chrisp

And the price reflects it. Unfortunately my budget can't accomodate that...not sure my car could either.

RedlineMan

Hey Guys;

Good discussion. The Kirkey 5300 is indeed top drawer, up there with ISP, LaJoie, Butler, etc. These are the cream of the alloy crop. I have not seen the 5300 yet in the flesh, but it is a very well conceived item from what I can see.

The Kirkey RR Deluxe is a very well built and turned out product, but it is certainly not a containment seat, and should never be asked to do what a containment seat would. Neither is any Ultrashield seat but the RR Super Seat. The Super is a very good product. It is not as refined in execution as the Kirkey products, but the function is fine. It does not have quite the high level of containment of the "top drawer" alloy units, but this can be an advantage in that it does not take up the extreme amount of room those seats do.

The Ultrashield Lightweight is NOT a seat I would consider, for the same reason I reject the Recaro Pro Racer for SERIOUS speed work. These seats have head halos, but not shoulder containment. DUMB!!! This is probably just as bad as the reverse; holding the torso solid, but not supporting the head.

None of the Ultrashield seats below the Lightweight have enough stiffness to be a truly viable product, in my opinion. If you are going for a traditional wing seat, the Kirkey Deluxe is the only alloy seat that has the right amount of structural integrity to not necessarily require a back brace.

This is now what my RR Deluxe looks like.

chrisp

My gut tells me that halo alone is still a worthwhile addition because the head is not harnessed. Harnesses hold the body, HANS eliminates forward over extension, and the Halo prevents side to side. Other head and neck can provide similar benefits as the halo (like ISAAC). Let's not turn this into a head and neck discussion though.

Halo without a head and neck restraint is a really bad idea in my book whether you have side containment or not.

I have a seat back brace now and will continue to use it but bolt it to the seat if I go aluminum.

bruinbro

C'mon, we could turn this thread into a PPV event.

Bro

gbaker

That's a great idea. I'm on board.

Geo

But the issue I think that is being noodled here is if the halo contains the head while there is inadequate shoulder retention, when the upper body moves and the head stays, that will likely mean bad news.

gbaker

..and that's the only thing that scares me about side nets. I'd have to check the specific papers presented by Tom Gideon and Hubert Gramling at the SAE Motorsports conference in 2004, but I *think* those sled test all used significant shoulder support--like John's above--when testing the incremental effectiveness of the side nets.

I don't believe the nets were tested in combination with no/moderate shoulder support. The driver is probably better off with them than without, but there may be some combination of impact/support that presents a problem.

RedlineMan

Hey;

I don't seek to make this a H&N thread. that is a seperate topic from seat-born head containment.

As George surmizes, corraling the head but not the torso can be really problematic, just as bad as the reverse. Even with all the video clips of crash testing available, most people still have no comprehension of just how much a body moves even if restrained by the best harness you can get. 4" for the hips, and 12-18" for the shoulders in a 30-40G hit. That is a lot of movement. Too much for the avergae wing seat to do any good at all.

There is another myth; that a wing seat will offer shoulder retention in a crash. Yes, there can be some benefit, but when you consider the angle of the wings (which is pretty shallow), and that the torso will be moving so far away from the seat, they cannot be looked at as a retention device. They should be considered as merely a driver support, PRE-crash.

The idea of containment from an H&N perspective is to maintain the relative static position of the head over the torso. If you add a halo without shoulder containment, you stand to corral the head from moving laterally, but the shoulders will project out from the wings and be moving out and from under the head. This will put a complex bending load on the spine, which bothers me. Like having a rib crusher seat with little commensurate shoulder support; the ribs take a real beating! I would prefer not to subject my neck to such abuse.

There may indeed be some benefit in a crash that does not have enough force to significantly project the torso under the halo, as head whip may reduced by the halo, but it really makes no sense to me to have half the equation when the math exists to solve it!

RedlineMan

Indeed;

I don't think anyone should look to a side net to make up for a miserable seat. Side nets are a last-ditch fail safe. They help support the seat, or the driver in instances where the seat may fail or simply not be up to the task of a brutal hit. A side net is merely a final component in an increasingly comprehensive system. I've been mulling one myself.

JCP911S

I think there is some scenario that can make almost any combination of safety equipment fail... "Retention" and "Impact" are really two sides of the same coin... if maximum retention were the goal, harnesses would be make out of steel cable...!!!!

Still, it makes sense to me that a seat offering full containment at hips, shoulders, and head is more liketly to reduce injury in side impact than any other combo, and that an alloy seat that deforms and stays there absorbs more energy than a plastic seats that deforms and snaps back...

But it is all a matter of degree...

To some extent the plastic wing seat is a product of European thinking steming from sportscar/raod racing, whereas the full containment alloy seat is an American/oval track thing.

Is this due to cultural differences or real-world differences in the performance in actual crashes?

Hard to tell, but my prejudice (and it is purely a prejudice) is that Europeans in general, tend to be less fanatical about "safety" than Americans... whether this means they are more risk prone, or that Americanbs are over-reacting, I would not even try to judge.

Botom line, in the absence of some clear, scientific concensus, it is up to each driver to make the decision they feel are best...

chrisp

One other subtlety to consider is the memory/rebound of a plastic seat is good for seconday and tertiary impacts. If the time between hits is enough body position returns to static and then the system is ready for another hit. An aluminum seat doesn't do this and if a side bolster has collapsed then you bolster-less for the next impact.

JCP911S

Exactly... no clear concensus... every accident scenario has a different "optimum'... you just have to decide what is the most likely, and design for that.

For example, an NASCAR chassis is designed to be very rigid to withstand the multiple collisions/barrel rolling that is most common int these races... but a direct shot into the wall (ala Earnhardt) drives a huge about of G-forces into the driver. Indy cars, on the other hand are designed to crush to absorb a singe very high-G impact.

RedlineMan

On the flip side of that...

You have a driver projecting out of, and trying to recoil back into, a plastic seat that may not "be there" waiting because it has returned to satic position to some degree. The driver may recoil into the sides of the seat, which may be potentially unjurious. The aluminum seat - assuming deformation - might be there waiting to receive the driver, and reduce the chance of injury on rebound.

As JCP effectively said, there are as many scenarios as there are accidents. I feel the full containment model has been proven beyond a doubt, in real world incidents, to be the best.

Study and Choose.

OGRacing

John & everyone else following this thread. There is a new full containmant Road Race seat coming from Kirkey. The availability is not going to be until July 2006. I sat in the prototype at the show and liked the support that it provided. It's similer to the Full containment Layback. As soon as they are available we will have them at our Sterling Va. and the OG Racing at Summit Point store.

Bill Love

[QUOTE=RedlineMan]Hey Guys;

Good discussion. The Kirkey 5300 is indeed top drawer, up there with ISP, LaJoie, Butler, etc. These are the cream of the alloy crop. I have not seen the 5300 yet in the flesh, but it is a very well conceived item from what I can see.

The Kirkey RR Deluxe is a very well built and turned out product, but it is certainly not a containment seat, and should never be asked to do what a containment seat would. Neither is any Ultrashield seat but the RR Super Seat. The Super is a very good product. It is not as refined in execution as the Kirkey products, but the function is fine. It does not have quite the high level of containment of the "top drawer" alloy units, but this can be an advantage in that it does not take up the extreme amount of room those seats do.

The Ultrashield Lightweight is NOT a seat I would consider, for the same reason I reject the Recaro Pro Racer for SERIOUS speed work. These seats have head halos, but not shoulder containment. DUMB!!! This is probably just as bad as the reverse; holding the torso solid, but not supporting the head.

None of the Ultrashield seats below the Lightweight have enough stiffness to be a truly viable product, in my opinion. If you are going for a traditional wing seat, the Kirkey Deluxe is the only alloy seat that has the right amount of structural integrity to not necessarily require a back brace.

chrisp

Kirkey told me September on the containment seat when I called yesterday. Perhaps they padded the date because they were speaking to an end consumer.

Thanks to all for all of the good info and input