Recent news on the safety front

[gsbaker]

http://www.racingsafetyinstitute.org/

Very long story short, this was initiated by sanctioning bodies' desire for an alternative to FIA and SFI. It is not a replacement, just a transparent alternative. There is much interest on the part of high performance manufacturers to participate, so one would expect to see more information in the future.

Have a great weekend.

[Knestis]

Outstanding - and long overdue. An organization and system that really put drivers' safety first, rather than making them part of a trade association marketing plan.

K

[lateapex911]

Great idea and concept. I've been thinking about it for a few days...how can we give it teeth?

[Knestis]

Tell your area directors that you have more confidence in this kind of system than in the SFI scam. Repeatedly. If they have an option that they can endorse, that makes them more popular with the membership, they will get behind it.

K

[gsbaker]

Tell your area directors that you have more confidence in this kind of system than in the SFI scam. Repeatedly. If they have an option that they can endorse, that makes them more popular with the membership, they will get behind it.

K
[/b]

Absolutely. This has been in the works for some time, and the number one factor in support of the concept was the reaction among sanctioning bodies. They like transparent, they like performance-vs-spec and they like the minimization of conflict of interest. Without exception, organizations queried on this welcomed an alternative to SFI.

Manufacturers are on board, and there will probably be more info posted in the near future.

The best way to give it teeth, Jake, would be for a member to propose to the BOD that the RSI sticker be accepted with the same weight as a FIA or SFI sticker. If done now, it could be voted on in time for next season.

[Eagle7]

I'm a little confused. Doesn't the RSI sticker simply say that the product has been tested and that the results are public? No assurance of any level of performance? How would SCCA use that as a safety criterion? I see the value for the shopper, but not for the sanctioning body.

[gsbaker]

I'm a little confused. Doesn't the RSI sticker simply say that the product has been tested and that the results are public? No assurance of any level of performance?
[/b]

Great point, Marty, but minimum performance is either not a criteria for an SFI or FIA sticker (head and neck restraints), or the minimum is so low that everyone passes (harnesses). Besides, SFI does not "certify" anything. The label simply says the manufacturer certifies the product to meet the spec, which is a quality assurance spec.

There is nothing preventing a pass/fail sticker also, solely for the benefit of tech inspectors, for those products where "standards" exist.

Edit: It has been suggested that the RSI label could be authorized for those products that meet a minimum, recognized standard where it exists. For products where there is no standard, the label could be used for any product having performance data posted. Thoughts on that?