RedlineMan

Howdy all;

This has been a topic of some debate here in various forms and threads, and there has been more of it elsewhere than most are aware of. Here are a few talking points.

-- Some insurance companies are starting to deny coverage for cars with tubing in them.

I can see their point, and it is the same one raised here recently. It occurs to me that if you notice the padded areas of your interior (dash, door panels), you will find that none of them seem all that soft. The generic roll bar padding people use is softer by comparison.

I feel it is MANDATORY that folks using tube equipment REPLACE ALL of their generic padding with high density padding such as marketed by Kirkey. It has been found that the generic padding is virtually worthless at absorbing impact because it compresses completely with relatively little force. The high density variety seems innordinantly hard to the touch, but actually does the job intended.

If you want to test this, pad a section of tube with each and then bash it with a hammer. The result will be a dope slap moment! I feel that this makes any tubing virtually as safe as any other portion of a car chassis, if slightly closer to the occupant in the case of side hoops on a cage.

- CVR/PCA Region will not allow harnesses with stock seats. These cars must have a race seat.

The feeling is that in an impact, the driver will move forward, and as this happens the seat back with pull the belts off the driver's shoulders. Apparently there has been some data collected on this, and it is a legitimate concern.

It would be my contention that this is only a sometime phenominon, not a rule, and that to apply a strict rule to small percentage occurence is draconian. I do agree that having a race seat to hold the belts in place is a good idea, but I feel it may be a bit extreme to force people to do a seat when they would rather not for any number of legitimate reasons.

And before anyone says "H Straps" let me cut you off. These will work, but there is an unitended consequence that few people think about.

These belts only work for single user vehicles. If a person of a different size - taller - to that which is adjusted for tries to use them, the "H" will come in front of the head rest, making the belts useless. For racing in a single user format, they are fine, but for general DE use, they are a limiting factor.

It is my feeling that the little considered sternum strap is the answer to all such questions, as the driver will NEVER come out of the shoulder straps with one in place. I further feel that any arguments against sternum straps (and there are a few) are BUNK.

- There has been LOUD talk of not allowing race seats & harnesses without a roll bar.

At the Fall PCA Zone 1 Presidents Meeting, there was a coincident gathering of region track chairs, and this idea was proposed as a rule. The contention is that harnesses in a race seat will not allow the occupant(s) to slump down in case of a rollover like would be possible with a standard 3-point belt. There is some merit to this (see the BMW pics), but I reject the argument in practice.

I think we would all agree that harnesses make occupants safer in most situations. My argument was that firstly, the number of incidents per mile/day/event is VERY small to start with, which is a fact. In the VAST majority of incidents, occupants will be safer in a properly installed harness system. Rollovers are an EXTREMELY miniscule percentage of the small total incident figure. Further, significant roof deformation is a SUPER EXTREMELY TINY slice of that extremely minscule percentage of that small number.

I asked if anyone thought that we should in effect penalize the OVERWHELMING majority of people who "MIGHT" biff to save the almost unmeasureable number of those who's roofs "MIGHT" collapse? They decided to "strongly encourage" the addition of a roll bar if one uses a harness and seats.

Anyone?

If you're going to live in a cage, Cage it RIGHT!

Brian P

A couple points...

CVR/PCA Region will not allow harnesses with stock seats. These cars must have a race seat.

I agree with your assessment. I used to have stock seats with a 6 point harness, and I never felt comfortable that the shoulder belts would stay on if I needed them. So, I put on the sternum straps, and they worked great. I have since upgraded to race seats, so the point is moot in my case.


There has been LOUD talk of not allowing race seats & harnesses without a roll bar.

The BMW picture was already debunked in this thread: https://rennlist.com/forums/showthre...5&pagenumber=2 Basically, the picture was taken AFTER the roof had been cut to get the passengers out. Apparently, nobody took a picture of what it looked like immediately after an accident and according to the eyewitness on that thread, it looked vastly different.

Furthermore, anybody who thinks they can "crouch" down or somehow protect themselves in a rollover is hugely mistaken. A car accident can easily subject the body to forces over 20G's. Nobody is going to have that kind of body strength and control to affect the outcome of the accident.

Finally, do we actually have crash test data from the DOT or IIHS about how to properly use 5 and 6 point harnesses? If not, then I think we are only guessing about what may and may not happen in an accident. The only thing I can think of that would say that 5 point harnesses are safer is that most of the top performing baby/infant seats are 5 point harnesses.

Z-man

John:
Interesting post! I must say that I agree with your points.

One thing I wonder about: who would install racing seats and not have 5/6 point harnesses? I suppose this applies to cars with the GT2 seats, but if anyone went through the trouble of installing other types of racing seats, and didn't add harnesses, I wonder about...

Do you think rollbars that are behind the driver should also have padding on them? (IE the Redline rollbars). If so, what areas should be covered?

If I may ask a question here regarding harness bars and bolt-in roll bars. There is a long and heated debate about whether harnesses should be looped over or mounted directly to harness bars and/or bolt-in roll bars.

Our region (NNJR - PCA) rules are: if you are using harnesses in conjunction with a harness bar, you cannot mount the shoulder harnesses directly to the harness bar that is attached to the B or C pillars via two bolts. If you have a beefier rollbar (Like the Redline racing one) that bolts to 4 or more points, the shoulder harnesses can be attached directly to the bar.

Now, the argument is that if the harnesses are looped over the harness bar, in an impact, more force will be applied to the bar than if it is attached directly to the bar. I have heard this argument many times, but I have heard the other side just as often. I understand most of the physics invovled, but am still uncertain which method is best.

What are your opinions on this?
-Zoltan.

forklift

I took the pad off of my roll bar for vision obstructive reasons......

Bill Gregory

Typically, most PCA region DE rules I've seen say that harnesses can be attached to harness bars if the manufacturer recommends it. So, for example, the BK Truss is OK to attach shoulder straps directly to, as that's what it's designed for. However, most mfgrs are moot or don't recommend connecting a belt directly to it.

This gets thrashed about periodically, however....on the statistical chances of an accident happening, I'd suggest that, on the track, it's foolhardy thinking that it likely won't happen to you. Here's the upper part of a 911 (not mine), without roll bar/cage, that rolled:



Do you know when you'll encounter oil or antifreeze on the track? Or when somebody in front of you pulls a boneheaded manuever? Or? Or? While safety equipment isn't cheap, as your experience and speeds increase, safety equipment should be considered mandatory. $5 helmet for the $5 head, thought.

My two cents on padding is that you put it on any metal bar your head might hit. That typically means behind the seat doesn't get padded. If you want to be sure, add a seat back brace to your rollbar.

SeaCay

Which is excactly why I purchased a $800 custom three layer nomex suit for driving in DE's. I know this is a bit off topic, but if we are driving around some racetrack at roughly the same speeds as some of the races, then why aren't the safety requirements roughly the same as the racers?

Mark in Baltimore

IIRC, you can order GT3 seats in 996's and GT3 cars without 5 or 6 point harness.

Timothy Stewart

I do not see any discussion about "harness halos".

I purchased a set when I did some events with PCA - San Diego
and I think they are very effective. Certainly they are not
better than a race seat with harness holes. But they certainly
do the job of keeping the harness in place with a stock seat.

tim

Steve in FL

In the US you can't order a 996 with GT3 seats (and the GT3 here comes with standard 996 sport seats if you weren't aware).

In the RoW where you do get GT3 seats in a GT3 you only get the harnesses if you order the Club Sport or RS versions of the GT3. Apparently in some countries you don't get the harnesses or the roll bar pre-installed - depends on the DMV regulations in each country I assume. Porsche sez we don't get the Club Sport or RS versions of the GT3 here in the US because of the process required to get DOT approval. Personally I think they also don't want the liability exposure in the US given the tendency to litigate rather than accept fault when you do something stupid. If you can make millions from spilling McDonalds coffee in your lap imagine what putting a Porsche into a wall at a DE would get you.

RedlineMan

Hey All;

Bill - I certainly would not chastise anyone who wanted to be safer. I get animated in two instances;

1) When people do something patently dumb in the name of safety. This rarely involves anything overtly inane, but it does happen that way occasionally. It mostly occurs when the Merchant of Safety Doom - Unintended Consequences - is not given his due. I feel we have honed the knife to a pretty fine edge already. we've done the easy stuff long ago, and as a consequence, the sides of that blade are steeply inclined. It is all too easy when you reach a certain point to fall off the edge, and cause more problems than you solve!

2) When people exceed "the limit" of what encumbrance we can rightly expect participants to endure. It is a tough thing to work out. Basically, I don't think event organizers want to be involved in telling people what they have to do beyond the basic universal items. Organizers should have no desire to be in the engineering and metalurgy business, for as they mandate, so to do they then accept responsibility for those mandates if they don't keep every loose nut from falling off the knife edge.

I don't argue your points at all. I embrace them. Trust me.. I build this stuff, and think about it way more than most people do. I perhaps just have different limits.

Z-man - I must admit I am ambivalent on some of this. I used a harness bar of my own construction for years. Certainly seemed rugged... at the time. The roll bar that you have - that I now build and sell - is a direct consequence of me beginning to question my own needs (As Bill mentioned), and looking for a higher degree of protection.

As far as belts go, I am a big proponent of attaching them directly to the bar in question - by means of a floating loop - under all circumstances except where the distance between the mount and the seat is not sufficient to allow enough give in the belt. I never build a belt bar in a cage that is closer than 8-10" to the seat for that reason.

Further, my gut tells me that I do not want to create any fulcrum or concentration of energy or stress at any point between the mount and the latch if I can help it. Laying a belt over a guide bar is not the worst scenario (see Earnhardt), but I still don't like it and avoid it, particularly if that bar is one of those rinky dink flimsy things that were around for a while. For my purposes, it is either made of roll cage spec tubing, or it doesn't pass muster.

Another reason I don't like the floor mounted belt laid over a bar arrangement is that this mile long expanse of belt will give an inordinant amount of stretch if one experiences a moment of rapid negative acceleration. Give is good to a point, but too much give means important parts of the driver hit hard things in the car. Full faced helmets are nice too, eh? Right there is a perfect example of stupid ideas that are more dangerous than what they sought to correct. That is what gets me animated most of all.

One can never plan for every eventuality... not without totally ruining the experience. In the end, it is about having healthy respect for the Dark Side, knowing your limits, and tossing in a little bit of luck.

I bring all this up just to get some ideas flying around, and on the odd chance I hadn't thought of everything already! The good ideas will float, the junk will sink. Always searching, just not jumping before the gang plank is set!!

Mark in Baltimore

Steve in FL,

Thanks for the info. My recollection was incorrect.

Dan Gallagher

that looks like a CVR event at limerock at the end of last season...

the roll was on day one of a 2 day event, i was only there for day 2 but i took some pics of it too.... didnt this car roll more than once?

Z-man

John: Thanks for your input. Good valid points, very eloquently worded.

Oh, and regarding the Full face helmet: before I bought my full face G-force, I was using an open face Shoei helmet. People warned me that if I had an impact, I would most likely bust my teeth on the steering wheel. To which I pointed out that it is not the helmet's function to prevent my head from hitting the steering wheel, but rather a function of properly mounted, and adjusted harnesses.

-Z .

Brian P

I don't know about that... Have you seen those videos of crash test dummies that Dateline or 60 minutes likes to show every few months? There's a lot of movement and that's at just 40MPH.

Plus, I've had crap like asphalt and race rubber thrown in the car from the driver's window. That stuff could really hurt. It's why I generally leave my visor closed as well now.

fatbillybob

One of my pet peeves is how close my helmeted head is to the left top tube of the roll cage. Padding just makes me closer to it. The only cars that give you some decent clearance are boxy sedans. What do you guys with full cages think of that? I wonder if it is better to have a roll cage that saves my life from the very rare instantaneous 50g impact or just gives me brain trauma at the more likely sub 20g crash? At 20g's I could probably live with no 6-8 point cage and do fine with a 4 point rollbar. What do you guys think of that?