HANS... the other shoe's dropped

[Harvey]

The information that I got was that the DeFender will be OK. I understand your concern at tech and believe me I am sure that you will see some tech person some where that will try and ruin your weekend by telling you that the device is not legal. I will try and find the email that I received and post it here.

[Knestis]

>> I have a rock that keeps tigers away...

Racing safety shamanism. I like it.

K

[BruceG]

>> I have a rock that keeps tigers away...

Racing safety shamanism. I like it.

K

SFI will also be inspecting our collective nomex suits...where we all sh*t our shorts for not doing more to prevent this happening! I guess all the pissing contests we got into on the subject of H&N prevented us from seeing the forest from the trees.

[Dano77]

Ok so we know that the HANs Device is FIA certified and that cert will get us more time on the device. And they are the only FIA Device,correct?



WRONG Safety Solutions HYBRID Head Restraint is FIA Approved. In sitting around reading my latest Circle Track and Racing Technology ,page 20 It has an announcment that the Hybrid has obtained FIA Certification. Its more than the cheap HANS but it dosent require the Re-Cert that the hans does.

Just something to think about.

Dan

[tom91ita]

Ok so we know that the HANs Device is FIA certified and that cert will get us more time on the device. And they are the only FIA Device,correct?



WRONG Safety Solutions HYBRID Head Restraint is FIA Approved. In sitting around reading my latest Circle Track and Racing Technology ,page 20 It has an announcment that the Hybrid has obtained FIA Certification. Its more than the cheap HANS but it dosent require the Re-Cert that the hans does.

Just something to think about.

Dan

good to hear!

does it meet the specific FIA xxxx cited by SCCA?

[Greg Amy]

...my latest Circle Track and Racing Technology ,page 20 It has an announcment that the Hybrid has obtained FIA Certification.

That would be quite the trick, given that FIA Certification 8858 has design requirements and drawing that look suspiciously like a HANS...with no allowances for anything else.

Here is it, read it:

http://tinyurl.com/69ps83o

[RacerBill]

That would be quite the trick, given that FIA Certification 8858 has design requirements and drawing that look suspiciously like a HANS...with no allowances for anything else.

Here is it, read it:

http://tinyurl.com/69ps83o

Go to fia.com. There are two 8858 specifications, 8858-2002 and 8858-2010. The latter specifically mentions the HYBRID.

[joeg]

My HANS has no FIA label (only the teathers do).

It now has an SFI label (Paid HANS to put it on).

You need one label or the other (or both).

[ShelbyRacer]

Ok so we know that the HANs Device is FIA certified and that cert will get us more time on the device. And they are the only FIA Device,correct?



WRONG Safety Solutions HYBRID Head Restraint is FIA Approved. In sitting around reading my latest Circle Track and Racing Technology ,page 20 It has an announcment that the Hybrid has obtained FIA Certification. Its more than the cheap HANS but it dosent require the Re-Cert that the hans does.

Just something to think about.

Dan

Only problem is, the full specs do not currently appear on the FIA list, nor does the proper model designation line up with any current SS device (not to mention that the FIA specs not only by model, but also by size, and only the "med" appears with the obscure model number). Before I plop my money on the table, I want to see it in print.

http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public...HR_systems.pdf

I want to get *my* name on the list for having a system built for me...

Oh, and I'll be waiting to purchase any device until the smoke clears after all this stuff gets dealt with.

[Kai Noeske]

I don't get the whining about having to wear HNRs. Our cages are stable survival cells, and the seats and belts keep us in their centers. The one remaining weak link was the freely flapping head that will break your neck in a high G impact. HNRs fix that, for the cost of 2 tires shipped and mounted.

Whoever sobs about "personal responsibility" needs to get real. It's not about yourself and your little "freedom". Racing is a sport that requires many to play together to happen. It's really a team sport of individuals competing against each other to maximize the fun for everyone. Every death or injury that a HNR *could* have avoided helps to make racing less fun. It helps to make racing *more expensive and regulated* - insurance rates, knee jerk regulations. And guess what: if you get hurt or die, you are guaranteed to ruin the fun for a lot of folks. Because many of the racers and volunteer workers are your friends, and they bloody care about you.

So, yes. Kudos to SCCA for finally mandating HNRs.


That said, the SFI extortion deal to buy and keep paying for a product that is no longer top of the line is rock bottom. Is it only SCCA who was sucked into that bad deal, or does this affect the other big clubs as well? If so, it is time for the clubs to turn the knife around and form an "American Motorsport Safety Assessment" council or so and make *that* the standard. You wanna tell us that product X is safe, SFI? Did you just make the manufacturer pay so they could slap your label on? How about you show us those independent lab tests that actual did SNELL-style tests before *we* approve your stuff as safe? You want to tell us that product part Y needs inspection or replacement after Z years? Fine with us, if you can provide credible data. Don't have that? Tough luck. kthxbye.

