Any plans for FIA certification?
Senior Member
Junior Member
The defNder has been designed in accordance with the strict FIA guidelines, so we are confident that they will be accepting, at least in concept, with the defNder.
Other than that would have to satisfy any other requirements they might have which will be a result of a presentation of the defNder to them.
We will keep everybody informed as this process progresses.
Regards,
defNder tech
Senior Member
appears to be a slightly redesigned Hans.
As far as what you mentioned about comparing your results to other manufactures I completely understand, and agree. Just wondering why most companies don't purchase the competitions HNR and then test them in the same manner that they believe is best and publish the data. Is it that they are all pretty close that you might end up giving the competition free advertising? I am assuming you guys purchased a few of the competitions and already tested them to get a base line starting point of where your sits.
Not directing the question just at "defNder tech," wondering about all HNR companies in general, although since HANS has the grasp on the market they probably just don't bother.
Senior Member
>> Although all the products have been tested to SFI38.1 protocols, the setup of each device can bring in variation that would account for the difference between our performacne and theirs. ...
So I think what I'm hearing here is that you believe the reliability of the 38.1 testing protocol is such that it doesn't actually have the discriminatory power to tell performance of one H&N system from another? That the test-retest repeatability error is large enough that it's greater than the anticipated measured differences in performance outcomes among systems?
K
Junior Member
The SFI test is consistant and reliable. The SFI has ensured that as many variables in the test rig have been reduced so that the "device" used on the test rig is tested and not the test rig itself.
We have started a testing page to our website and have currently got some testing photos up with testing data to follow before the PRI.
To date we have not tested other manufactures devices as even if we did test them and publish the results, without credible witnesses the results would always be questioned. For the same reason we would not compare our results to another manufacturer as we were not there to witness and varify their testing and results to be able to compare them directly.
Senior Member
So three different tests of the same device, under the 38.1 protocol, yield test results that are considered "repeatable." Why would single tests of three different devices be any different?Originally Posted by defNder tech
The whole point of a "test protocol" is to assure that it's reliable enough to generate data that are comparable, among tests. It's either good enough to use as a basis for comparison or not. And "approval" is comparison to some benchmark performance - presuming the protocol is in fact performance-based.
K
Senior Member
Ok so it comes in cool colors here are a couple of things I would like to know. Is it made in the USA? What is it made of? Looks like fiberglass to me. To me it looks like it would put a lot of presure on the lower part of the device in a impact. That would be right on your chest. I'm sure the crash dummy used to test the device does not care about it but I might. Any thoughts on that? The rear back piece looks pretty low and looks like it might get hooked under a helmet. It sure looks a lot like the same design concept as the HANS. Wonder what they think about it?
Last edited by 1stGenBoy; 10-14-2008 at 02:14 PM.
Senior Member
Bob, it does appear very HANS-like, and that is NO surprise, as the SFI spec was written with help from the HANS folk, and limits the design architecture of any device that is to pass. The limits are specific in the mandating of a "yoke" device.
It's also no surprise that this unit appears (and I use the term "appears", because the photos are rather dramatic, yet un-revealing, probably by choice), to incorporate some elements to improve on the HANS' failings in the belt retention area.
I'm confused by the companies stance that test results aren't to be considered valid unless they were there as witnesses.
Isn't that the point of hiring Wayne State et al to do the testing? Impartial 3rd party oversight? The implication is that the results are suspect, and that implies meddling. How can such manipulation enter the process??
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
for sale: 2003 Audi A4 Quattro, clean, serviced, dark green, auto, sunroof, tan leather with 75K miles.
IT-7 #57 RX-7 race car
Porsche 1973 911E street/fun car
BMW 2003 M3 cab, sun car.
GMC Sierra Tow Vehicle
New England Region
lateapex911(at)gmail(dot)com
Senior Member
Test data available yet?
Chris Raffaelli
NER 24FP
Senior Member
Now that I see the concept in detail and the design, I'd like to see actual test data.
Looks like a HANS that could also help in side impacts.
-Tom
ITA Integra | 05 Mazda3 | 03 Mini
http://www.tomhoppe.com
Junior Member
team issue TEST DATA
The team issue test data will be posted on the testing page of the website before the PRI in Dec.
What we can tell you is the team issues neck tension was well below 300lbs in both frontal and 30deg during the SFI 38.1 certification.
Regards,
defNder tech.
Senior Member
Those appear to be competitive numbers. I look forward to seeing more data.
Junior Member
The key here is that you get high performance from a device that is Budget Friendly.
We have not sacrificed performance to be able to offer the team issue at the price point of $ 549.99 excluding tax and shipping.
We believe every driver should have the same access to good neck protection, as every driver is going as fast as their money will let them.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks