ltc

I came across this in a karting forum (www.ekartingnews.com) where it was mentioned for possible use in a kart (no harnesses). I didn't think BSF was a problem in a kart, but........

Here is the 'car' version:
http://www.leatt-brace.com/r_product.asp
http://www.leatt-brace.com/pdf/r_instruction_manual.pdf

Here is the 'motorcycle' version:
http://www.leatt-brace.com/gpx_product.asp
http://www.leatt-brace.com/pdf/gpx_i...ion_manual.pdf

I don't really know what to think looking at them.

ceboyd

hmm... I often wondered about motorcycle but usually you are thrown from a motorcycle so I question it even more for motorcycle use IMHO


...otherwise it looks like MORE of a PITA than a HANS which I've finally gotten used to now...

M758

well just a quick look and a look at the description seems to make it look very much like a better neck roll. The neck roll supports the head with contact of the lower parts of the helmet to the roll. This device uses that same principle it appears, but provides a much better positional control than a soft spongy neck roll.

Now controling the helment does not control the head except where you can used the helmet as a sort of head "bucket" This works in general to pull the helmet off the head it appears.

Any ones see this differently?

93 FireHawk 968

I wonder how it compares to the currently available systems? It's priced a bit higher than the others? Any idea on who is selling it?

Joe

Rick964

At $395 for the entry level version that is quite a bit cheaper than HANS or ISAAC (other than the Link model). Interesting to see how this works out with SFI though.

Geo

Looks like a toilet seat.

bruinbro

A toilet seat would probably work the same and cost less.

Bro

DJF1

A toilt seat that actually might be working well... I look forward to seeing more tests on this device.

RedlineMan

Hmmmmph...

My gut reaction is, you've got to be kidding me. This thing does nothing to reduce neck load. It merely attempts to maintain relative head/torso positioning. Position is important to be sure, but no less so than load.

How about a broken neck AND a broken sternum? What a deal.

DJF1

Why would you say that? It looks like it stops the head travel much like all the other devices out there. HANS does nothing to reduce the initial load. It just stops the head and concequently the neck from hyperextending. This device looks to be doing exactly the same. The only device you can argue that it actually reduces the neck load upon impact would be the ISAAC where the shocks start from second 0 to decelerate your head gradually. The HANS has just loose tethers which just stop abruptly your head, yet it is praised by everyone as the most effective solution.
While you can argue that this is nothing more than a fancy collar, I think the difference is as profound as the difference between the soft roll bar padding ( which does little to protect your head) and the FIA padding which is harder but does effectively protect your melon.
I think this device warrants more testing, but unfortunately for them they are not the 900 pound gorilla...

ltc

Here is the contact info from the ekartingnews thread:

Karl Ebel
Marketing

Leatt Corporation Inc.

Operational Headquarters;
Unit 1, Kyalami Plaza, Kyalami Drive, Killarney Gardens, Cape Town, South Africa
Postal: Suite 109, Private Bag X3, Bloubergrant, 7443, South Africa
Tel: +27 21 556 5409

Fax: +27 21 557 3925

Email: karl@leatt-brace.com

Web Site: www.leatt-brace.com
Mobile: +27 721110208

ltc

Could someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but is this the first H&N restraint from outside the US?

HANS, ISAAC, R3, Hutchens, Hutchens Hybrid, D-Cel.....are all US companies.

I am wondering if this new H&N design might skip SFI and perhaps get FIA approval? Yes, I know, the 800# gorilla has a stranglehold on FIA (F1, WRC, etc)........

924RACR

Very interesting. I freaked at first thinking about mobility, till I realized it doesn't have any straps to the helmet - correct?

Still looks like it'd be a challenge to fit out the window opening - great for open-cockpit cars, worse than a HANS for small-window cars.. Would probably pass SFI38.1, for all some of us hate 38.1 (assuming the numbers are good - hard to compare with Delphi and WSU sleds). Don't see actual load numbers up there, though - only motion/geometry info. It is nice to see that they at least are looking at lateral loading too...

Might be a good thing; need more info.

Geo

I didn't see any.

Without straps, what is it restraining?

Tech: "Here, wear this toilet seat....."

RedlineMan

OK...

This is my opinion, and I might be wrong. It is based on intuition. I am not trying to attack you personally DJ, but in my opnion this represents a fundamental MISSUNDERSTANDING of what is going on.

Part of the job of an H&N device is to try and maintain as normal a relationship between the head and the torso as possible. Keeping the head more or less on top of the shoulders and in normal position will reduce neck strain in the geographic, mechanical sense.

However, how do you keep the head in that position if you do not directly hold it in place or restrain it? Obviously, your neck muscles are not strong enough to do it. From my memory of physics - which I failed miserably as a book-learning student - I remember something about equal and opposite forces. To counter a force, you need an equal and opposite force, or in the case of every other H&N device available, a substantial amount of direct restraint. I do not see where this rig will give you that in any possible sense. I do not see how this rig will do anything to lessen the DYNAMIC load on the neck, and I've got to figure that this is at least as important as positional maintenance, if not more so.

I do see that it will attempt to hold your chin up, but how does it counter the dynamic forward load that is trying to rotate the head up and over that collar? I don't see that happening. It seems that it relying solely on changing the vactor of that force. So, instead of your head rotating forward and down to such an extereme that your neck is snapped by leverage, it is stretched to an extreme instead.

Is this safer? Safe enough? I don't see it. I want to see sled test data. Maybe it works. Maybe you survive? Does it reduce the dynamic load or just shift it? Numbers... I want numbers. Computer modeling is next to useless in real terms.

By the way, understanding how the HANS really reacts would reduce some of what I perceive as your dislike for its performance. It is a very well chronicled sequence, and the device performs very well under most circumstances. The Isaac does indeed "outperform" it in total reduction of dyamic load, no doubt at least partially due to the "immediate" take up of the hydraulics. This is a verifiable distinction, but it is a debateable point as to whether you could label it significant. Both are extremely viable products.