[RacerBill]

...
That said, the SFI extortion deal to buy and keep paying for a product that is no longer top of the line is rock bottom. Is it only SCCA who was sucked into that bad deal, or does this affect the other big clubs as well? If so, it is time for the clubs to turn the knife around and form an "American Motorsport Safety Assessment" council or so and make *that* the standard. You wanna tell us that product X is safe, SFI? Did you just make the manufacturer pay so they could slap your label on? How about you show us those independent lab tests that actual did SNELL-style tests before *we* approve your stuff as safe? You want to tell us that product part Y needs inspection or replacement after Z years? Fine with us, if you can provide credible data. Don't have that? Tough luck. kthxbye.

Spot on!!!!!

Last week, at the Cincy Region meeting, the current Area director and the member who is also running for the office were asked about SFI and both expressed displeasure for the way SFI conducts business, implying that they would love to replace them with some other form of standards organization. They also agreed that it is the risk management group that is mandating that the SCCA utilize some form of standards certification for safety products. Could be that at least some of the board would like to find an alternative to SFI, but right now, they are the only game in town.

I would love to be independently wealthy and be able start such an organization, but all I have is time on my hands.

[Matt Rowe]

A couple of thoughts:

One, inspection works great until someone figures out that nicks and abrasions from normal wear and tear can compromise the composite in ways that can only be verified through destructive testing. How long do you think it will be before that $15 inspection and re-cert leads to a certain percentage of scrapped devices.

Two, it seems like we are probably 5 years away from an updated HANS, er SFI 38.1 spec. That will help refresh demand and cover the patent issue (20 years from date of invention or 17 from date of issue IIRC). Then all the inspections won't matter as everyone will be required to update to the new device in X years.

These are just a couple of the potential consequences of an organization that bases it's model on the sale of certification stickers. These principals can be applied to other devices beyond HNR (belt expiration dates that led to scrapping perfectly good quick release hardware sound familiar) so as Kirk correctly has been pointing out (for years) this isn't a HANS issue or a HNR issue, it is an issue with a manufacturer based organization influencing our hobby with no real stake in our success, health or enjoyment. If we were smart we would have a not-for-profit group developing impartial standards based on demonstrated risks but I fear that ship has long since sailed.

[Matt Rowe]

One last thought, for those thinking this will make some substantial change in the new 1/1/2012 requirements, I doubt it. Either those rules have already been approved or they will be within days. By the time any change in policy can be agreed to many will have already purchased devices to comply with the current 2012 GCR. So the immediate impact will be relatively minor and reverting back will only aggravate the people that purchased a new device so they can race in 2012. The blowback of yet ANOTHER flip-flop on HNR would be painful.

[Dano77]

From team simpsons website,

http://simpsonraceproducts.com/safet...-fia-approval/

It seems as though they have done they're homework on this. But lets see if SFI has the last laugh

[mossaidis]

I would be motivated to get the Hybrid product with the FIA label and not the SFI label for obvious reasons. That simpson article was posted 7/1/2011, yet I can't find a site that sells the hybrid with the FIA certification. EDIT: Actually it is not clear to me, which Hybrid model is being referenced in the article, there are SO many models from safety solutions. Shit, I am lost. LOL!

[ShelbyRacer]

>> I have a rock that keeps tigers away...

Racing safety shamanism. I like it.

K

Wait, only by experiencing the pain and suffering of SFI can we understand SFI? We might be on to something here...

Oh, and I was notified in a vision that I must visit the spirit world every five years, or I can no longer be considered a valid shaman.

[titanium]

I don't get it.
First you say:

So, yes. Kudos to SCCA for finally mandating HNRs.

Then you continue:

How about you show us those independent lab tests that actual did SNELL-style tests before *we* approve your stuff as safe? You want to tell us that product part Y needs inspection or replacement after Z years? Fine with us, if you can provide credible data. Don't have that? Tough luck. kthxbye.

I never saw any 'credible data' that said our type of racing needed a HNR in the first place.
Or that the SCCA/SFI says we could save 'X number of lives annually' if we adopted mandatory HNR.

That's the data that I want to see...

Does the SCCA even keep records of driver fatalities at it's events and what was the cause?

[Z3_GoCar]

I never saw any 'credible data' that said our type of racing needed a HNR in the first place.
Or that the SCCA/SFI says we could save 'X number of lives annually' if we adopted mandatory HNR.

That's the data that I want to see...

Does the SCCA even keep records of driver fatalities at it's events and what was the cause?

There were at least two H&N fatalities that I know of in BMWCCA racing in the '95-'96 time frame. One was at PIR and the other at NHIS, thus CR's early adoption of SFI restraints.

[JLawton]

EDIT: Actually it is not clear to me, which Hybrid model is being referenced in the article, there are SO many models from safety solutions. Shit, I am lost. LOL!

It's the really expensive one.............. and it also says "FIA approved".

[gran racing]

I'm with you Rodney.

The majority of deaths that I'm aware of in our form of Club Racing have mostly been heart attacks, not deaths due to head injuries. While my personal opinion is that people should buy a H&NR system, it's just one part of the package (which much is not regulated).