new rules for helmets and HANS?

mikeblaszczak said:
I'd tend to agree, Kyle. But there's lots of drivers in Conference who don't run Hondas.
Click to expand...

Something we should remedy. There's a LARGE population of Honda enthusiasm who, IMHO, are spending lots of money on their Hondas without proper direction. If they could somehow be motivated to go racing instead of entering in NOPI or HIN, our membership base could grow quite a bit. To be fair, the same could be said about Bimmer enthusiasts.

BTW Kyle, poking fun at someone, harmlessly is a form of camaraderie. I don't mean anybody any harm nor any disregard as I figure we're all in this together. I know Blaszczak thinks that anyone running Hondas must have a genetic defect but I don't hold that against him. :p

To be on topic I seek out Kyle the most because I whole heartedly agree with his stance on the subject, just not in this context, thus the back and forth. The viewpoint of choice is fine on a larger social or political scale but in this case 1 person's decision or lack thereof could have real negative consequences on the group as a whole. The dynamics of Conference in regards to choice is very different to the philosophy of choice on a national/social level and my cognitive dissonance is trying to stuff a Libertarian ideal into the cookie dish we call Conference. As I try to do so, I'm getting ingredients spilled all over the kitchen floor and don't see how this recipe comes together.

So going back to my original point before everyone but Kyle got angry at my innocent ribbing, since our insurance and legal advisers have deemed that not requiring the device poses no increased risk then I completely support Kyle's thinking and all the philosophical ingredients then actually fit in the cookie dish!, however if the vote went the other way I would still not be bothered because I get the bigger picture and the context in which is set.

However, if our insurers deemed that not making HANS mandatory posed unnecessary and unwarranted risk then I would support only the decision to make them mandatory.

kyle said:
Please don't use the "threat" of an immenant event if some one dies if they are not wearing a restraint. That is BS.
Click to expand...

I agree. Using an appeal to fear or even slippery slope isn't the right way to refute the principle and my doing so is regrettable. I still stand behind the mountains of logic in support of using them.

kyle said:
That is what is wrong with our Country. Too many career politician, lawyers and greedy people.
Click to expand...

And now this is disconnect I'm having. We are not talking about our country, we are talking about ICSCC and not all principles of Democracy, Social freedom, Dictatorship, Libertarianism or whatever social philosophy you subscribe to carry over to what we're trying to do in ICSCC. It isn't the same. Kyle, I'm on your side, and with no comparison to you or anyone else, I am not absolutist in any theories I subscribe to and when I see compromise I take it with a grain of salt. I look at the bigger picture and consider the sources, who stands to profit or who stands to lose. Since HANS or DefNder are not funding a proposition to make them mandatory, and nobody in Conference is trying to usurp more dictatorial power, I think it's safe to say that if they were made mandatory it would be done so with proper intent and spirit of the conference and its participants as a whole without jeopardizing the value the of input our members have.


Mike: You know frustrated I am with trying to change people's minds but I felt I need to at least make my stance clear which I have done so poorly in my previous posts.

I won't post in this thread anymore.
 
Last edited:
The logic that I've heard stated had to do with how a mfg. labels their products in respect to the standard that they have constructed that product. (i.e. UL, FIA, Snell, SFI, ASME, NEMA...etc) But whether any which one of those standards set the standard of longevity, and in any given set of environmental circumstances, or is it a calculation considered by the original design engineering toward any one of those particular standards? Only the risk managers know for sure...

snide-219x300.png

or DO they?​
 
SFI only rates belts for up to 24 months because of tests they have done with the webbing material (although I think that was nylon and not the polyester more commonly in use today [or have I gotten that backwards?]). HANS (for example) are carbon fiber tend not to degrade outside of some external force, although they can delaminate. I imagine nobody's testing the HANS tethers (again, e.g.) like they have with harness webbing.
 
I spoke for over an hour to an engineer at a prominent helmet manufacture about the ratings and certifications for helmets. An interesting conversation. I learned quite a bit. Main point is not the fiber used but the bonding agent. Older methods tended to delaminate with age and exposure. Newer material does not make for better or longer lasting product. Manufactur methods are the main ingredient for a quality product. Carbon fiber is the best due to strength and light weight but only if done in the best practice. From what I learned my first improved and injury preventative product I will buy this year is a lighter helmet from a quality manufacturer. Nothing else has the same injury reduction potential. Right behind that will be a HANS. I chose that manufacturer because of the craftsmanship they use and the info I learned from the helmet manufacturer.
 
Last edited:
Steve Adams said:
SFI only rates belts for up to 24 months because of tests they have done with the webbing material...
Click to expand...

Actually NOT, Steve.

SFI NEVER DID any testing and used the physical tests the SAIL BOAT industry did on materials used in boat rigging. Subjected them to the equivalent of 24 hour days in the broiling sun of a tropical day in the port of Tahiti (that sounds good right now :) ). Test concluded 'boat rigging' needed to be replaced every 2 years. SFI said, that sounds pretty good.. We'll use that even though it in no way resembles a racing environment even for open cockpit cars.

As opposed to 'using' the info from those results, the 'majority' of top boat maintainers replace the running rigging every 4 to 5 years or, when it shows signs of actual physical wear.... Go figure?
 
Last edited:
Close enough. It's pretty much BS however you look at it. My racecar spends far more time under cover (even at the track) than it does in direct sunlight, not to mention that my belts are under a roof.
 
Just ordered a defender $500.00 new to my door. Pays to pin the eyes open and spend hours on the internet completely neglecting all responsibilities to find an inexpensive alternative. After wadding up my rabbit in '06 at PR in true end-over-end fashion, I kinda felt naked racing without one over the last couple of years. I have always been on the fence as far as the expense goes, but after following this thread closely I felt the obligation to myself and family not to put myself at any more risk than necessary. Thanks to all for the education.

"always a student"

tyler
 
tkolbo said:
Just ordered a defender $500.00 new to my door........ I have always been on the fence as far as the expense goes, but after following this thread closely I felt the obligation to myself and family not to put myself at any more risk than necessary. Thanks to all for the education.
Click to expand...

ONE driver convinced :) :) The thread is TOTALLY worth the time and effort by all :) :) Good going Tyler!!
 
In the last two seasons I have added:
-- roll cage brace to foot area to keep left front tire from coming in and mashing my feet. Go look at some pictures of tires coming through the clutch/brake pedal area
-- Replaced belts with 6 point, rather than 5 point
-- Replaced stock tank with fuel cell
-- Bought a much safer suit (thanks Randy!)
-- Put in an AFFF fire system (which includes the cell area)
-- Bought a DefNder
-- Put in the right side containment net

There will come a time when all of the above are required. I'm not rich, but instead of buying a really bitchin' engine I did the above. And I do know how to shop for a deal.

Every time I hear the safety arguments I think of hydroplane racing. Back when Bill Muncey was my hero he ran an open cockpit boat. They also never installed seat belts as they needed to be free in order to be ejected away from the boat when it crashed.
Bill finally died in his sport, well before the technology to protect the drivers came to be.
Now all hydros must have safety capsules that break free, the driver has multi-point belts and an onboard oxygen system. All required.

I find the argument of "You can't mandate my safety" to be specious.
While you can certainly go out onto the street and express yourself by not wearing a seatbelt, you do so as a citizen.
When you join a club you have additional rules that come into play and some of the rights of you, the citizen, have been overridden by club rules. To which you agreed when you signed up.
The Board is elected to oversee the safety of its membership. I'm certain there are some rules to which not all members agree. You may voice this through an election and 'vote the bastards out.' Or vote to keep a rule in or out.
However, if the Board feels it is in the best interest of the club to mandate a rule, they may do so.
Claiming the loss of a right to a personal freedom in this regard is redundant.
When you joined a club some of those rights (like not wearing a seatbelt) no longer exist.
 
Bossbill said:
.....Every time I hear the safety arguments I think of hydroplane racing. Back when Bill Muncey was my hero he ran an open cockpit boat. They also never installed seat belts as they needed to be free in order to be ejected away from the boat when it crashed....
Click to expand...

You know, that used to be the philosophy in auto racing too. Drivers 'distained' the use of seat belts because they thought it was 'better' to leave the car rather then ride in it during a high speed impact. One of the more 'colorful' individuals' to use this technique was Maston Gregory. One weekend when he made rather spectacular leap from his car at speed a reporter asked him "why". His reply... "If you saw what I was about to hit you'd understand"!

Can you imagine a driver with that approach today? No, why? Because racing harness's are "REQUIRED". Some things just make sense :) :)
 
Last edited:
@ Bill V: That HAS GOT TO BE THE BEST STATEMENT about the freedom of choice argument I have heard yet. I love the way you stated it. I am still a stubborn old fart about our freedoms, but I really like what you said.
 
Very happy with my purchase of a Defender head and neck restraint. The seller I purchased from has one more display model for sale for $475.00. Contact info:

bearbaker@verizon.ne​t

Inexpensive safety (oxymoron?)

Tyler
 
Just to add my two euro cents here.. I bought a 2nd hand Hans (got lucky and got a great deal). Before that, I was on the fence due to people saying they were uncomfortable or restrictive, etc.. The cost bothered me, but really, if I couldn't afford a head/neck restraint device, especially with them popping up 2nd hand at great prices every now and then, I don't think I could afford racing in general. My Hans cost me much less than what I spend on a race weekend, less than a set of tires, etc.

So anyway, I was happy with my deal, but I was even happier when I finally sat down in the car with the new custom bead seat, new belts (that actually work for my skinny little body) and the Hans device. I couldn't believe how comfortable it all felt! I'm actually sort of worried that it might give me a false sense of security. And pre-grid will be a struggle to stay awake now, it's like being in a nice warm womb all over again. Ahhhh... Ok, maybe that's a bit too far.

Ok, so the real point of my post is.. Whatever you buy, if it isn't comfortable, you're either doing it wrong or you got the wrong size/angle. Maybe the custom seat just makes everything fit that much better, but I really was surprised at how solid but at the same time, fluffy, I felt in the car :p hehe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top