Time to write those letters - Head and Neck Restraints

[Racerlinn]

The response from my BoD member basically followed the line of "we have to protect ourselves from ourselves". With a "hey I don't like SFI, but it's all we got" message.

Hmm, always was interested in taking up kayaking...wonder if those are certified by anyone....

[Greg Amy]

Who knows the offical scoop with Defnder? Their not talking.

According to correspondence I've seen/received, they are 'no longer pursuing SFI certification' and they've 'not yet made the decision' as to whether they'll "re-certify" existing units after 5 years. No official public announcement, but that's what private emails from them and SFI are saying.

This now leaves two "SFI certified" 38.1 manufacturers: HANS and Safety Solutions. It's now a "duopoly".

GA

[gran racing]

From what I was told, this is one of the owner's businesses and it comes down to money. This is not coming from the owner's mouth so who knows.

[Ron Earp]

Tried of people who don't race making rules and regulations in this club that are not founded in science or logic.

I'll keep racing. And I'll forge every blasted certification on every piece of safety gear I own.

[dickita15]

Tried of people who don't race making rules and regulations in this club that are not founded in science or logic.

The entire CRB races. Of the 13 BOD 9 are current racers.

[Ron Earp]

The entire CRB races. Of the 13 BOD 9 are current racers.

Ok, I'm wrong there and I'm likely wrong on a lot of this stuff because I've not been following the discussion like I should. I'll read up and not post knee jerk stupidness like I did.

I still feel the safety decisions are going in the wrong direction and are going to increase costs to the racers with no benefit to them. I'm sure I don't have the big picture, but I know I'll carefully choose equipment to minimize expenditures forced by rule changes. I might like to have a new Sparco Halo seat in my new build, but if it needs replacement in five years I'll put a Kirky ally seat in that doesn't.

[StephenB]

Strange questions but figured someone here may have tried this with a friend in the past at some point... it kinda went along with this thread in the sence that most here are frustrated with costs.

I am contemplating sharing some safety equipment with a few friends and "sharing" some equipment between my two cars.

For example...
1.) I want to get an annual on two cars but I want to share things that can easily be swapped like the belts and a few other random parts between the two cars. Swapping the seat, belts, window net, etc will honestly save a few thousand dollars! Has anyone done this in the past?

2.) What about sharing personal safety equipment. (I have a twin so this would be easy for us since we are the same size) We both currently have helmets but I am thinking we could get each helmet fitted with anchors and then just purchase one Hans and share it. Provided we are in different sessions seperated by one race group or even an enduro with a third driver between the two of us so we can swap. Looking towards the future this may make our racing much more affordable! Has anyone ever tried this in the past?


Just trying to think a little outside the box to keep racing into the future. BUT I am concerned that Tech will say no-no-no when we show up together.

Stephen

PS: I did send a letter a while ago and got a response that a decision was made and I will have an answer in the next fasttrack.

[Greg Amy]

1.) I want to get an annual on two cars but I want to share things that can easily be swapped...

The equipment will need to be physically installed on each car as it is tech'd, otherwise you'll get a notation in the logbook that "xxx must be installed (and inspected) by next race". What happens after that is your responsibility.

2.) What about sharing personal safety equipment.

Jeremy and I share a HANS. That's no problem now since it's not a required item, but next year we will have to appear at race tech individually to get our gear tech'd. From there the compliance checks for getting onto the track will be the same as it is for now: you'll get checked on the grid. As long as you're wearing the required personal safety gear on the grid, I don't see where sharing it will be a problem.

GA

[Chip42]

Stephen - don't get your anual tech gear check at the same time, swap your H&NR and you'll be fine - the sticker goes on the helmet, and unless that policy changes all you need to show is the helmet between annual gear tech. just make sure you both DO wear the device on track.

as for swapping seat and belts betwee cars - this can get old fast, and the belts CAN start to fray of you have to run them through their adjusters repeatedly. it's not really likely, but this is one of the lower recurring costs - spend 350 on a 5-pt FIA belt set for each car every 5 years. ditto seats - if you are worried about seat costs, getting an aluminum thing with no testing or certification is apparently awesome if it has a back brace, or so I'm told. right now we DON'T expire FIA seats, so they aren't perishable. since your codriver is your twin, you get the easy way out of the rails issue, too. if the rules are expected to stay as they are, we can all buy racetech or simillar FIA seats with back brace mounts and use them until they fall apart, and then some.

[dickita15]

Ok, I'm wrong there and I'm likely wrong on a lot of this stuff because I've not been following the discussion like I should. I'll read up and not post knee jerk stupidness like I did.

I still feel the safety decisions are going in the wrong direction and are going to increase costs to the racers with no benefit to them. I'm sure I don't have the big picture, but I know I'll carefully choose equipment to minimize expenditures forced by rule changes. I might like to have a new Sparco Halo seat in my new build, but if it needs replacement in five years I'll put a Kirky ally seat in that doesn't.

Ron I do not disagree with you just pointing out that one reason is incorrect. All these changes are really not a big deal for the hard core racer. The cost of a Hans for a guy that runs 10 weekends a year is not a huge cost per race. We are however making it harder for the casual racer who runs a couple of weekends a year to stay involved with racing.

[Greg Amy]

All these changes are really not a big deal for the hard core racer....We are however making it harder for the casual racer who runs a couple of weekends a year to stay involved with racing.

Problem is, Dick, the "hard core racer" never stays that way in Club Racing for long. There's only so many Ken Paysons in this world; many more will jump in but inevitably scale back (or choose to volunteer), with the vast majority becoming ScottKs and DarrellLs* who get frustrated with the time and money required and go do other things.

SCCA Club Racing's very survival depends on these Scotts and Darrells. Make those go away and there's not enough Kens left to make it a viable existence.

GA

* Two CT friends of mine who have become frustrated with the amount of time and money it costs to go club racing. They have both thrown in the towel just this past racing year, sold off everything racing-related, and are doing other hobbies and/or spending more time with their family.

[Ron Earp]

We are however making it harder for the casual racer who runs a couple of weekends a year to stay involved with racing.

Yes, and these people are important to the club. They can either become hard core racers, stay the same, or leave all together. To me they are an important demographic that must be captured as they're the future of the club. Hard core racers are just that and they're going to race no matter what. These casual racers are how the club might grow and prosper.

Edit- I see Greg has posted essentially the same thing as I did as I went away from my computer for too long before hitting enter.

[Chip42]

What I keep hearing are the clubs 2 biggest "issues" are new memberships and member retention.

true, not all members race - many NEVER do, they volunteer, crew, or are spouses and the like.

but what's the point if there is no racing? the rules are confusing for many classes to the younger generation. with Drifting and hard parking being the paradigm, it's understandable that IT, SM, SS, and T confuse them a little. ST should help to close that gap. good.

Then there's the initial buy in - expensive in any organization, of the personal safety gear and updates to the car. again - an existing hurdle (adding the H&NR doesn't really add too much to this, but it can still be the difference in starting this year or next, or other tradeoffs). used equipment saves a lot of money here, and thats often a route used to get going. the issues for attracting new racers are evident and ongoing

Now we are discussing additional hurdles for the existing racer. we got them in, they purchased the gear - even the HANS or whatever. they buy new belts every so often. they pay their entries, they pay for the costs of racing. they probobly haven't gotten a substantive raise in 10 years, so the escalating costs compete with other escalating cost in their real life. and we are thinking of asking them to replace even more stuff? you won't get many of them back. many will quit just SEEING the cost on the horizon, hoping to get out before the used racecar market is flooded.

and the new members will see the long-temr costs and might jump ship too.

and why? to satisfy an industry or for safety? it's not like guys have been dying in droves over the last 20 years. we must have been doing something right. I agree that H&NRs are useful - I agree that a neck donut is also, though less-so. I'd love to see a root cause analysis for what serious injury and death we have seen, and brake it down to lack or failure of the safety equipment, failure of instalation of the equipment, car prep issues and mechanical failure, poor driver decisuions on track, and age or medical related problems.

I bet we'd find that revising the existing safety equipment instalation and inspection criteria would address the bulk of the problem.

yes - stuff breaks, wears out, and is needed anew for various reasons. one of them should not be based on expiration dates (I'm willing to allow belts based on known data and unknown storage conditions for the individual car). the industry's done pretty well up to now based on that alone.

if it's lawyers you're worried about, find soem of our own to indemnify the club from incidents arrizing on track. I'm no lawyer, but it can't be that hard. spell out the risks, make us sign on the line that we understand them.

