ltc

http://www.hmsmotorsport.com/news.php?newsID=49

" the Hutchens failed to meet minimum standards from testing by SFI Foundation Inc. The HANS device was approved by SFI, a California-based nonprofit organization that sets standards for specialty/performance automotive and racing equipment."

I think someone here (in a recent thread) had reservations about SFI certification and exactly what it meant.

Wonder if other sactioning bodies will follow suit and what this means for other devices (ISAAC, R3, et. al.)

Jarez Mifkin

Great! I just bought a Hutchens since I couldn't afford a HANS! Story of my life I tell ya.

924RACR

I seriously hope the other sanctioning bodies will not adopt this spec. SFI is selling the spec on the myth that "some spec is better than none" - incorrect, and relies on ignorance.

The correct statement is that some H+N protection is better than none - even if it's the less expensive webbing devices.

Unfortunately, if SCCA, PCA, NASA, etc are to adopt this spec they'll put many racers in the position of having to park their H+N restraints. I dearly hope that these groups are not so benighted as to prevent us from using proven safety devices such as these. But it's up to us, as members of those groups, to let them hear our voices and to let them know we don't approve of it.

mitch236

I think that is the others adopt this spec, they will require HANS's use, not either HANS or nothing.

Jarez Mifkin

I agree with you Mitch, there's no way they can say you can wear a HANS, but if you don't have a HANS then you just can't wear anything at all.

924RACR

Well, that's exactly what the SCCA rules, at least, will state if they adopt 38.1.

Currently the use of a H+N device is strongly recommended, but not required.

It would be very easy to simply add to that a statement that any H+N device used must be certified to SFI 38.1.

Now you can race without a Hutchens, but not with.

Maybe you guys have more confidence in the PCA or SCCA rulemakers than I do. I run in IT. I have plenty of reasons to be skeptical - the ITCS is full of them!! Thankfully the ITAC is helping clear up some of the mess now.

It's a whole lot easier to keep bad rules out of the rulebook than it is to get them out after the fact.

mitch236

ain't that the truth

Jarez Mifkin

I spoke with the PBOC rules makers a few minutes ago, They said that since they don't require a H+N device, that we are free to use what we have.

Al P.

hopefully after getting off the phone they weren't sitting around going.....

"H+N devices sound like a good idea, let's see what NASCAR's doing about this"

924RACR

That's the concern I have... Sure, this requirement may well be a good idea at that level of racing, but I can't agree that it makes sense down at this level. I don't have too many concrete walls to head-on into at 190mph.

mitch236

That's not correct logic. While I may not agree with forcing you to use a HANS device, I believe h&n restraints should be mandatory, along with head fence seats. You can do considerable damage to your spine or carotid arteries with a much slower impact than 190mph.

Geo

First of all, if the SCCA adopts 38.1 for club racing it will not likely not be HANS only since the R3 also meets 38.1. NADSCAR is requiring HANS only, but Champ Car and F1 have been doing that for some time and I would expect that to continue.

What that will mean is any uncertified H&N device would be SOL. Will the various sanctioning bodies adopt 38.1 for amateur racing? I think it's a foregone conclusion. The question is how soon. If they don't they leave themselves open for a law suit the first time someone has a basal skull fracture.

The real question in my mind is SFI. It's well known I don't like nor trust SFI. It is NOT and independent organization like Snell. I'd love to see an independent organization formed to set standards and funded by the certifications issued (per unit sold). For me, I'm buying as much FIA homologated safety gear as I can going forward.

Where does this leave the Isaac? Well, until they submit for certification and join SFI (IMHO the critical part - so I'm cynical), it would be out in the cold. Having met Gregg personally and knowing what I know of him and how he takes care of his drivers, I cannot imagine them not getting their device approved if sanctioning bodies adopt 38.1 for amateur racing. At least I sure hope so (and I own a HANS).

Glen

I dont understand this debate at all. HANS is the best, there have been no BSF fatalities on anyone who has used it in an incident. The cost has come down every year and will continue to as more are in use. Before everyone jumps on the"can't afford it dogpile",all the cost means is not Racing ONE RACE WEEKEND this coming season in order to be able to purchase one. If You race, DE or anything You can't afford to do it at all without a HANS.

924RACR

Can't say I'd agree with that, Glen, for numerous reasons, but that's not the point of this thread (and I don't see the point of taking it there). The point here is the concern about sanctioning bodies adopting 38.1, or doing so prematurely, and where that leaves users of less expensive but still effective devices like Hutchens, Wright, etc.

Don't drink the Kool-aid.

ltc

IIRC, post mortem analysis of the Earnhardt crash showed a velocity vector of ~ 40mph into the wall.

I have never witnessed a live sled test, but the videos I've seen at 35-45mph are sobering.