5-point harness w/o roller cage/harness bar
02-12-2014, 03:06 PM
#16
Now, for an '87, you are dealing with a very old car here... so there are grey areas, but this was still a car that had to meet certain crash criteria, developed by professional engineers to meet defined crash-test criteria.
02-12-2014, 03:43 PM
#17
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will have to assume the defined crash-test criteria was based on road use, not track.
Most if not all harness set-ups I've seen use a harness bar, as a guide or even fixation point for the harness, so I don't understand the geometry discussion. The bar is used to adress this exact issue, no?
Is the following true:
1. No cage (to protect roof from collapsing in a roll-over) = No harness is safer
2. With cage (half or full) = Harness is safer
I did a search for related topics in the Racing forum but didn't find much to help anser these basic questions.
2.
Most if not all harness set-ups I've seen use a harness bar, as a guide or even fixation point for the harness, so I don't understand the geometry discussion. The bar is used to adress this exact issue, no?
Is the following true:
1. No cage (to protect roof from collapsing in a roll-over) = No harness is safer
2. With cage (half or full) = Harness is safer
I did a search for related topics in the Racing forum but didn't find much to help anser these basic questions.
2.
02-12-2014, 03:57 PM
#18
Rennlist Member
02-12-2014, 09:44 PM
#19
I will have to assume the defined crash-test criteria was based on road use, not track.
Most if not all harness set-ups I've seen use a harness bar, as a guide or even fixation point for the harness, so I don't understand the geometry discussion. The bar is used to adress this exact issue, no?
Is the following true:
1. No cage (to protect roof from collapsing in a roll-over) = No harness is safer
2. With cage (half or full) = Harness is safer
I did a search for related topics in the Racing forum but didn't find much to help anser these basic questions.
2.
Most if not all harness set-ups I've seen use a harness bar, as a guide or even fixation point for the harness, so I don't understand the geometry discussion. The bar is used to adress this exact issue, no?
Is the following true:
1. No cage (to protect roof from collapsing in a roll-over) = No harness is safer
2. With cage (half or full) = Harness is safer
I did a search for related topics in the Racing forum but didn't find much to help anser these basic questions.
2.
Nets to restrain side to side movement are recommended.
The harness bar simply assures that the belts are positioned correctly, but provides no additional structural integrity to the car itself.
It is actually logical if you imagine what happens in a high-speed collision. Car stops, your body doesn't and starts bouncing around inside the car hitting stuff.
Safely equipment is designed to do two critical things.
1. Restrain your body so it doesn't hit stuff
2. Absorb energy to reduce maximum G-loads on your body... this is why seats are designed to flex and belts to stretch a certain amount.
Most racing accidents are not full frontal impacts... they have impacts that can be 360 degrees... so side to side restraint is critical.
If I drop you out of a third-floor window, the fall won't hurt you... hitting the ground will hurt you...
Now, if I tie a rope around your neck and drop you from a third-floor window, you won't hit the ground, but that does not mean this is "safety equipment".
