this and another incident confused. your right, the NHIS incident has no mention of a H&N in any of the articals, threads, or recounts from drivers at the event. Its been a crazy year with fatal incidents, sadly enough for me to get my facts crossed.

As for SFI or not, I don't know how I feel. I think the BMWCCA fear is that joe racer to design his own rather then buy a proven design and in the end prevented nothing in the case of an incident or impeded the driver when it should not have. I consider that BMWCCA required SFI as a CYA of its own.

68495


NASA CCR 29.1.2. Has a list of H&N required by mid season 06. No regard to SFI approval. Yet..
Lawrence

[Racerlinn]

Originally posted by mlytle@Dec 15 2005, 10:07 PM
bmwcca just announced tonight that for bmw club racing,
"Effective April 1, 2006, all racers must use a Head and Neck Restraint meeting SFI 38.1 standards. As of December 1, 2005, the following devices have been approved under the SFI 38.1 standard:

HANS - (888) 426-7999 - www.hansdevice.com

R3 Device - (800) 731-4404 - www.lfttech.com

Hutchens II - (800) 731-4404 - www.hutchensdevice.com"

marshall

68423


"Meeting" the SFI 38.1 standard and "Approved" (which implys the "stamp of excellence" of SFI) are two different things. Do they really used the word "approved"? I await Mr. Baker's thoughts on this.

[mgyip]

Originally posted by dj10@Dec 16 2005, 11:26 AM
? Marshall, didn't that guy who died @ the BMW club race in the NE have a hans on?

68476


Directly from BMWCCA's website: http://www.bmwccaclubracing.com/static/index.htm

It is with the deepest sadness that we announce the passing of BMW CCA member and club racer David MacPherson, following an incident on Friday, October 28, 2005 during a BMW CCA club race at New Hampshire International Speedway.

After examining the incident scene and numerous in-car videos, it appeared that this was a single-car, single-driver incident. During the race, following a restart after a full-course yellow, Car #124 took an unusually low line next to the pit wall going into Turn 1 at New Hampshire International Speedway. It then proceeded across the track, impacting the outside wall, which was equipped with a Safer barrier. After the initial impact, Car #124 continued along the wall until it stopped. Emergency service personnel and race and track officials responded to the site immediately. After extraction from the car, Dave was taken immediately to hospital. He was not wearing a head and neck restraint at the time of the incident. We have no additional or definitive medical information. Medical information is reserved for Dave's family and we request that their privacy be respected.

Hopefully this will end the speculation and hearsay about this incident.

[dj10]

I'm all for saftey I just don't like anyone telling me I have to hang a $800.00 something around my neck, after I have gone through all the trouble of fire suits, roll cages that would pass pro standards, SFI seat & fire system.
Next they will make fire systems & fuel cells mandatory, even in IT, and no more open face helmets, you will have to use ear protection and protective eye wear. Hell, your SCCA regions have big bank accounts, let them buy you the Hans.

Leave it to the indivudal drivers! Let me sign a waiver cause I don't want one.

[mlytle]

Originally posted by dj10@Dec 16 2005, 11:38 PM
I'm all for saftey I just don't like anyone telling me I have to hang a $800.00 something around my neck, after I have gone through all the trouble of fire suits, roll cages that would pass pro standards, SFI seat & fire system.
Next they will make fire systems & fuel cells mandatory, even in IT, and no more open face helmets, you will have to use ear protection and protective eye wear. Hell, your SCCA regions have big bank accounts, let them buy you the Hans.

Leave it to the indivudal drivers! Let me sign a waiver cause I don't want one.

68525

hi dj!

hmmm, let's see..
hans...check
fire system...check
closed face helmet....check
hearing protection...check
eye protection....check
fuel cell.....ooops, my scca its car is missing one of the dreaded safety features! :)

on your fear of your head being restricted with a hans for normal use...it isn't. after one session of use, i didn't even notice it anymore...

marshall

[dj10]

Originally posted by mlytle@Dec 16 2005, 06:57 PM
hi dj!

hmmm, let's see..
hans...check NOT MANDITORY
fire system...check NOT MANDITORY
closed face helmet....check NOT MANDITORY, OPEN FACE ALLOWABLE
hearing protection...check NOT MANDITORY
eye protection....check NOT MANDITORY
fuel cell.....ooops, my scca its car is missing one of the dreaded safety features! :) ONLY ANOTHER $500 + INSTALLATION AND IT CAN BE YOURS. :D

on your fear of your head being restricted with a hans for normal use...it isn't. after one session of use, i didn't even notice it anymore...

marshall

68528

marshall, imagine if you didn't have or want any of these and someone told you you have to use the open face helmet. The hans is just a personal choice and it should be mine to make.

On another subject, please tell the other 2 wise men (Matt & Dave) I said Happy Holidays to all of you. :D
Did marrs make mid ohio a event for 06?

[lateapex911]

It is indeed a CYA, and it's very sad. There are plenty of ways that common sense could be injected, but in the end, a freaken lawyer won the day.

Sadly, it is more about liability than true safety, at least it is for the BMWCCA.....

And the SFI thing is an absolute sham..a joke.. a racket even.

All hiding behind the veil of "public good" and "safety".

Lame decision...gutless.

[mlytle]

Originally posted by dj10@Dec 17 2005, 12:32 AM
marshall, imagine if you didn't have or want any of these and someone told you you have to use the open face helmet. The hans is just a personal choice and it should be mine to make.

On another subject, please tell the other 2 wise men (Matt & Dave) I said Happy Holidays to all of you. :D
Did marrs make mid ohio a event for 06?

68531


yo dj!
i confess, i was riding a yamaha rice rocket back in the early 80's with a full face helmet, leathers, boots and gloves in a state where helmets weren't required. guess i am one of the oddballs who partakes in risky sports, but checks all the safety boxes doing it....;)

will pass on greetings to matt and dave!
we wanted to make mid-o a marrs event, but the track gave away the aug wor games date to nasa. the new date for the wor games doesn't work with the marrs sked, so we are going back to the glenn in july.

marshall

[leggwork]

(edit: posted this before I read the rest of the thread and now see that somebody posted the text I refer to below)


there is an updated statement about Dave McPherson's death at www.bmwccaclubracing.com. He did not have a H&NR on.
bruce



Originally posted by JamesB@Dec 16 2005, 04:37 PM
Are you referring to the driver that died not of the crash but of medical condition? I believe yes, he did have a H&N on.

68478

[dj10]

Originally posted by mlytle@Dec 19 2005, 10:37 PM
yo dj!
i confess, i was riding a yamaha rice rocket back in the early 80's with a full face helmet, leathers, boots and gloves in a state where helmets weren't required. guess i am one of the oddballs who partakes in risky sports, but checks all the safety boxes doing it....;)

will pass on greetings to matt and dave!
we wanted to make mid-o a marrs event, but the track gave away the aug wor games date to nasa. the new date for the wor games doesn't work with the marrs sked, so we are going back to the glenn in july.

marshall

68737


Got a $10.00 head wear a $10.00 helmet.
Well maybe see at the Glenn.

[benspeed]

Gentlemen - you get one life. A Hans is an excellent investment and you can bank that they will become mandatory. To think otherwise is to ignore the litigeous nature of our court system and the general trend in pro series.

I know everybody has heard it before but a Hans costs the same as a set of tires and I bet you can sell your Hans for more than half the cost of purchase.

You don't even notice it when you're driving except when you're backing out of a garage and you can't look all the way right or left.

I think the Isaac ought to be considered too - Baker's product is excellent also.

[leggwork]

any SFI 38.1 HNR ought to be considered ... if they do become mandatory, it is highly likely that only SFI compliant ones will be allowed due to possible litigation if they set the bar any lower.
cheers,
bruce




Originally posted by benspeed@Dec 21 2005, 08:54 PM
Gentlemen - you get one life. A Hans is an excellent investment and you can bank that they will become mandatory. To think otherwise is to ignore the litigeous nature of our court system and the general trend in pro series.

I know everybody has heard it before but a Hans costs the same as a set of tires and I bet you can sell your Hans for more than half the cost of purchase.

You don't even notice it when you're driving except when you're backing out of a garage and you can't look all the way right or left.

I think the Isaac ought to be considered too - Baker's product is excellent also.

68879

[Matt Rowe]

Originally posted by benspeed@Dec 21 2005, 03:54 PM
I know everybody has heard it before but a Hans costs the same as a set of tires and I bet you can sell your Hans for more than half the cost of purchase.
68879


I don't know about anyone else but I wouldn't buy a used helmet or a used set of belts. Any H&N device falls into the same category where visually you can't tell if it hasn't been overstressed at some point in it's life. So I don't think resale is a particularly good argument, especially when there are plenty of other good reasons to have one.

[mlytle]

Originally posted by Matt Rowe@Dec 21 2005, 11:20 PM
I don't know about anyone else but I wouldn't buy a used helmet or a used set of belts. Any H&N device falls into the same category where visually you can't tell if it hasn't been overstressed at some point in it's life. So I don't think resale is a particularly good argument, especially when there are plenty of other good reasons to have one.

68893

for $15 you can have a hans recertified by the company. that makes a used one a little more palatable.

[Greg Amy]

Whenever someone starts lecturing me about my use/non-use of safety equipment for racing/motorcycling/whatever, my immediate and terminal reaction is "If you really cared about me and my health, you wouldn't be lecturing me about the equipment I choose to use/not use, you'd be trying to convince me not to do that dangerous activity in the first place." Therefore I am convinced you really aren't that concerned that I have only one life, what you're really concerned about is "cover your ass" or trying to justify your own particular purchase and use of that equipment.

What you choose to use is your own personal choice - as it is mine.

There's been more than one time I've been lectured to use my seat belt, even though I already do; to use a helmet while motorcycling, even though I already do; to use an enclosed helmet instead of an open-face one while racing, even though I already do; to use a H&NR while racing, even though I already do. And each time I hear this lecture from the do-gooders - and trust me, the lecturing never ends - those who are convinced that they know what's better for me than I do, my reaction has always been...well, unpleasant. News flash: I am an adult, not a child; I understand and accept the ramifications and consequences of my actions. You are free to make your opinion known, but note that I'm not asking to take away your choices, I encourage you to do the same for me. - GA

[Matt Rowe]

Originally posted by mlytle@Dec 21 2005, 06:36 PM
for $15 you can have a hans recertified by the company. that makes a used one a little more palatable.

68897


Well, that's the first time I've seen that. Hmm, I learn something new everyday. I am curious what their recertification involves? Ultrasonic or xray inspection? Composite inspection is still as much black art as science.

[mlytle]

Originally posted by Matt Rowe@Dec 22 2005, 02:05 AM
Well, that's the first time I've seen that. Hmm, I learn something new everyday. I am curious what their recertification involves? Ultrasonic or xray inspection? Composite inspection is still as much black art as science.

68912


topic came up on the bmw cr forum soon after the new rule came out. the big issue was that only very recently did hans devices start shipping with sfi stickers. what were all the early adopters of hans devices supposed to do? they had the exact same hans, but no sfi sticker on it. solution, send it back for inspection and (re)certification. no idea what the process is.

[dj10]

Originally posted by mlytle@Dec 21 2005, 10:27 PM
topic came up on the bmw cr forum soon after the new rule came out. the big issue was that only very recently did hans devices start shipping with sfi stickers. what were all the early adopters of hans devices supposed to do? they had the exact same hans, but no sfi sticker on it. solution, send it back for inspection and (re)certification. no idea what the process is.

68922


Marshall, not only that but, what is the life expectency of the hans before you replace them. If you have to replace helmets every 5 years seems to me you need to replace the hans also since they are made of the same materials?

[JamesB]

Originally posted by dj10@Dec 22 2005, 12:10 PM
Marshall, not only that but, what is the life expectency of the hans before you replace them. If you have to replace helmets every 5 years seems to me you need to replace the hans also since they are made of the same materials?

68970


Mainly the reason for replacing the helmet is that your sweat and wearing it compresses the impact absobtion matieral over time making it less effective (even SNELL published that.) The Shell itself does weather over time too, but its mostly the overall construction of the helmet that most are worried about.

For the hans I dont know, if you ask me I would likely just replace the straps every time I replaced a helmet. Its a small bit to pay just like for belts that ensures it will work when you need it.

But thats my view on any of the H&N out there so you need to plan to service it to ensure its working properly.

[leggwork]

I believe that the recommendation is to replace the Hans tethers every 3 years.

One thing that makes me wonder about mandating hans or other SFI 38.1 device is that you generally have to install posts into your helmet. Surely this voids the helmet warranty and likely the snell certification. On the FIA site, there is a "Technical List 29" that shows which helmets are approved for use with a hans. It is interesting that groups can mandate the hans but it is ok to have a non-compliant helmet.
bruce



Originally posted by JamesB@Dec 22 2005, 04:21 PM
Mainly the reason for replacing the helmet is that your sweat and wearing it compresses the impact absobtion matieral over time making it less effective (even SNELL published that.) The Shell itself does weather over time too, but its mostly the overall construction of the helmet that most are worried about.

For the hans I dont know, if you ask me I would likely just replace the straps every time I replaced a helmet. Its a small bit to pay just like for belts that ensures it will work when you need it.

But thats my view on any of the H&N out there so you need to plan to service it to ensure its working properly.

68972

[JamesB]

I have not read the owners manual for a HANS yet, so I didnt know they had that recommendation. I am however a sweaty person. Back when I was racing motocross and now going into club racing, I know that I am lucky to get 5 years out of a helmet even with a balaclava, so that was my basis.

[pgipson]

On helmets, it generally works out to every 10 years or so. Snell 95 helmets are still good this year even though Snell 05 helmets are available. I would expect that 05 helmets will be a requirement next year (along with an SFI approved H&N system?).

[mlytle]

Originally posted by pgipson@Dec 22 2005, 06:32 PM
On helmets, it generally works out to every 10 years or so. Snell 95 helmets are still good this year even though Snell 05 helmets are available. I would expect that 05 helmets will be a requirement next year (along with an SFI approved H&N system?).

68994

snell95 is only good until the end of 2005. snell00 is the oldest allowed helmet cert for 2006. (for bmwcca cr and scca)

i found that 4yrs was about the max use i got out of a helmet in active racing use. interior got, ah, worn. the chin strap started fraying. the foam definitely compressed a bit as it fit much looser.

[JamesB]

Actually per the GCR S95 is accepted untill 1/1/07. Probably due to the delayed release of the S05 requirements.



Effective 1/1/07, Snell SA95 helmets
will no longer be permitted (e.g. SA2000 minimum).

[pgipson]

Ya know, I had 2007 in my mind when I typed that drivel about helmets. It just came out "next year". See what happens when your 2006 season starts in October?

[JamesB]

yeah, meanwhile I dont even want to go move my car out of the hut tow it home and into the garage because its been 20 degrees out all week.

[dave parker]

Gentlemen
Hubbard Downing recommends that you replace the tethers for your HANS device every TWO years or whenever your are involved in a hard crash.

Hubbarrd Downing also recommends that you not leave your HANS device sitting out in direct sunlight. So don't leave your HANS and helmet sitting on top of your racecar.


cheers
"dangerous" dave parker

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by mlytle@Dec 22 2005, 05:22 PM
...i found that 4yrs was about the max use i got out of a helmet in active racing use. interior got, ah, worn. the chin strap started fraying. the foam definitely compressed a bit as it fit much looser.

69017
We were chatting with several helmet folks at PRI and confirmed that, industry wide, about 25% of racers purchase a new helmet every year, so the 4 year replacement cycle is average.

[mlytle]

Originally posted by gsbaker@Dec 29 2005, 11:52 PM
We were chatting with several helmet folks at PRI and confirmed that, industry wide, about 25% of racers purchase a new helmet every year, so the 4 year replacement cycle is average.

69531


whoooo hoooo! i am average!!! :)

[JamesB]

I am really not surprised what you learned from PRI. My last helmet was just starting to show wear from AX and track days and I had the helmet for 4 years, it was a SA95 and I figured if I am going to start club I might as well get a new helmet with a SA2000 rating just because.

If mine lasts 5 years I would be surprised. At the WDCR fall school it was pretty chilly and I was still soaked in sweat ever every session. I can only think of how much I will sweat come summer.

[leggwork]

get yourself a nomex head sock/balaclava - it helps keep the helmet dry.
bruce


Originally posted by JamesB@Dec 30 2005, 07:51 PM
I am really not surprised what you learned from PRI. My last helmet was just starting to show wear from AX and track days and I had the helmet for 4 years, it was a SA95 and I figured if I am going to start club I might as well get a new helmet with a SA2000 rating just because.

If mine lasts 5 years I would be surprised. At the WDCR fall school it was pretty chilly and I was still soaked in sweat ever every session. I can only think of how much I will sweat come summer.

69606

[JamesB]

I already have one due to facial hair I dont plan to shave off. And still not only did I wring out sweat from the balaclava but the helmet was damp too.

[gsbaker]

The National Safety Steward for BMWCCA Club Racing is a HANS dealer.

[JamesB]

so.....they didnt require HANS but SFI approved gear. he didnt just exclude your company. So please drop the damn conspiricy crap. Get SFI approved and then you can even be seen at pro events!!!

[gsbaker]

It would be irresponsible to produce an inferior design.

[JamesB]

Well, then suck it up. It's no conspricy if you refuse to desing your product to pass SFI cerfication. Thus R3 and Hans gain the upper hand. I don't care who wrote the rule, I look at test results and cerfications. Even if you blow them out of the water it doesnt matter if SFI wont let you slap their cert on it.

I am not surprised that BMWCCA would side with a standardized testing cerfication, its a solid CYA. Your not the only company left out, but I dont see them running around crying black ops and kickbacks.

[gsbaker]

Well, then suck it up. It's no conspricy[sic] if you refuse to desing[sic] your product to pass SFI cerfication.[/b]

Exactly. There is no conspiracy.

Relax, James. SFI says we should design a product in a certain fashion, regardless of performance, while the data prove that SFI is wrong, so we won't do it. End of story.

And the CYA is anything but solid when BMWCCA has to explain this to a jury.

[JamesB]

Only if the lawyer can prove negligence on the sanctioning body failed policing to ensure the H&N that failed did not have current SFI certification. It would take a pretty crafty lawyer, negiligence and a host of other issues to poke a hole in their cerfication requirement.

Oh and I am relaxed, I am just tired of the conspiricy theorists running around here crying about something they have a choice to effect.

If you feel the SFI requirements don't save lives, prove it, and use the proof to petition a change.

[leggwork]

Greg,
Are there any moves afoot to update the 38.1 spec?
thanks,
bruce




It would be irresponsible to produce an inferior design.
[/b]

[gsbaker]

Greg,
Are there any moves afoot to update the 38.1 spec?
thanks,
bruce
[/b]
Not to our knowledge. The spec may be reviewed at the annual meeting.



Only if the lawyer can prove negligence on the sanctioning body failed policing to ensure the H&N that failed did not have current SFI certification. It would take a pretty crafty lawyer, negiligence and a host of other issues to poke a hole in their cerfication requirement....[/b]
As a veteran of over 100 product liability cases I can tell you with absolute certainty that, under the right circumstances, taking down the BMWCCA and its officers would be like shooting fish in a barrel for the estate of a deceased driver. The plaintiffs will throw in conspiracy and racketeering as a matter of course.

[leggwork]

well, if somebody knowledgable like you isn't pushing for a change, it won't happen, will it? Isn't this pretty important to your business (if all amateur sanctioning bodies follow BMWCR)?
cheers,
bruce




QUOTE(leggwork @ Feb 3 2006, 01:16 PM)

Greg,
Are there any moves afoot to update the 38.1 spec?
thanks,
bruce


Not to our knowledge. The spec may be reviewed at the annual meeting.

[/b]

[gsbaker]

Bruce,

We have been pushing since December of 2002, nearly two years before the current spec came out. Specifically, we recommended a graduated measure of head load reduction rather than a pass/fail limit.

BMWCCA is the only amateur body to mandate anything--yet to take effect--and so far no others have followed. We doubt any will.

This is a self-correcting phenomenon. People will eventually "get it". The only question is when and at what cost.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

[JamesB]

Well wouldn't liability become much lower by requiring that the safety product chosen by that driver must be certified by a recognized organization. Rather then if they where to just require an H&N device and the product chosen by that driver turned out to be ineffective then sanctioning body will be held accountable for not assuring that the H&N device was held to a certain set standard? Is that not what SFI cerfication is about? Adhearance to a set standard so you dont have to spell it out in your rules? If you expect me to think otherwise its an uphill battle all the way for you.


However, if noone is actively proving your claim that current requirements are ineffective in saving lives and needs to be changed. Then if the product you support so wholeheartedly is superior to the current certified designs out there, I say one thing. Why not step up and show us the 38.1 sled test numbers, not your personal test. Prove that the product really does exceed the 38.1 standard. With that data ontop of the 30 degree offset data, would not SFI listen to fact and reason rather then coersion and conspiricy accusations?

[gsbaker]

James,

I agree with what you are saying. There are only two rather fine points that are causing the problem:

1) Of course it only makes sense for sanctioning bodies to eventually adopt a standard. They do it for belts, suits, roll cages, etc., why not H&N restraints? The fine point in this regard is that SFI Spec 38.1 includes specific design criteria that have trapped drivers in burning cars and that have nothing to do with head injuries. If bodies want to mandate a product certified by the manufacturer to meet/exceed SFI 38.1 performance specs, fine, we already do that. But, if they want the SFI sticker on the product they are going to be dealing only with products that let the belts slip off and that trap drivers in cars. See the problem?


Why not step up and show us the 38.1 sled test numbers, not your personal test. Prove that the product really does exceed the 38.1 standard.[/b]
There is no such thing as a "personal test". All of our testing at Delphi has been to the SFI 38.1 protocol, and the numbers have been published here and provided to headrestraint.org.


...would not SFI listen to fact and reason...[/b]
2) No, they won't. That's the whole point. They are stuck with a disproven old wives' tale left over from the last millennium with this single point nonsense. If they don't wake up soon they are going to BBQ someone. And that's where the liability increases when a sanctioning body mandates an SFI sticker.

[JamesB]

Well untill you can show me proven fact from pro or other racing that the current SFI approved designs (notice there is more then one??) are in fact failing to work as designed to the specs then I dont believe you. The sled test is done without a proper seat which means no bolsters or harness guides and I find that your claim utterly inconclusive.

Fact is fact, you dont meet all SFI 38.1 requirements, you know everyone is going to adopt SFI/FIA approved devices, so you choose to cry about it.

If you can't change the body, maybe its because the body has no proof that change is needed. I have seen man pro wrecks in the last two years all of then requiring a 38.1 device and you would figure if the belts where slipping off these devices drivers would be speaking up.

Well all I have seen is you posting data of a 30 degree offset test, thats not the 38.1 test unless I missed a thread. The ISAAC site only shows offset data too, so there is no way to directly compare your results to the 38.1 competition.

[gsbaker]

Whatever you say, James.

[JamesB]

Well rather then explaining to me where your 38.1 sled data was you blew me off. So as much as I like your product philosophy, untill I am sure it wont be a waste of money I cannot invest in it when SCCA decides to require SFI 38.1 devices. This does not mean I will go out and buy a HANS, there are competition I am looking into, and will chose when I feel I have read what I need.