If a 3rd Party shouldn't have the power to say "yay" or "nay" on a product, then who should? Does this mean that we need a truly independent regulating body who makes its money elsewhere?
If I understand what's being said, SFI is just a "club" - pay your dues and you're "in. Therefore, any certs such as from Snell, SFI or FIA are bulls**t and that they shouldn't mean anything other than the manufacturer has paid their "dues" and that the products have been rubber stamped.
Just food for thought...
Haz-Matt Racing
I am not completely clear on this but follow the logic for a moment.
It appears the FIA process does have at least one fundamental difference. FIA products (or at least the suits) have their cert stitched directly into the suit. This would imply no label, therefore no fee for the label and therefore no benefit to the FIA if 1 suit or 1,000,000 is sold.
Again, it's just a guess based on some circumstantial evidence but if correct it would imply the FIA is fundamentally only interested in the certification of the initial product line. Whereas SFI actually makes money based on the volume of individual sales and is therefore more eager to see more products sold or life limited and replaced.
~Matt Rowe
ITA Dodge Neon
NEDiv
Sent to me via Scrutineering channels. It was noted this will be posted on SCCA's web site:
Technical Services
RACING MEMO
DATE: March 31, 2010
NUMBER: RM 10-04
FROM: Club Racing Board
TO: All Participants
SUBJECT: SFI Decertification of Impact Products
SCCA is aware of the action taken by SFI against Impact Racing. We are in the process of determining what action (if any) will be needed for our drivers. We will communicate the outcome to our drivers, tech personnel and stewards via member email and website posting when the answers have been determined. Until further notice, it is business as usual and as long as your safety products have SFI certification (patch/sticker) that meets our current GCR requirements, you would be considered compliant.
SPORTS CAR CLUB OF AMERICA, INC
PO Box 19400, Topeka, KS 66619-0400
(800) 770-2055 Fax (785) 232-7214 www.scca.com
I found this in my in-box from 4:10pm PST from BMWCCA-CR
[This announcement is being sent to all Club Racers - It is not unsolicited email]
Effective 4/27/2010, programs involving 3.2A, 3.3, 16.1 and 16.1 with Impact are decertified (harness belts and driver suits). Further information and updates available on sfifoundation.com.
For more information about BMW CCA Club Racing, or to find out how your organization can become a sponsor, contact Gary Davis at [email protected], or check out our website at http://www.bmwccaclubracing.com.
BMW CCA Club Racing Title Sponsors:
BMW CCA Club Racing Series: Tirerack.com
BMW CCA Club Racing Schools: BimmerWorld
Premier Sponsors
evosport
HMS Motorsport (and Official Supplier of Safety Equipment)
UUC Motorwerks
VAC Motorsports
Associate Sponsor
Grassroots Motorsports Magazine
You received this message because you are affiliated with BMW Club Racing. Please direct any questions or comments about this email to [email protected]
BMW CCA Club Racing || 640 South Main Street, Suite 201 || Greenville, SC 29601 || www.bmwccaclubracing.com
STU BMW Z3 2.5liter
Regardless of the fee for a label, the discussion on this thread has been "SFI only cares about a label - they don't certify after the initial product test". From what I can tell from FIA, the same holds true - there is no random sampling of product nor is there production oversight which allows an unscrupulous manufacturer to produce substandard product after the initial certifications are approved.
Unfortunately, there isn't a good way to test any questionable product without destroying it but bear in mind that Impact is the same company that was using knock-off HANS anchors - unlike the SFI debacle, this issue was about product rather than a silly label. It certainly raise questions about a company's integrity when they start knocking off a product, right down to the FIA certifcation... For more info: http://hansdevice.com/s.nl/sc.12/category.60/.f
Lastly, this entire issue revolves around Contract Law - SFI's contract is that manufacturers purchase labels from them. Yes, it's like a pyramid scheme but that's beside the point - the issue at hand is that the contract has certain requirements which Impact chose to ignore. From a strictly legal standpoint, Impact is in violation of their contract. The concerns about safety, which IMHO are well founded, are a separate matter entirely.
Haz-Matt Racing
stupid question but what about the whole "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" stuff?
1985 CRX Si competed in Solo II: AS, CS, DS, GS
1986 CRX Si competed in: SCCA Solo II CSP, SCCA ITA, SCCA ITB, NASA H5
1988 CRX Si competed in ITA & STL
That's what Impact's lawyers have been doing this week - if this were an isolated incident of impropriety or if the CEO hadn't admitted that they were producing their own SFI labels, they'd probably have a good chance of having the action rescinded. Then again, this is the US legal system where a thief can trespass into your house, injure themselves in the process and sue YOU for not keeping them safe (during a criminal act).
Haz-Matt Racing
Bookmarks