Don't buy a harness before December 7th.

[gsbaker]

That's when a "paper" titled "Determination of the Pressure Distribution Beneath Two- and Three-Inch Wide Racing Safety Belts" will be presented at the biannual SAE Motorsports Engineering Conference & Exposition.

This is an "oral only" paper, meaning that the author is not submitting a formal paper for publication and distribution. There can be several reasons for this, but since the author is John Melvin, an active researcher, there is a good chance he just walked out of the lab and cannot put together a paper by Monday's submission deadline.

Given the timing, this work may not affect the 2007 season--or any other season for that matter--but if you do not need belts now, it may pay to wait.

As usual, there are some excellent topics on the docket. The schedule of technical sessions can be found here:
http://www.sae.org/servlets/techSession?EV...=SESSION_MATRIX (http://www.sae.org/servlets/techSession?EVT_NAME=MSEC&GROUP_CD=SPEC&SCHED_NUM=144719&REQUEST_TYPE=SESSION_MATRIX)

FYI.

[Eagle7]

The cynic in me says he will find that 2" shoulder belts are superior to 3".

[gsbaker]

John is a well-respected researcher. 2" belts have been used in the military for decades, and I hear they are allowed in NASCAR so I wouldn't be surprised to see them get the thumbs up.

<strike>I&#39;m sure any videos of the 2" belts actually staying on a HANS device during the SFI offset test would be purely coincidental.</strike>

[gprodracer]

OK Gregg,

Talk to me like the 3rd grader that I am. Are you saying that we all may have to change to 2" belts for the 2007 season based on what this report says? Or will we be allowed to use the 3" ones until they expire?
While we are on the belt question, I have heard that 6 point attachments will be the next thing required, but I haven&#39;t heard when this will take place (or if it is just "recommended" for now).
And finally, I need to get a H&N system in my budget for next year. My plan is for an ISSAC, but from what I can understand, the last "battle" was won, but the "war" to get the SFI wording out of the rule has only been postponed. How long has it been postponed for? A month, 6 months, or a year?
What has been going on with this debate since we "won" last month, and what can we do to finally put this siliness to an end? I&#39;m going a hell of alot faster since switching to Prod, and I don&#39;t want to make an expensive investment which could be banned before it gets shipped to me

So....Gregg, and any "powers that be", any of the latest info on the direction of these issues is going would be appreciated.

Thanks for listening!

Mark

[dickita15]

mark i have a hunch that someone may try to test the one release clause at the runoffs next week. if so we should be hearing news of the next battle soon.

[gprodracer]

Thanks Dick,

From all of us who keep up on the rule changes here, please keep us posted!
:023:

Mark

[tom_sprecher]

Why bother with 2" belts? Whats the advantage of 2" vs. 3"?

[gsbaker]

Mark,

Dick has a good point. Let&#39;s wait until next weekend and see if the political factor comes into play with the CRB trying to sidestep the BoD.

Regarding SFI, it is my personal opinion that the 38.1 spec will change. The single-point release clause that almost turned Joey Hand into toast on national TV is what most worries sanctioning bodies, but the amateur crowd doesn&#39;t like the idea of forcing members to drop a grand for something that passes a 70G impact test. Since SFI specs are written by the manufacturers, however, don&#39;t expect a stampede to let Isaac in.

Also, more H&N restraint information will be released in conjunction with the SAE conference and many sanctioning bodies are waiting for this info before altering their H&N policies. I have a suspicion that the net effect will be favorable toward Isaac systems. Just a wild guess.

Thanks for your support by the way. It is much appreciated since members such as yourself can influence SFI via their organizations.


Tom,

First, I am not a belt guy, so except for a sliver of aerospace-related info, I can only offer second-hand observations regarding motorsports. As I understand it, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with 2" belts and, in fact, a case can be made that they are superior to 3" as lap belts (it goes to the shape of the iliac crest, the front portion of the pelvis). Aside from that, both function well.

The more interesting side of the story is the commercial aspect. Domestic aerospace manufacturers and foreign motorsports manufactures offer 2" belting (some foreign motorsports mfgrs have 3", yes) so would like to see the SFI spec allow them in general. I&#39;ll bet an important factor here is HANS, and we all know why--if it works better with 2" belts, there&#39;d better be some 2" belts on the market or their sales will tank. The question then becomes, when will they recall the older "wingless" HANS?, but that&#39;s a little OT.

(We have supplied Isaac systems for 2" belts. We simply use the 2" belt connector from the Quartermidget model.)

In the net, I can&#39;t see any of this sufficiently impressing organizations that they would require a switch any time soon, if ever.

[tom91ita]

what has become of this?

i have trouble accessing the 2007 GCR when searching for restraint, etc.

is this in the new GCR?

tia, tom

[gsbaker]

Tom,

We&#39;ve heard nothing new and, personally, I haven&#39;t looked for it in the GCR. Next week&#39;s presentation is on recent research and I doubt sanctioning bodies would invoke a change for 2007 at this late date, but you never know. They may say it&#39;s okay to use 2" belts in any setting.

[Domino]

This past season I went from a 6 point system with 3" lap belts to a 2" lap belt. Night and day difference in comfort. It fits much better on the crests of the hip.

It&#39;s the best harness system I&#39;ve ever used and worth the few extra $

http://english.schroth.com/racing/produktd...?id=5&id_kat1=1 (http://english.schroth.com/racing/produktdetail.php?id=5&id_kat1=1)