ltc

Found some new literature on the R3 device (SFI38.1 compliant, along with HANS) and wanted to pass it on:

http://www.lfttech.com/images/R3_Brochure.pdf

http://www.lfttech.com/

An interesting observation is that it can be worn (attached to driver's torso) or permanently attached to the seat (although an asterisk at the bottom of the brochure says this is not approved..no idea by whom).

They also show pictures of the belts coming off the HANS device in a side impact test. The HANS does not appear to be the 'newer' style with 'wings'.

It does not appear to use the same helmet attachments as HANS and it appears as though the QD tethers are attached to the chin of the helmet?

It is designed by the same group who did the original Hutchens device.

gbaker

I'm glad to see Trevor getting more aggresive in his marketing.

The chin attachment is so you don't have to search for the tethers.

Juan Lopez

I wonder if it would work attached to the points on a GForce helmet

Larry Herman

I am leaning to the R3 device for this simple reason. If I am going to "bite it hard", it will more likely be in a students car than in mine, especially considering that I ride with a fair number of white and black group drivers. Having a device that I can wear 100% of the time is argueably better than a supposed "better device" that can only be worn in my car. Worth thinking about.

RedlineMan

Hmmm...

My gut reactions -

- Assuming the HANS stayed under the belts, I see it providing far superior protection in a side impact. I see the R3 doing very little.

- If the HANS did NOT stay under the belts, the R3 may help more, as little as my impression of that would be.

- The depiction of the HANS being "inferior" to the R3 in side impacts is EXCEEDINGLY DISINGENUOUS. If I am seeing correctly, the R3 test photos are taken with an extensive halo seat while the HANS photos are not!!! In fact, if I am correct, I find that moderately sleezy.

- The R3 certainly stands to offer "longer term protection" in that it is attached to the occupant, not reliant on the belts for retention.

- All in all, I would have found it difficult to make a decision which to buy if I had known about the R3 when I bought my HANS.

gbaker

Belt slippage off the HANS device is well documented, including on the sled test used for the SFI 38.1 spec.

IIRC, the R3 comes in different shapes to accommodate various seat angles, so it should not be considered a universal device.

mitch236

I have been thinking that attaching the helmet to the seat may offer the best protection, although this would mean that it would only protect you in your car. Is there a good reason not to attach your helmet to the seat with teather straps?

Larry Herman

I'm not sure that attaching straps to the seat is such a good idea. On the surface it sounds ok, but I would be concerned with belt stretch, and having a reverse condition where my body moves forward through belt stretch, but my head, being tethered to the seat, doesn't. This is pure speculation, though, not having any testing to back it up.

RedlineMan

But...

It is EXCELLENT speculation, Larry. I don't think I'd go there.

M758

What is the cost for this?
I could not find anything on the website.

ltc

$875
http://www.clracing.com/clracing/r3.htm
http://www.clracing.com/clracing/ima...ber%202004.jpg

ltc

Just my 0.02, it doesn't appear to be very comfortable, especially that 'tail' running along your upper spine when seated.
I'm also trying to figure out if your shoulder haresses go over or under the device; it's not clear in the second link/picture, even when you left click on the photo to enlarge, as the 2 views/drawings don't seem to match.

It's also interesting that even though this is SFI38.1 certified, NA$CAR has apparently specified HANS (also 38.1) ONLY. Developed by the same group who did the original Hutchens, perhaps they are trying to get this approved for use as well?

I'm just wondering what exactly 38.1 means and to whom it will ultimately matter.

M758

Not sure of the details of SF38.1, but I do know that NASA rules for 2005 state that they may require a SFI38.1 device in 2006.

The reason all comes down to their being a standard and liability. SCCA is in a similar positoin as is PCA. I would expect that in some period of time (maybe 2006 or 2007) all of the sacntioning bodies will reqiure a SFI38.1 device or a device meeting FIA cert (if an FIA standard is relaeased).



Thanks for the price info.

The good/bad news is that the prices of HANS, R3 and ISAAC are all pretty much the same. High, but that means the cost is not factor in which one to buy.

mitch236

DOUHH!!!

Bill935K3

looks like good HANS is going to get some competion
FYI
I had a square sideways hit on the passanger side at Mt Tremblant 2 years ago. Esimated speed of around 115. Original HANS and LEAF belts. The HANS stayed under the belts and IMOP was a great help. The left side web strap was stretched permanently 1/2" longer. It had to absorb quite a load to have that much memory. I can see this happening though especialy if a person does not really re sock down his straps after 4-5 laps. I really want to see one of the new style HANS at Sebring