[gran racing]

Maybe I'm unique, but back when I started another $800 or so would have been a big deal to me. I'm not sure it would have prevented me from getting started, but it would have been one more thing on a big list of items to overcome.

All these changes are really not a big deal for the hard core racer.

My wife tells me often that my life revolves around racing and that I'm addicted to it. The HNR mandate isn't enough to soley cause me to question the costs of racing to fun, but I will honestly say it has me giving it more serious thought.

Dick, have you or anyone else spoken with that vintage club about changing their requirements?

[pitbull113]

I've read that the majority of deaths during road racing are caused by heart attacks. Maybe we should all wear heart monitors while we race and if the monitors detect a danger it cuts the ignition.

[erlrich]

Problem is, Dick, the "hard core racer" never stays that way in Club Racing for long. There's only so many Ken Paysons in this world; many more will jump in but inevitably scale back (or choose to volunteer), with the vast majority becoming ScottKs and DarrellLs* who get frustrated with the time and money required and go do other things.

SCCA Club Racing's very survival depends on these Scotts and Darrells. Make those go away and there's not enough Kens left to make it a viable existence.

GA

As one of those who has had to scale back - from a double driver's school + 5 or 6 events in '06 to just two events in each of the past 2 years - I will say that while the requirement to purchase a (another) H&N restraint (and a new helmet, since the one I have already has anchors for a soon-to-be illegal H&N restraint) will probably not keep me from racing, it will undoubtedly cause me to have to give up something next year - at a minimum an event - maybe more.

On top of that, and even worse IMO, it has caused me to seriously consider whether I want to continue racing, at least with the SCCA. I'm guessing I will, mostly because I've met and had the opportunity to race (and work) with some really great, talented folks...but that's probably the only thing that keeps me from going away. I've really lost a lot of...faith...in the club's leaders, or at least in their ability to understand, and empathize with those of us who have very limited resources to put into this hobby. Then again, maybe I was just fooling myself to think they ever did?

[Racerlinn]

What to satisfy an industry or for safety?

This has nothing to do with safety. It's all about covering of asses and money. And I don't believe it will make a damn bit of difference.

[spawpoet]

As one of those who has had to scale back - from a double driver's school + 5 or 6 events in '06 to just two events in each of the past 2 years - I will say that while the requirement to purchase a (another) H&N restraint (and a new helmet, since the one I have already has anchors for a soon-to-be illegal H&N restraint) will probably not keep me from racing, it will undoubtedly cause me to have to give up something next year - at a minimum an event - maybe more.

On top of that, and even worse IMO, it has caused me to seriously consider whether I want to continue racing, at least with the SCCA. I'm guessing I will, mostly because I've met and had the opportunity to race (and work) with some really great, talented folks...but that's probably the only thing that keeps me from going away. I've really lost a lot of...faith...in the club's leaders, or at least in their ability to understand, and empathize with those of us who have very limited resources to put into this hobby. Then again, maybe I was just fooling myself to think they ever did?

My situation is very similar, and you echo my sentiments re: the H&N requirements exactly. And it's not just this decision (or similar requirements that may have preceded it) that makes one rethink involvement in the SCCA. It's the mandates down the road that somebody else in the club is sure to dream up, that may make racing even more prohibitive that worry me. We all want to be safe, but there is a law of diminishing returns with safety mandates just like anything else. Alot of racers will be cutting out a race weekend or two just to pay for their new H&N. I fall in to that category. How many more are there?

[Jeremy Billiel]

Have you guys been to the race track recently? Go count me how many enclosed trailer there are larger than 26 feet long and how many semi's. Look racing is not cheap....

This bitching is wasting your time. The reality is you are the minority. Now, can SCCA be as successful without the average joe? Nope, but SCCA will still survive.

[gsbaker]

...anyone else spoken with that vintage club about changing their requirements?

SVRA was getting much resistance from members, many of whom did not want to 1) spend the money, and 2) chop up a potentially valuable vintage racer in order to remount the shoulder belts. Isaac products have been in SVRA for many years.

Addressing your post about organizations being sued for injuries, I'm not aware of any cases, which is interesting given the injuries/fatalities that occur among drivers who both do and do not use the products. It is possible the Burgess case (SCCA fire death at Daytona) is percolating, but I'm not certain of the facts.