Lots of POV spread across a lot of existing posts, but maybe we can tie it together. (and hopefully I get the poll right the first time!!)
Printable View
Lots of POV spread across a lot of existing posts, but maybe we can tie it together. (and hopefully I get the poll right the first time!!)
I'd suggest 2 choices regarding SFI/FIA Approval:
SFI/FIA Approval for personal reasons
SFI/FIA Approval to meet club rules
I can't add that, maybe webmaster can
Done. there are two responses to the "club reasons" now, that were originally for the non distinct choice. Post here if those choices are no longer valid, and i will modify accordingly.
Thanks for starting this, Jim. It's interesting in that it confirms our belief that drivers are looking for protection first and value second.
(I'm not voting, BTW.)
I voted SFI for club reasons but that was not a factor at the tme of my purchase.
The recent changes will influence my future purchases as I fear SFI certification may be required by additional sanctioning bodies.
First and foremost for me is performance or 'adequacy of protection'.
Also, considering the current rule makers lemming tendancies, I checked SFI for club reasons.
Does anyone know how the HANS device performs with the new Schroth 7/9 point belts? This setup is supposed to be much better for keeping the HANS in place during a shunt. Useless setup with the ISAAC
Wasn't sure which HNR thread to post this in, but I figured this one might be the best.
I know the downside to the Hans is the whole side impact aspect of protection, but does anyone know how much side protection a fully bolstered seat offers?
For example I have the sparco circuit and the whole reason I got it was because of the head bolsters(and cause I got a steal on it). Will wearing a Hans in that type of seat offer, the same type of side protection as say wearing the Isaac in a non bolstered seat or in the same seat?
Not exactly. Side nets, however, have been tested and will reduce neck tension by over 50%. On the downside, nets will increase neck compression but not to the point of injury--unless mounted too high. (SAE paper #2004-01-3513.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandro
Given that seat bolsters and side nets are similar concepts for achieving the same end, it would be reasonable to assume similar results.
Excellent question, and one that remains unanswered--at least for now.Quote:
For example I have the sparco circuit and the whole reason I got it was because of the head bolsters(and cause I got a steal on it). Will wearing a Hans in that type of seat offer, the same type of side protection as say wearing the Isaac in a non bolstered seat or in the same seat?
Perhaps, but there's the flipside...even IF the protection were the same, the window size shrinks significantly, and it's not unlikely that in a major incident of the type you are discussing, doors might not work.
One recent rule change the ITAC made to the ITCS was to allow the removal of the window support found on some cars that separates the main from the "vent" window, to improve ease of egress, as we are seeing more and more people wearing Hans devices, then installing seats with side head bolsters to make up for the lateral weakness of the HANS. It seemed like it was getting to be a step forward in safety, but a step backward in safety. Hopefully the new allowance will partially mitigate the backwards part.
Good to hear about the side vent window. That is something I have actually been meaning to write in about because even without a Hans I can barely make it out the window, due to the vent window.
Has that already been approved or is it awaiting approval?
I plan on getting a Hans either way, I was thinking the same concept just wondering if anyone knew if a test with that idea had ever been done.(didn't mean to come off as bashing on the Hans I think it is an excellent HNR)