Results 1 to 20 of 61

Thread: Impact Racing Products, was: "Very disturbing thread"

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    368

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Rowe View Post
    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.
    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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mgyip View Post
    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.
    Very well said....Thanks!!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,106

    Default

    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

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    368

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tom91ita View Post
    stupid question but what about the whole "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" stuff?
    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

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    La Habra, CA
    Posts
    144

    Default

    A this point the outcome of the SFI/Impact legal battle is moot except for people that own Impact merchandise. The confidence in Impact products among racers is pretty much gone and when it comes time to purchase new belts, suits, and nets I think a large part of the racing community will shop elsewhere.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    368

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by betamotorsports View Post
    A this point the outcome of the SFI/Impact legal battle is moot except for people that own Impact merchandise. The confidence in Impact products among racers is pretty much gone and when it comes time to purchase new belts, suits, and nets I think a large part of the racing community will shop elsewhere.
    A sizable part of Impact's business is/was in kids' safety equipment - in other words, buyers who want absolutely NO QUESTION about the quality and performance of the equipment. The sanctioning bodies that see the most Impact equipment only recognize SFI (b/c FIA is a furrin' company run by Frogs) - as a result, the de-certification hits them very hard and almost immediately.
    Haz-Matt Racing

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    721

    Default

    Gee....Haven't heard a word from Bill or Impact on any forums with any kind of rebutal of these issues

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In the green Honda
    Posts
    449

    Default

    Technically I am just stirring the sh*t here because I have nothing in this one side or the other. And I analyze requirements documents for a living so I can't help myself when I see bad wording.

    I pretty much agree that SCCA is doing the right thing, let's wait and see what happens. Baby and bathwater. But the wording of the message is unfortunate.

    "...as long as your safety products have SFI certification (patch/sticker) that meets our current GCR requirements [regardless of whether it is counterfeit or not], you would be considered compliant."

    I'm not sure how else they could say it "as long as your equipement was at one time certified and is now only decertified by a contractual licencing dispute..." or "please don't make your own tags and then try to claim we said it was ok."
    Jim Hardesty
    ITC 1986 Honda Civic Diablo Rojo Verde
    Never argue your tab at the end of the night. Remember, you're hammered and they’re sober.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by betamotorsports View Post
    A this point the outcome of the SFI/Impact legal battle is moot except for people that own Impact merchandise. The confidence in Impact products among racers is pretty much gone and when it comes time to purchase new belts, suits, and nets I think a large part of the racing community will shop elsewhere.
    short memory? Don't pay attention? Didn't do research?

    This is the 3rd time in recent years bill has pulled something like this...

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •