PCA equal restraint rule + HANS/harnesses
07-10-2023, 12:02 AM
#91
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
A few more points:
Some head and neck restraint products have both SFI and FIA cert./homologation. Some have only one. This may merit some consideration by prospective users/purchasers or it may not.
The Schroth SHR Flex is an example.
It is also an example of a product marketed as having some potential benefits from features that may not be part of SFI or FIA standards. This may merit some consideration by prospective users/purchasers or it may not.
Cursory review of the Flex DFUs compared to a different (more traditional?) Schroth product suggest required and/or recommended shoulder harness mounting and angles are the same.
Folks should also note that SFI and or FIA standards for head and neck restraints may not include any considerations for a 3 point belt implementation-- I have not reviewed the standards in several years. However we can conclude that a product designed for a 3 point belt implementation or a harness implementation can meet SFI and/or FIA standards... when used with a harness implementation. Simpson product is an example.
Simpson's marketing language is interesting-- it mentions Federal Motor Vehicle safety standards:
https://www.simpsonraceproducts.com/...rts/HYSSML11PA
"Simpson's Hybrid S model is currently the only Frontal Head Restraint proven effective for 3-point harnesses, and it is also FIA and SFI approved. Additionally, in a partnership with Detroit auto manufacturers, the Hybrid S is third party tested to FMVSS208. The Hybrid S allows high-performance driving instructors, auto manufacturing test engineers, and other drivers with 3-point harnesses access to the advantages of head restraint safety. The FIA Hybrid Head Restraint, in conjunction with a Snell or FIA rated helmet and a 3-point harness, reduced neck tension significantly when compared to a test with only a helmet and 3-point harness. While we can offer head restraint protection for use with 3-point seatbelts, Simpson's top concern is driver and instructor safety. We suggest a Full Containment Cockpit System that includes a Full Containment Seat, Snell or FIA rated Helmet, FIA or SFI approved Frontal Head Restraint, and a 5 to 7-point seatbelt harness system for the best protection while on the track."
Of course one key question is whether those Fed standards have any relationship to the race track use case (versus public roads).
And I am curious the testing details...
As a capitalist I am also curious about whether there is a competing product, and if not, why not.
Some head and neck restraint products have both SFI and FIA cert./homologation. Some have only one. This may merit some consideration by prospective users/purchasers or it may not.
The Schroth SHR Flex is an example.
It is also an example of a product marketed as having some potential benefits from features that may not be part of SFI or FIA standards. This may merit some consideration by prospective users/purchasers or it may not.
Cursory review of the Flex DFUs compared to a different (more traditional?) Schroth product suggest required and/or recommended shoulder harness mounting and angles are the same.
Folks should also note that SFI and or FIA standards for head and neck restraints may not include any considerations for a 3 point belt implementation-- I have not reviewed the standards in several years. However we can conclude that a product designed for a 3 point belt implementation or a harness implementation can meet SFI and/or FIA standards... when used with a harness implementation. Simpson product is an example.
Simpson's marketing language is interesting-- it mentions Federal Motor Vehicle safety standards:
https://www.simpsonraceproducts.com/...rts/HYSSML11PA
"Simpson's Hybrid S model is currently the only Frontal Head Restraint proven effective for 3-point harnesses, and it is also FIA and SFI approved. Additionally, in a partnership with Detroit auto manufacturers, the Hybrid S is third party tested to FMVSS208. The Hybrid S allows high-performance driving instructors, auto manufacturing test engineers, and other drivers with 3-point harnesses access to the advantages of head restraint safety. The FIA Hybrid Head Restraint, in conjunction with a Snell or FIA rated helmet and a 3-point harness, reduced neck tension significantly when compared to a test with only a helmet and 3-point harness. While we can offer head restraint protection for use with 3-point seatbelts, Simpson's top concern is driver and instructor safety. We suggest a Full Containment Cockpit System that includes a Full Containment Seat, Snell or FIA rated Helmet, FIA or SFI approved Frontal Head Restraint, and a 5 to 7-point seatbelt harness system for the best protection while on the track."
Of course one key question is whether those Fed standards have any relationship to the race track use case (versus public roads).
And I am curious the testing details...
As a capitalist I am also curious about whether there is a competing product, and if not, why not.
FIA vs SFI: SFI is pretty much only acknowledged here in the USA. FIA is a more worldwide standard. Every HANS, Stand 21, Schroth and Hybrid S can be gotten with either or both certifications on them. Dual cert costs a little more. There is absolutely no difference between the devices themselves whether it carries an SFI, FIA or both sticker. We sell only FIA stickered devices.
The Flex is a good unit especially if you find the standard HANS or other similar devices to not sit comfortably on you shoulders because of it's ability to be adjusted. While we do sell the Schroth flex, my issue primarily is the lack of padding that it comes with. I find the HANS more comfortable, but that's just me.
FIA and SFI certification standards have absolutely nothing to do with use with 3 point harnesses. They are safety standards based on racing, and you will never have a 3 pt harness in a race car.
The Hybrid S was not designed for use with a 3 point harness. It was found to meet the FMVSS208 standard BY one of the car manufacturers (I believe it was Chrysler) and Simpson was informed about the findings. So of course they market it that way, but it was never a design criteria when it was developed. And quite possibly because of this is why there is no competing product. A car manufacturer was using their product for crash testing and found that it "reduced neck tension significantly when compared to a test with only a helmet and 3-point harness." You would have to get that same manufacturer to run the exact same test with your product to claim it's the same as they Hybrid S, because, honestly, there is no "standard" to test against. Again, it's not in the SFI or FIA standards for testing, so its kind of a one-off gray area.
__________________
Bob Saville
Getting You On Track!
www.naroescapemotorsports.com
704-395-2975
'07 SPC
'71 914/6 Huey
'04 GT3
Bob Saville
Getting You On Track!
www.naroescapemotorsports.com
704-395-2975
- Data Analysis & Coaching
- Drivers Gear
- Crew Gear
- Car Gear
'07 SPC
'71 914/6 Huey
'04 GT3
07-10-2023, 03:31 AM
#92
Three Wheelin'
"The Hybrid S was not designed for use with a 3 point harness. It was found to meet the FMVSS208 standard BY one of the car manufacturers (I believe it was Chrysler) and Simpson was informed about the findings. So of course they market it that way, but it was never a design criteria when it was developed. And quite possibly because of this is why there is no competing product. A car manufacturer was using their product for crash testing and found that it "reduced neck tension significantly when compared to a test with only a helmet and 3-point harness." You would have to get that same manufacturer to run the exact same test with your product to claim it's the same as they Hybrid S, because, honestly, there is no "standard" to test against. Again, it's not in the SFI or FIA standards for testing, so its kind of a one-off gray area."
Not unexpected.
Hence my post.
I wonder if most users and/or the organizations that allow the use of this product with 3-point belts are aware of this.
Not unexpected.
Hence my post.
I wonder if most users and/or the organizations that allow the use of this product with 3-point belts are aware of this.
Last edited by Mahler9th; 07-10-2023 at 12:50 PM.
07-10-2023, 06:18 AM
#93
Rennlist Member
"The Hybrid S was not designed for use with a 3 point harness. It was found to meet the FMVSS208 standard BY one of the car manufacturers (I believe it was Chrysler) and Simpson was informed about the findings. So of course they market it that way, but it was never a design criteria when it was developed. And quite possibly because of this is why there is no competing product. A car manufacturer was using their product for crash testing and found that it "reduced neck tension significantly when compared to a test with only a helmet and 3-point harness." You would have to get that same manufacturer to run the exact same test with your product to claim it's the same as they Hybrid S, because, honestly, there is no "standard" to test against. Again, it's not in the SFI or FIA standards for testing, so its kind of a one-off gray area."
Not unexpected.
Hence my post.
I wonder if most users and/or the organizations that allow the use of this product with 3-point beltsare aware of this.
Not unexpected.
Hence my post.
I wonder if most users and/or the organizations that allow the use of this product with 3-point beltsare aware of this.
07-10-2023, 07:51 AM
#94
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Use of the Hybrid S in a 3 point belt scenario is far safer than using nothing at all. The Hybrid S is SFI and FIA certified so it does meet those standards that we all follow and is perfectly fine to use with full 6 point harnesses. Many people use it with full 6 point harnesses, including a lot of pro drivers (especially in Nascar). But again, the use of ANYTHING with a 3 point belt is not something that there is a standard for. SFI and FIA do not cover street car safety equipment use. That's where the FMVSS208 comes in - its a Federal safety standard pertaining to occupant crash protection that this device meets.
IMO, the fact that an independent company that was NOT the manufacturer is the one that determined the benefit and safety aspect of the device for a specific use case means a lot.
07-10-2023, 01:02 PM
#95
Three Wheelin'
"But again, the use of ANYTHING with a 3 point belt is not something that there is a standard for. SFI and FIA do not cover street car safety equipment use."
Yes I figured that. But as I said, I have not reviewed SFI or FIA information in many years.
"IMO, the fact that an independent company that was NOT the manufacturer is the one that determined the benefit and safety aspect of the device for a specific use case means a lot."
Which car manufacturer? What make and model? What DOT safety systems were in that vehicle? What use case? Is there any information in the public domain about this?
Can this information/these test results be extrapolated to other types of vehicles and use cases?
I have no reason to doubt the veracity of the product claims. Nor any reason to believe them.
After what happened 20+ years ago, I suspect that Simpson has done some diligence with respect to potential liability in making claims.
If an organization such as PCA allows such a product with DOT belt systems, I hope that they understand the details.
Yes I figured that. But as I said, I have not reviewed SFI or FIA information in many years.
"IMO, the fact that an independent company that was NOT the manufacturer is the one that determined the benefit and safety aspect of the device for a specific use case means a lot."
Which car manufacturer? What make and model? What DOT safety systems were in that vehicle? What use case? Is there any information in the public domain about this?
Can this information/these test results be extrapolated to other types of vehicles and use cases?
I have no reason to doubt the veracity of the product claims. Nor any reason to believe them.
After what happened 20+ years ago, I suspect that Simpson has done some diligence with respect to potential liability in making claims.
If an organization such as PCA allows such a product with DOT belt systems, I hope that they understand the details.
Last edited by Mahler9th; 07-10-2023 at 01:04 PM.