Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 63

Thread: Hans or Isaac?

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Orlando, FL, USA
    Posts
    2,322

    Default

    Thanks Gregg. Let me know if this question is out of bounds. So are you anticipating that SFI won't certify the Isaac or have you already submitted and been rejected?[/b]
    We have been told by SFI that our design is not "certifiable", so we have not submitted it.

    Oh, I did send the following letter to the CRB:...[/b]
    Good letter. Thank you. We greatly appreciate it.
    Gregg Baker, P.E.
    Isaac, LLC
    http://www.isaacdirect.com

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    cromwell ct
    Posts
    746

    Default

    Great letter Scott however you plagarized parts of my letter without permission.....(lol)!!

    Thanks for the compliment....and let's keep up the good work on this.

    ISAAC users of the world unite!!

    R
    Rob Breault
    BMW 328is #36
    2008 Driving Impressions Pro-ITA Champion
    2008 NARRC DP Champion
    2009 NARRC ITR Champion
    2009 Team DI Pro-ITR Champion

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    NNJR
    Posts
    514

    Default

    First I want to premise by saying I would support language to this effect.
    "The use of a head and neck restraint device is highly recommended. All head and neck restraint devices must be certified by their manufacturer to meet or exceed the minimum performance requirements of SFI Specification 38.1."[/b]
    I think it is highly likely that there are licensing issues with manufacturers making that representation without actually having the license to do so:

    1.3 Use of the "This Manufacturer Certifies That This Product Meets SFI Specification 38.1" logo/designation, the authorized artwork style, or conventional lettering by a manufacturer, on a subject product, is intended only to indicate that the manufacturer of the product has represented that they have submitted the product to the recommended tests, with positive results, in compliance with the standards established herein.[/b]
    10.0 CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE
    Upon demonstration of successful compliance with all the requirements of the specification and the self-certification program and upon entering the licensing agreement with SFI, the manufacturer may advertise, present and offer the Head and Neck Restraint System for sale with the representation that their product meets the SFI Specification 38.1.[/b]
    14.0 STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS
    Testing procedures and/or standards contained in this specification are intended for use only as a guide in determining compliance with the minimum performance requirements as defined herein. The granting and assignment of the "This Manufacturer Certifies That This Product Meets SFI Specification 38.1" logo/designation is in no way an endorsement or certification of product performance or reliability by SFI. SFI, its officers, directors and/or members assume no responsibility, legal or otherwise, for failure or malfunctions of a product under this program.[/b]
    I suspect the text of the logo is part of the subject of what I am sure is a registered trademark. This is all extremely problematic for a manufacturer to make the representation in the proposal you wrote.

    "The use of a head and neck restraint device is highly recommended. Only head and neck restraint devices that have successfully passed all the impact performance tests of SFI Specification 38.1. may be used."

    I know some will say it is semantics - but semantics matter in the arena of law and licensing.

    Even then the SCCA as an SFI member may not even be able to provide such a work around as part of their membership.

    I think efforts to correct 38.1 would be better served if the rule is going to make any reference to it all.





    Great letter Scott however you plagarized parts of my letter without permission.....(lol)!!
    [/b]
    Falls under fair use, tough! :P
    Ed.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Margaritaville
    Posts
    641

    Default

    Great letter Scott however you plagarized parts of my letter without permission.....(lol)!!
    Thanks for the compliment....and let's keep up the good work on this.
    R
    [/b]
    Hey Doc, I used your original letter as a basis for mine as well. Different words, but easily comparable.
    I copied the Insurance and Medical folks as well as an Executive Steward. Got good feedback from the Stew who was in complete agreement. This needs to be fixed.
    Steve Linn | Fins Up Racing | #6 ITA Sentra SE-R | www.indyscca.org

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Orlando, FL, USA
    Posts
    2,322

    Default

    It's important to keep in mind that there have been many personnel changes within the SCCA recently, and we suspect that some of what prompted the FasTrack piece is poor communication. The subject has been discussed and a general direction was coming together, but with new folks in new places there is some rebooting going on, so to speak. Anyone who has worked in a large organization knows that getting everyone on the same page telling the same story can be challenging.

    Decision makers in the SCCA, and other bodies, "get it". They know what is happening and they want to do the right thing by the members while keeping their insurance carriers happy. One problem is that home-made H&N restraints are showing up at the track, and the Club fears that the use of an untested design could be dangerous. So please, don't duct tape your helmet to the roll cage. It just make matters worse.

    It's not as bad as it looks, although I must admit the continuous stream of announcements inconsistent with the GCR looks stunningly messy.

    We want to thank everyone for the letters they have written to the Club. Please keep them upbeat; they have a difficult job.
    Gregg Baker, P.E.
    Isaac, LLC
    http://www.isaacdirect.com

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    2,555

    Default

    Even then the SCCA as an SFI member may not even be able to provide such a work around as part of their membership.
    [/b]
    Is the SCCA a member of SFI? As a non-manufacturer, I would imagine not.
    George Roffe
    Houston, TX
    84 944 ITS car under construction
    92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
    http://www.nissport.com

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    NNJR
    Posts
    514

    Default

    Is the SCCA a member of SFI? As a non-manufacturer, I would imagine not.
    [/b]
    Yes the SCCA is a member sanctioning body. I think you have to be in order to use their standard in the sanctioning body rules.

    http://www.sfifoundation.com/sancbody.html

    The following sanctioning bodies are members of the SFI Foundation, Inc. Each organization listed here utilizes SFI Specifications within its rulebook. In addition to setting minimum performance standards for the industry, SFI also provides a technical and chassis inspector certification program that is used by some of the organizations.[/b]
    Ed.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    1,225

    Default

    We have been told by SFI that our design is not "certifiable", so we have not submitted it.
    [/b]
    Interesting choice of words as a response from a group (SFI) that may very well be "certifiable" in there own right! :119:



    edit=clarity
    Chris Wire
    Team Wire Racing ITS #35

    www.themotorsportshour.com
    "Road Racing on the Radio"
    WPRK 91.5 FM
    wprkdj.org

    "Tolerance is the last virtue of a degenerating society" - Unknown


  9. #49
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    1,893

    Default

    Good discussion.

    Going all the way back to the original post, I chose the Isaac. I felt it offered the most comprehensive protection in the widest range of possible incidents.

    If I were purchasing today I would choose a HANS, since rightly or wrongly, it is the only 'high performance' H&N device that I expect to be legal next year.

    I really do hope that there is a solution available for current Isaac users by mid year.
    Chris Schaafsma
    Golf 2 HProd

    AMT Racing Engines - DIYAutoTune.com

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    cromwell ct
    Posts
    746

    Default

    Good discussion.


    I really do hope that there is a solution available for current Isaac users by mid year.
    [/b]
    Retro fit the HANS with the ISAAC viscoelastic dampers instead of the webbing......hhmmm Greg, collaborative effort?

    Dibs on the royalties!!

    R
    Rob Breault
    BMW 328is #36
    2008 Driving Impressions Pro-ITA Champion
    2008 NARRC DP Champion
    2009 NARRC ITR Champion
    2009 Team DI Pro-ITR Champion

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Clermont,Fl....USA
    Posts
    110

    Default

    Pleeze excuse me for saying this, but I don't understand the term used for the SCCA as "They"...I thought "We" are the SCCA.......or do we pay dues for the bennefit of "THEM"......off subject I guess, but while keeping up on this post I keep feeling it is us against them...

    David
    cool but sunny Fla. today

  12. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Flagtown, NJ USA
    Posts
    6,334

    Default

    If this gets approved codified in the GCR, I want to see race officials make people remove their ISSAC. They have no idea how ugly this will get.

  13. #53
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    NNJR
    Posts
    514

    Default

    Pleeze excuse me for saying this, but I don't understand the term used for the SCCA as "They"...I thought "We" are the SCCA.......or do we pay dues for the bennefit of "THEM"......off subject I guess, but while keeping up on this post I keep feeling it is us against them...

    David
    cool but sunny Fla. today
    [/b]
    Perhaps there are days when some aren't feeling the included and represented feelings of club membership based on leadership or rule making actions.

    The realities of a club this size which is often more a deifinition and representation of a finite leadership group can easily result in a member (particularly one that is of a perceived minority or unrepresented view) at any given time utilizing correctly or not the exclusive 'they' rather than the inclusive 'we' in terms of the club.

    Only an observation, not a conclusion or judgment.
    Ed.

  14. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Wauwatosa, WI, USA
    Posts
    2,658

    Default

    ***Dibs on the royalties!!***

    Sorry Rob, I got dibs on this a year ago.
    Have Fun ; )
    David Dewhurst
    CenDiv Milwaukee Region
    Spec Miata #14

  15. #55
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Warren, Ohio USA
    Posts
    110

    Default

    According to a small blurb at the bottom of page 17 in the April SportsCar, there are three devices approved at this time. The HANs and the Hutchens II and R3.
    Carl

  16. #56
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    2,555

    Default

    Yes the SCCA is a member sanctioning body. I think you have to be in order to use their standard in the sanctioning body rules.

    http://www.sfifoundation.com/sancbody.html
    [/b]
    Thanks for the info Ed. I never knew that.
    George Roffe
    Houston, TX
    84 944 ITS car under construction
    92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
    http://www.nissport.com

  17. #57
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    1,893

    Default

    Pleeze excuse me for saying this, but I don't understand the term used for the SCCA as "They"...I thought "We" are the SCCA.......or do we pay dues for the bennefit of "THEM"......off subject I guess, but while keeping up on this post I keep feeling it is us against them...

    David
    cool but sunny Fla. today
    [/b]
    I think it is pretty natural that when someone makes a decision that you did not make, and do not agree with that you refer to the decision makers as 'they', as opposed to 'we' that don't feel it was a wise one.

    Chris Schaafsma
    Golf 2 HProd

    AMT Racing Engines - DIYAutoTune.com

  18. #58
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Wauwatosa, WI, USA
    Posts
    2,658

    Default

    George, WKA ia also a member.

    Here is a little bit of news from the May, 2006 Circle Track mag.

    Safety Alliance:

    Simpson Performance Products is now an authorized distributor and factory trained installer for the HANS Device. The cooperative effort presents a wider platform for the head-and-neck restraint. As part of the effort, the "Simpson Safe Racer Program" will offer extended payment terms for the purchase of a HANS Device.

    Extended payment terms is saying a lot.......................

    Have Fun ; )
    David Dewhurst
    CenDiv Milwaukee Region
    Spec Miata #14

  19. #59
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Apex, NC, USA
    Posts
    192

    Default

    Great letter Scott however you plagarized parts of my letter without permission.....(lol)!!

    Thanks for the compliment....and let's keep up the good work on this.

    ISAAC users of the world unite!!

    R
    [/b]
    ARG Doc!! I almost plagarized the whole thing! Sorry about leaving out the "shout out" and thanks for appending your letter -- it's what prompted me to send mine in.
    Scott Gallimore
    worker, nat comp license, IT-7 driver,
    North Carolina Region Board of Directors, Member at Large

  20. #60
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,252

    Default

    Scott, excellent letter. You can add my name to it if you wish:

    Jeff Young
    NCR 55
    Member No. 304971

    David, I run an open ITS car. While I fully agree the Isaac should be allowed, jsut one point of clarification. The arm restraints attach to the cam lock -- basically they are pinned in by one of the belts. They release with a single twist of the camlock harness as well.

    Jeff
    NC Region
    1980 ITS Triumph TR8

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •