On track experiences and video's 991 GT3 only. - Page 52 - Rennlist - Porsche Discussion Forums

Notices
991 GT3 GT3RS and 911R
Sponsored by:

On track experiences and video's 991 GT3 only.

Old 10-21-2015, 02:36 PM
  #766  
Manifold
Super User
 
Manifold's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Close enough to plenty of good tracks
Posts: 4,077
Default

Originally Posted by Zulu Alpha View Post
991 GT3 vs 981 GT4 PCUAE - YAS Marina 16 Oct 2015
I'd be borrowing a HANS for the passenger ...
Manifold is offline  
Old 10-21-2015, 04:24 PM
  #767  
Zulu Alpha
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Zulu Alpha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 960
Default

Originally Posted by Manifold
I'd be borrowing a HANS for the passenger ...
He had one, he didn't have time to grab it.
Zulu Alpha is offline  
Old 10-21-2015, 06:04 PM
  #768  
Mech33
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Mech33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,966
Default

Originally Posted by Zulu Alpha View Post
He had one, he didn't have time to grab it.
I'd wear the 3-points then if I were him.
Mech33 is offline  
Old 10-21-2015, 07:47 PM
  #769  
Manifold
Super User
 
Manifold's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Close enough to plenty of good tracks
Posts: 4,077
Default

Originally Posted by Mech33 View Post
I'd wear the 3-points then if I were him.
That's what I suggest to passengers in my GT3 who don't have head/neck restraint (HNR). There may be crash scenarios where 6-pt without HNR is better than 3-pt, but IMO the evidence suggests that 6-pt without HNR is more likely to result in a basal skull fracture in a frontal impact, and generally I'd prefer to rely on the car's built-in safety systems based arond the 3-pt belt, rather than use a 6-pt without HNR, which I consider to be an incomplete system.

I continue to find people using 6-pt belts without HNR when 3-pts are available, and often being advised to do so by others, without having any significant knowledge regarding these issues and the attendant risks.

Last edited by Manifold; 10-21-2015 at 08:41 PM.
Manifold is offline  
Old 10-21-2015, 08:03 PM
  #770  
Zulu Alpha
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Zulu Alpha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 960
Default

With all due respect guys. I really appreciate the word of warning, but the guy sitting next to me is not some Joe enjoying a GT3 bashing. He has a background in countless racing involving VLN, Porsche Carrera Cup, and so on. I think he is well aware of the risks taken not having a Hans system while entrusting his life in another persons hand.
Zulu Alpha is offline  
Old 10-21-2015, 08:21 PM
  #771  
Mech33
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Mech33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,966
Default

Originally Posted by Zulu Alpha View Post
With all due respect guys. I really appreciate the word of warning, but the guy sitting next to me is not some Joe enjoying a GT3 bashing. He has a background in countless racing involving VLN, Porsche Carrera Cup, and so on. I think he is well aware of the risks taken not having a Hans system while entrusting his life in another persons hand.
Ah, so he knows he's more likely to die in a crash in the 6-points without a HANS than the 3-points, yet wears them anyway? For my own liability sake, I wouldn't let someone do that... you never know when something might go wrong on track.

I find that most folks just don't know that. Even the HPDE clubs around here are so stuck on enforcing helmet rules, but let folks run in 6-points without a HANS... I haven't run with PCA yet, but in Audi Club they require the driver and passenger to run the same restraints, which forces the driver to use a 3-point if the passenger doesn't have a HANS and you don't want to let them use a 6-point without it... silly.
Mech33 is offline  
Old 10-21-2015, 08:36 PM
  #772  
Macca
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Macca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 14,138
Default

I think it's pointless even fitting the passenger 6 point harness. I take lots of people around the track and none of them seem to own a hans so they use the 3 pt. also the passenger 6 pnt gets in the way when my wife and I tour between the tracks (we cover most NZ tracks annually so around 6000 km touring pa between the 8 tracks in NZ). I sold the passenger harness to another racer...
Macca is offline  
Old 10-21-2015, 08:36 PM
  #773  
Macca
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Macca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 14,138
Default

Just my POV of course :-)
Macca is offline  
Old 10-21-2015, 08:38 PM
  #774  
BBMGT3
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
 
BBMGT3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,227
Default

Good evening

I am the passenger

Yes, the 6 point without Hans is incomplete. But, on race tracks I consider the 3 point insufficient as well. But in a frontal impact arguably a 6 point is worse...

Was a judgement call - 6 point or 3 point. Went with 6. But I quit the road car business a while back because I think the lack of full cages is a problem. But i digress - At the end, it's a risky business regardless of which seat you get into. I've had a few shunts so I know first hand...
BBMGT3 is offline  
Old 10-21-2015, 08:51 PM
  #775  
Manifold
Super User
 
Manifold's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Close enough to plenty of good tracks
Posts: 4,077
Default

Originally Posted by Zulu Alpha View Post
With all due respect guys. I really appreciate the word of warning, but the guy sitting next to me is not some Joe enjoying a GT3 bashing. He has a background in countless racing involving VLN, Porsche Carrera Cup, and so on. I think he is well aware of the risks taken not having a Hans system while entrusting his life in another persons hand.
If the passenger is making an informed decision, that's better than him using the 6-pts because they happen to be there and not knowing the risks. My comment is a general safety comment, rather than focused on this particular instance.

Originally Posted by Mech33 View Post
Ah, so he knows he's more likely to die in a crash in the 6-points without a HANS than the 3-points, yet wears them anyway? For my own liability sake, I wouldn't let someone do that... you never know when something might go wrong on track.

I find that most folks just don't know that. Even the HPDE clubs around here are so stuck on enforcing helmet rules, but let folks run in 6-points without a HANS... I haven't run with PCA yet, but in Audi Club they require the driver and passenger to run the same restraints, which forces the driver to use a 3-point if the passenger doesn't have a HANS and you don't want to let them use a 6-point without it... silly.
Liability is a real issue that people need to consider. It's fun and games until someone gets hurt, then the tone can change abruptly, especially in the litigious US.

PCA has a similar rule, but it's worded in an ambiguous way which results in some people following it and some not.

Originally Posted by Macca View Post
I think it's pointless even fitting the passenger 6 point harness. I take lots of people around the track and none of them seem to own a hans so they use the 3 pt. also the passenger 6 pnt gets in the way when my wife and I tour between the tracks (we cover most NZ tracks annually so around 6000 km touring pa between the 8 tracks in NZ). I sold the passenger harness to another racer...
I've had many people ride with me in the GT3, some of which had a HANS, and I like being able to offer them the 6-pt, since that's what I normally use.

Originally Posted by BBMGT3 View Post
Good evening

I am the passenger

Yes, the 6 point without Hans is incomplete. But, on race tracks I consider the 3 point insufficient as well. But in a frontal impact arguably a 6 point is worse...

Was a judgement call - 6 point or 3 point. Went with 6. But I quit the road car business a while back because I think the lack of full cages is a problem. But i digress - At the end, it's a risky business regardless of which seat you get into. I've had a few shunts so I know first hand...
Agreed that it's a judgment call, and the limitations of not having full race car safety systems need to be considered (and there is still certainly risk even with those systems). We each need to weigh the risks vs benefits ourselves and make our own choices, I would just like to see people be reasonably well informed when they make those choices, and I believe we have a ways to go in that regard.
Manifold is offline  
Old 10-21-2015, 11:23 PM
  #776  
Macca
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Macca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 14,138
Default

Good points Manifold. All worthwhile debate and Im sure many reading this may pick up a few ideas from it...
Macca is offline  
Old 10-22-2015, 01:23 AM
  #777  
Jamie_GT3
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Jamie_GT3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,419
Default

Originally Posted by vdar View Post
Thanks for the feedback montoya! It was only my second day ever at Pacific so working on getting up to speed cautiously... definitely not a place you want to get something very wrong! 1:29 sounds like a good target time for a racer going 10/10ths in the GT3. I'm hoping to clean up my line enough for 1:31 or so as an amateur
In my stock 2007 RS on NT01 can get to 1:32-1:33 pretty consistent, would need to see overlay of laps, segments, g's etc... and more clearly what you're doing with the pedals. From what I saw at the Ridge, I'd say you're getting the hang of it...
Jamie_GT3 is offline  
Old 10-22-2015, 12:21 PM
  #778  
mlpor
User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Colorado
Posts: 190
Default

Originally Posted by Mech33 View Post
Ah, so he knows . . . .

. Even the HPDE clubs around here are so stuck on enforcing helmet rules, but let folks run in 6-points without a HANS... I haven't run with PCA yet, but in Audi Club they require the driver and passenger to run the same restraints, which forces the driver to use a 3-point if the passenger doesn't have a HANS and you don't want to let them use a 6-point without it... silly.
Audi Club's been an interesting kettle of fish from my past experience. But, to what I think may be a part of your point vis-a-vis safety system designs, . . . . might one assume the standard car 3 point systems (?) generally assume the occupants won't be wearing helmets - my question is it the additional weight of the helmet (generally assumed to be present in 5 & 6 point restraint systems) that while maybe not creating, at least increases the need for an HNR?

Love the Audi Club, and I believe also current PCA Club HPDE rules/thinking process, "If one dies, they must all die together" line of reasoning.
mlpor is offline  
Old 10-22-2015, 01:02 PM
  #779  
MileHigh911
User
 
MileHigh911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,464
Default

Ever since Dale Earnhardt died, the HNR awareness in the motorsports world has come to the front page. The tremendous forces generated by rapid deceleration is what is to be feared. It can rip apart internal organs and break the vertebrae with resultant spinal cord injury. A traditional 3 point safety system was designed for occupants "not" to be wearing helmets. Thus, all surfaces are soft to touch (no roll cages in the USA), there are airbags strategically positioned for when the occupant is thrown around, and the car is designed to diminish the energy of the crash by crumple zones, which diminish the G-forces applied to the occupant. Any additional weight to the head will increase chances of neck injury in all crashes. It becomes a "keep the skull from fracturing" vs "keep the neck from breaking" discussion. Consider motorcycles that crash at the track. Injuries are typically lower extremity and pelvic injuries. The helmeted head is flopping along the ground, along with the body, diminishing the energy of the crash.

I believe a lightweight helmet is important whether 3 point or 5/6 point safety systems. Most would concur, that if in a streetcar, with an unaltered OEM 3 point safety system, it is safer for your neck than if strapped into a 5/6 point safety system without a HNR (there is a trade off...as you flop around the car, if you don't hit the designed airbags and soft surfaces, internal organs can be damaged if your ribcage doesn't protect them). Imagine a head-on, car into wall accident with the 991 GT3. The car will crumple as designed (great crumple zone in a rear engine car, easy to dissipate energy), decreasing energy. A strapped in 5/6 point occupant will then have the left over energy from deceleration applied to his/her internal organs and neck. The exploding airbags will still happen, but your body will never touch them. If the force is say, 15 Gs, then an 8 lbs head, plus 4 lb helmet (12 lbs) will have 12x15= 180lbs of force applied to your supporting structures of your head. Not good.
MileHigh911 is offline  
Old 10-22-2015, 01:09 PM
  #780  
Manifold
Super User
 
Manifold's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Close enough to plenty of good tracks
Posts: 4,077
Default

Originally Posted by mlpor View Post
Audi Club's been an interesting kettle of fish from my past experience. But, to what I think may be a part of your point vis-a-vis safety system designs, . . . . might one assume the standard car 3 point systems (?) generally assume the occupants won't be wearing helmets - my question is it the additional weight of the helmet (generally assumed to be present in 5 & 6 point restraint systems) that while maybe not creating, at least increases the need for an HNR?

Love the Audi Club, and I believe also current PCA Club HPDE rules/thinking process, "If one dies, they must all die together" line of reasoning.
The helmet does add about 30% to the weight of the head, thus increasing head/neck forces in a crash by about the same amount, which is substantial.

Regarding the 'equal restraints' rule, the question is whether it means that equal restraints need to be used, or just offered. Either way, PCA currently has no requirement that head/neck restraint (HNR) needs to be used, so would allow a driver using a HNR and a passenger using 6-pts without HNR. Not good. If the rule is interpreted to mean that equal restraints must be used, that means that a driver with HNR may be motivated to pressure the passenger to use the 6-pts even if he doesn't have an HNR, or the passenger may elect to use the 3-pts and thereby force driver to do the same, despite having an HNR and wanting to use it. Also not good.

To be fair, the better argument for asking the driver to downgrade to passenger's level of restraint would be that the driver will then hopefully dial it back and drive with increased safety margin, and IMO that argument has some validity. But OTOH there needs to be consideration for scenarios where a crash results from a mechanical, fluids on track, error of another driver, etc. where downgrading the driver's restraint increases the driver's risk without any benefit. Moreover, a driver using downgraded restraint may forget that it was downgraded while on track, and thus forget to dial it back. I personally am willing to drive with my HNR and take passengers who are using to the 3-pt, but I do consciously dial it back and increase safety margin due to the passenger having lesser protection.

Last edited by Manifold; 10-22-2015 at 01:27 PM.
Manifold is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: On track experiences and video's 991 GT3 only.


Contact Us Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: