Fire Suits

[Greg Amy]

According to the latest Fastrack, as of 11/01/07 (yes, today), the following rule is in effect:

Effective 11/1/07: Change section 9.3.19.A as follows:
Driving suits that effectively cover the body from the neck to the ankles and wrists. One piece suits are highly recommended. All suits shall bear an SFI 3.2A/1 or higher certification label or FIA 8856-2000 homologation. Underwear of fire resistant material shall be used except with suits carrying FIA standard 8856-2000 or
SFI 3-2A/5 or higher (e.g., /10, /15, /20) Certification Patch.

This means that unless your driving suit carries one of these certs on the suit (i.e., you must have the SFI patch and/or the FIA embroidery with this cert as a minimum) your suit is no longer legal to use in SCCA.

Thoughts?

Frankly, I think this is an abomination. I know of many good firesuits perfectly capable of providing adequate fire protection, but its maker has not bowed to the demands of the almighty SFI. Plain and simple, it looks like SCCA (and/or its legal team) is sliding in bed with a manufacturer's organization.

I cringe when I think of working Tech in '08. We're going to lose a lot of good people when they show up at their first event (especially their first schools) with a suit that doesn't meet SCCA's new "standards". I'm going to have to look these prior-to-this-moment-excited drivers and tell them they have to go home.

This is not a good thing. - GA

[dickita15]

I cringe when I think of working Tech in '08. We're going to lose a lot of good people when they show up at their first event (especially their first schools) with a suit that doesn't meet SCCA's new "standards". I'm going to have to look these prior-to-this-moment-excited drivers and tell them they have to go home.

This is not a good thing. - GA
[/b]

Boy that is exactly what I have been thinking. While I admit I have seen some suits with no documentation and no way to know how good they are this is going to really suck in tech.
I think it will be a bigger problem at regionals than at schools. I have seen plenty of guys that have no idea of rule changes happening when they have been pending for a couple of years never mind when the first mention is this late.
Hey Greg want to invest in a trackside suit dealership?

[BlueStreak]

I think there is going to be a run on counterfeit patches...

Seriously speaking, this may have been driven by insurance underwriters. I, for one, would like to know if that is the case.

If you have to prove the capabilities of your suit to the tech inspector, and it had nothing identifying the material as one of the materials approved under previous rule, and it had no patch, how is tech to know that it is good enough? I'd say what suit you wear is really none of the club's business, but since we all share the same insurance policy, if someone has $$$$ in medical bills paid by our policy because the suit they were wearing wasn't enough, rates go up, entry fees go up, so it does become some of my business.

Fact is, as long as we have lawyers, this slippery slope will continue to get steeper. The real pain will come when only one organization is respected for certification, whether that be FIA or SFI or ???, and the fix will be in as certification costs will be under a monopoly.

There will come a day when HANS is mandatory as well, for the same reasons: lawyers, insurance companies, and medical bills.

I'm still furious about the harness dating as well. I've got a harness in my car that I used SEVEN times that will be going to some autocrosser this winter because it is now a safety hazard for road racing!

Safety requirements are extremely difficult to get right. Heck, we have states where seatbelts are mandatory and motorcycle helmets are not. I can see logical arguments on both sides of these issues, but can't for the life of me figure out how the same state can logically apply both arguments.

[tom91ita]

ed,

you got to use your belts 7 times? i have given some away because i never used them.

we both need to get out more!

Just went and looked at my suit. it is a SFI 3-2A/5. could not remember. i bought it in circa 1991-2 for my first driver's school.

i remember specifically that i wanted to have a rating that would not require the long undies.

for once luck vs. planning wins out for me.

is this suit rule another attempt to cycle everyone into newer equipment or to have them go to NASA where the rules are not so tight? i really do not understand that if there are only a couple of insurance games in town for this, that the requirements can be so different.

there is a local car club (furrin group) that does autocrosses. they allow riders (that have signed teh waiver and are over 18) whereas SCCA does not. they use the same ins. co. as scca and scca cites insurance for not having riders.

and happy thanksgiving to every one! leaving in a few minutes for another annual attempt at assuring my suit does not fit next year.

tom

[924Guy]

I can see some sense and logic behind the rule change... possibly. But I definitely would like to see it expressly spelled out just what has driven this change - we shouldn't have to guess.

Another item - referenced in the other thread, it sounds as if the use of CarbonX is not interchangeable with Nomex? News to me - I have been slowly buying up some, as I do like the product... going to have to go back and check I guess the new GCR... not required that I use it, but I prefer having more than the bare minimum of protection!

[Knestis]

I just can't muster the strength to explain how pissed off I am about this.

K

[JeffYoung]

Does anyone have any idea why this was done??

[mbuskuhl]

... or to have them go to NASA where the rules are not so tight?

tom
[/b]

What NASA rules are "not so tight"?

NASA CCR "A driver is required to wear a suit that covers his or her entire body except for hands, feet, and head. Driving suits shall be one piece carrying an SFI 3.2A/1 rating or higher (3.2A/5, 3.2A/10, 3.2A/15, or 3.2A/20) or FIA 8856-2000."

Their underwear, helmet, socks, gloves, shoes rules are also the same.

NASA rules are MORE STRINGENT in my opinion. For safety, they REQUIRE a right side net or seat bolster (effective July 1, 2007) and as it stands now, January 1, 2008 will require a SFI approved head and neck restraint system (got pushed back from July 1, 2007).

http://www.nasaproracing.com/rules/ccr.pdf

[BlueStreak]

ed,

you got to use your belts 7 times? i have given some away because i never used them.

we both need to get out more!

[/b]

AGREED!

and happy thanksgiving to every one! leaving in a few minutes for another annual attempt at assuring my suit does not fit next year.

tom
[/b]

THAT was funny..........is this why I keep outgrowing suits??????

[vr6guy]

So let me get this straight.... I cant use my 3 layer omp suit, but I can go into my fathers closet and use his 2 layer suit, (because of its sfi rating meets standards) THAT WAS PURCHASED IN 1984!!!??? oh yeah I bought mine in 2001.... If this makes any "logical" sense to anyone here, in a realm of reality that isnt completely screwed up, please explain!?

the scca Hokey Pokey

take your right foot in
take your right foot out
take your right foot in
and take your shotgun out
you pull the trigger and shoot your foot right off
thats what the scca's about!!!!

Ive seen a monkey ride a bike, even a squirrel water ski!!! It would amaze me if scca makes it another ten years


"I wanna go fast"

Marc Rider
NER

[tom91ita]

What NASA rules are "not so tight"?

NASA CCR "A driver is required to wear a suit that covers his or her entire body except for hands, feet, and head. Driving suits shall be one piece carrying an SFI 3.2A/1 rating or higher (3.2A/5, 3.2A/10, 3.2A/15, or 3.2A/20) or FIA 8856-2000."

Their underwear, helmet, socks, gloves, shoes rules are also the same.

NASA rules are MORE STRINGENT in my opinion. For safety, they REQUIRE a right side net or seat bolster (effective July 1, 2007) and as it stands now, January 1, 2008 will require a SFI approved head and neck restraint system (got pushed back from July 1, 2007).

http://www.nasaproracing.com/rules/ccr.pdf
[/b]

you are right. bad example with regards to the firesuits and misc. gear. i mean rules in general. and it may just be my perception based on what i have seen with scca events and nasa events.
<blockquote>having half of track be hot and half "cold" so that after the checker, cars and trucks can cross the track from the infield while cars are on the cool-down as opposed to waiting for the track to be completely clear of race-cars.</blockquote>
<blockquote>fewer corner workers to operate flags and fire bottles</blockquote>
<blockquote>ballast bolted to the main hoops of roll cages</blockquote>
my apologies.

tom

[vr6guy]

A little info I found on the net.... very interesting
FIA

The European recognized FIA conducts their own testing and is similar to it&#39;s American equivalent: SFI. The FIA grades only on one level, which is a higher standard than most U.S. race sanctioning organizations require a pass or fail. The FIA minimum requirement equates to just slightly below a SFI grade 10 fabric. These suits are almost equal to an SFI 3.2A/10-38 rated suit ( almost 19 seconds of protection without underwear!) however, for import reasons there is no recognized SFI rating number that falls in-between a 5-19 suit and a 10-38 suit.

