Simon, here is MY reason why it's a bad idea.
I will be LESS safe as a result of the mandate.
"How can that be?", you ask...
Well, quite a few years ago, I did my research. Even though we race (and crash) at lower speeds than many other categories, I decided that getting some H&N protection was a good idea.. BUT, I think that safety is more than one item. How that item interfaces with all the other elements is key.
I decided that the HANS was a poor choice. It's performance numbers were poor compared to other devices, in certain modes. It had issues with the belts slipping off, rendering it useless, or worse, it could conceivably cause injury. The lack of protection in it's lateral modes could be minimized by the use of a halo seat. But, that too has a downside: reduced window real estate. Once crashed, and presumably upside down or in another position where the door is inoperable, getting out becomes significantly more difficult with a big halo seat in the way of the window. I'm 6'3, so it's much different than it is for somebody 5'9".
So, I chose a system that exceeded the performance of the HANS, and eliminated the need for the space robbing Halo style seat.
But, SFI, in it's collusion with the HANS folks, wrote very limiting language into the 38.1 spec, language that makes it very difficult to achieve superior performance. The language limits the architecture of the design. It's as though the UL existed way back when the light bulb was invented, and asked Mr Edison to write a spec on the matter of home lighting, and he specified that all home lighting that was to be approved by the UL was of a tungsten filament design. No Arc vapor, no HID, LED, etc etc.
Anyway, for years I've been driving with a device that has been tested by the top labs and shown to be of the highest performance.
Now, if this rule passes, I will throw that device away, and replace it with a poorer performing device. For around $700. Then to attempt to recover some of my lost performance, I will need to add a Halo seat. Proper FiA versions are easily $700, and proper mounts will add over $100.
But wait. I'm still not as safe, because getting out of the car is a much more difficult task due to the reduced window aperture*.
So....roughly $1500, and I'm less safe. That's just dumb.
That's my one good reason.
* I know, I should go buy a different car.
I suspect the racing suit comment is based on the fact that people with weaker hearts, or who are in poorer physical condition, typically have heart attacks and other related trauma when they are pushed to extremes. Like heat. Obviously, operating a racing car causes some people to have a faster heart rate, elevated breathing rate and so on. Add the heat of summer, magnified by the extra heat in some racing car cockpits, and then add on top of that, a multi layer, poor breathing racing suit, and you have a recipe for sudden health issues.
Does the suit itself cause the heart attack or other trauma? No, years of neglect, hereditary issues and so forth do, but the conditions provide the straws that break the camels back. My casual observations show that many or most of the recent deaths in club racing have been health related, and not due entirely to crash trauma. Seems to me that's a major issue that we should examine more closely, but, it will be a highly controversial one.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Simon T.
Thanks for sharing. I see some of the concerns now, especially with the SFI stuff.
Bookmarks