So, what this all means is: any FIA approved suit will carry the label stating that the suit complies to their standards in Europe. Additionally, for the U.S. market, because the SFI rating numbers cannot be "rounded up", the suit will also carry the more recognized "lower" SFI rating label for legal reasons, even though the suit meets or exceeds the much stricter FIA demands.

That tells me my suit is just fine........ this should be looked at by all!!!

Its a no brainer, my suit exceeds the minimum requirements

[spnkzss]

I don&#39;t remember seeing anything about this prior to this coming out. That is very bothersome. I see it as a precursor to a mandatory SFI H&N restraint.

I think the least they could have done was said effective 1/1/09.

[spdmonkey]

I don&#39;t remember seeing anything about this prior to this coming out. That is very bothersome. I see it as a precursor to a mandatory SFI H&N restraint.

I think the least they could have done was said effective 1/1/09.
[/b]

As I stated in the other thread this first appeared in a Fastrack during the summer. I thought it was July although it may have been August but it definately was in Fastrack as I fired off a letter and got no response beyond the automated we got your letter deal. I know for my Sparco suit it was sold with both FIA and the SFI ratings in versions produced the following years after I bought mine. I will try contacing Sparco to see if I can get an SFI tage added to my suit. Regardless its totally bogus that my suit which is in better condition than so many others I see in use is worthless now.

db

[Andy Bettencourt]

Can someone point me to a link of a suit that doesn&#39;t meet this standard? Even the $100 G-Force stuff does...

http://www.gforce.com/products/suits.php

I don&#39;t think its the SCCA sliding in bed with the SFI, if anything, it would be an attempt at keeping insurance rates in check. Hopefully.

[vr6guy]

Can someone point me to a link of a suit that doesn&#39;t meet this standard? Even the $100 G-Force stuff does...

http://www.gforce.com/products/suits.php

I don&#39;t think its the SCCA sliding in bed with the SFI, if anything, it would be an attempt at keeping insurance rates in check. Hopefully.
[/b]

The point Im tryin to make is that my suit is far better than the basic requrements...... this isnt rocket science.
I wouldnt get into a race car wearing the bare minimum required "rating"

scca making my $800 suit for over the wall crewing..... comedic!

I can hear the hokey pokey music playin....

Marc Rider
NER

[RSTPerformance]

I deleted my post... I will keep that I am pissed beyond belief. I also have a 3 layer $800+ OMP suite that I got around year 2000 and doesn&#39;t meet this new spec. I refuse to buy a new suite. How can we get this changed?

Raymond "Many asked on phone or via e-mail what my plans are for next season... I am now buyng a boat where I can wear my non spec speedo and do whatever I want where morons wont f me from behind everytime I turn around" Blethen

My reaction in no way represents RST Performance Racing... but I don&#39;t think all of you want me to create yet another "Blethen" log-in name!

Further review....

what does this line mean???

Underwear of fire resistant material shall be used except with suits carrying FIA standard 8856-2000 or SFI 3-2A/5 or higher (e.g., /10, /15, /20) Certification Patch.

I read it as sayting that we can use our old suites but we now must also wear fire resistant undies (Most likely thongs correct)?

Raymond

[Andy Bettencourt]

HOW THE HELL does a $800 suit not carry an SFI rating?

[pfcs49]

sombebody start a longsuite!

[Greg Amy]

I read it as sayting that we can use our old suites but we now must also wear fire resistant undies (Most likely thongs correct)?[/b]

Negative. You must own an SFI "/1" suit at a minimum; if your suit is /5 or higher you don&#39;t need undies - GA