ExRacer Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 (edited) Checking the CCR and noting that the side restraint net or head restraint 15.17.9 Head Restraint – Side Impact will be required from 7/1/07. Question? Doesn't a properly fitted Hans device satisfy this requirement? Not trying to circumvent the rules, but it seems that it is superior to a helmeted racer with/without a horsecollar, even though a racer without a collar and a side net meets the rules . . . Clarification please. I'm planning on running a friend's car at the next event and he doesn't have the side net yet, but I have a Hans. Edited June 23, 2007 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExRacer Posted June 23, 2007 Author Share Posted June 23, 2007 OK sorry Ryan, missed this post http://www.nasaforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=15812 Any tech guy got an opinion on whether a Hans mitigates this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce L. Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 LOL, the limitations of the HANS design are exactly the reason for requiring an alternative side impact restraint! HANS is only useful in a fore/aft direction. Now an Isaac Device does provide lateral restraint, but NASA isn't willing to accept that for some reason. bruce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkeF Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Now an Isaac Device does provide lateral restraint, but NASA isn't willing to accept that for some reason. bruce Did they provide any reasoning? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce L. Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 not that I've heard - they probably don't feel like making the equivalence judgement in the absence of standards. bruce Now an Isaac Device does provide lateral restraint, but NASA isn't willing to accept that for some reason. bruce Did they provide any reasoning? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExRacer Posted June 24, 2007 Author Share Posted June 24, 2007 Thanks guys for the insight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmw22 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 not that I've heard - they probably don't feel like making the equivalence judgement in the absence of standards.bruce Now an Isaac Device does provide lateral restraint, but NASA isn't willing to accept that for some reason. bruce Did they provide any reasoning? The Isaac is not SFI rated. NASA is basing their decision on SFI rating. The Isaac doesn't meet SFI rating because it doesn't have a single quick release mechanism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpanther Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 not that I've heard - they probably don't feel like making the equivalence judgement in the absence of standards.bruce Now an Isaac Device does provide lateral restraint, but NASA isn't willing to accept that for some reason. bruce Did they provide any reasoning? The Isaac is not SFI rated. NASA is basing their decision on SFI rating. The Isaac doesn't meet SFI rating because it doesn't have a single quick release mechanism. H&N and side restraint are two different subjects. At some point, *BOTH* may be required. The current requirement for side restraint is not under SFI rules at this point. SFI has no requirements for side restraint in road race applications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriverGT5 Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 not that I've heard - they probably don't feel like making the equivalence judgement in the absence of standards.bruce Now an Isaac Device does provide lateral restraint, but NASA isn't willing to accept that for some reason. bruce Did they provide any reasoning? The Isaac is not SFI rated. NASA is basing their decision on SFI rating. The Isaac doesn't meet SFI rating because it doesn't have a single quick release mechanism. The rumor I heard was the Issac didn't even pass the crash numbers needed to qualify. Regardless, a strong "halo" will provide better protection than any device on the market. I just ordered an R3 and as soon as the RX-7 is back together, I'm installing a serious Halo bar on the seat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renntag Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 ... I'm installing a serious Halo bar on the seat. Do you have pics of this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Corkran Posted July 5, 2007 Share Posted July 5, 2007 ... I'm installing a serious Halo bar on the seat. Do you have pics of this? What, you haven't looked inside Kent's car lately? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce L. Posted July 5, 2007 Share Posted July 5, 2007 rumor? why don't you just go to the isaac site and look at the results? You'll see more test results there than on the hans site ... not that I've heard - they probably don't feel like making the equivalence judgement in the absence of standards.bruce Now an Isaac Device does provide lateral restraint, but NASA isn't willing to accept that for some reason. bruce Did they provide any reasoning? The Isaac is not SFI rated. NASA is basing their decision on SFI rating. The Isaac doesn't meet SFI rating because it doesn't have a single quick release mechanism. The rumor I heard was the Issac didn't even pass the crash numbers needed to qualify. Regardless, a strong "halo" will provide better protection than any device on the market. I just ordered an R3 and as soon as the RX-7 is back together, I'm installing a serious Halo bar on the seat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renntag Posted July 5, 2007 Share Posted July 5, 2007 ... I'm installing a serious Halo bar on the seat. Do you have pics of this? What, you haven't looked inside Kent's car lately? yes, but I dont call it a "serious Halo bar". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriverGT5 Posted July 5, 2007 Share Posted July 5, 2007 rumor? why don't you just go to the isaac site and look at the results? You'll see more test results there than on the hans site ... All I can find on their site is a few charts that list the things they're good at and the competitors they beat. There are an awful lot of systems not listed and about 10 figures not shown. All it takes is one to fail a sled test. To me, the real telling thing is that they haven't re-designed anything. If the Issac was really so good, there should be an SFI version on the market already. It can't be that hard to design a carbon fiber mount for some pistons that meets standards. The "single-point" release is easy enough to get around, and regardless of how you feel about SFI specs, they seem vital to selling products. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriverGT5 Posted July 5, 2007 Share Posted July 5, 2007 ... I'm installing a serious Halo bar on the seat. Do you have pics of this? And some shoulder supports to go with it. Apparently that is a crucial part of a halo setup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkeF Posted July 5, 2007 Share Posted July 5, 2007 rumor? why don't you just go to the isaac site and look at the results? You'll see more test results there than on the hans site ... All I can find on their site is a few charts that list the things they're good at and the competitors they beat. There are an awful lot of systems not listed and about 10 figures not shown. All it takes is one to fail a sled test. To me, the real telling thing is that they haven't re-designed anything. If the Issac was really so good, there should be an SFI version on the market already. It can't be that hard to design a carbon fiber mount for some pistons that meets standards. The "single-point" release is easy enough to get around, and regardless of how you feel about SFI specs, they seem vital to selling products. Gregg Baker of ISAAC addressed this. He felt using one point of release would jeopardize the safety of the device. How would you suggest doing it? (Not trying to be a dick, simply curious). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExRacer Posted July 5, 2007 Author Share Posted July 5, 2007 Hey GT5 who makes that head suppport? I have purchased the Kirkey aluminum side bolsters but after seeing the video about how they collapsed on the RaceTech site, I'm a little leary about bolting/welding them in without some extra bracing. That assembly seems pretty stout. What's the construction and mounting method? Thanks for your post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renntag Posted July 5, 2007 Share Posted July 5, 2007 ...That assembly seems pretty stout. What's the construction and mounting method? Thanks for your post. Agreed. Do you have any more detailed pics? TIA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriverGT5 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Randy just ordered one from ISP in Charlotte. They bolt to any aluminum race seat. I too have a Kirkey one that is so flimsy it's there to pass rules only. It was so bad that at Rockingham just the cornering forces put it out of whack. I had to reach up 1/2 through the race to bend it back. Will that do anything in a wreck..... ummm..... Yay for the letter of the rules and not the intent! I took one look at Randy's ISP unit and I knew I'd get one. It's all high density foam and super strong aluminum. I think it runs right at $200 but for the level of protection that adds, I consider it money well spent. I'd buy one of those and shoulder supports before a H&N Restraint if it were and issue. As for the Issac, I don't see why you can't bolt two pistons to a cf "T" and strap in to you like all the other H&N R's. The fact that he "feels" it isn't safe means he hasn't tested other methods. If his product is so much better, than he should do what ever possible to get it into the hands of drivers. You can't say one one hand the concept is better than anything else, then on the other not put forth the effort to design and test an SFI legal unit. There is another puzzle piece missing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExRacer Posted July 7, 2007 Author Share Posted July 7, 2007 GT5 what do the letters ISP stand for? I googled it and nothing race stuff came up. Do they have a website? Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce L. Posted July 7, 2007 Share Posted July 7, 2007 gregg's problem is that there are problems with the SFI spec - he's got principles ... this has been covered ad nauseum here and on other sites ... cheers, bruce Randy just ordered one from ISP in Charlotte. They bolt to any aluminum race seat. I too have a Kirkey one that is so flimsy it's there to pass rules only. It was so bad that at Rockingham just the cornering forces put it out of whack. I had to reach up 1/2 through the race to bend it back. Will that do anything in a wreck..... ummm..... Yay for the letter of the rules and not the intent! I took one look at Randy's ISP unit and I knew I'd get one. It's all high density foam and super strong aluminum. I think it runs right at $200 but for the level of protection that adds, I consider it money well spent. I'd buy one of those and shoulder supports before a H&N Restraint if it were and issue. As for the Issac, I don't see why you can't bolt two pistons to a cf "T" and strap in to you like all the other H&N R's. The fact that he "feels" it isn't safe means he hasn't tested other methods. If his product is so much better, than he should do what ever possible to get it into the hands of drivers. You can't say one one hand the concept is better than anything else, then on the other not put forth the effort to design and test an SFI legal unit. There is another puzzle piece missing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriverGT5 Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 GT5 what do the letters ISP stand for? I googled it and nothing race stuff came up. Do they have a website? Thanks Innovative Safety Products The guy's name is Chris and 800-432-2798 is the number. Their shop is right next to Lowes Motor Speedway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExRacer Posted July 9, 2007 Author Share Posted July 9, 2007 Thanks, we installed a RaceTech net on one of our cars this weekend and it was very narrow on the vertical side of the triangle with only 2 straps. Another shop (7s Only) had a net from SS and it had a much wider span with 3 straps to attach to the cage. Evidently even though the Safety Solutions' logo is on both pieces there was some discussion that the narrow net did not provide enough width to safely "catch" your shoulders and helmet. The tech guy let us race, but it brings up a good point. Is the net supposed to retain BOTH your shoulder and head, or just the helmet? Argument against a narrow net is that your body could slip under the net and your head is held vertical putting the neck in a bind. This gets pretty sticky when we're talking about our safety. I'm slanting toward this "halo" deal now. The wide net also came with a fabricated separate vertical bar to allow some range of adjustment in the angle and distance for wrap around the seat. We also had issues with the forward part of the side net obstructing vison of the accessory instument panel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriverGT5 Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 I don't pretend to know enough about the nets to offer an opinion but Chris at ISP told Randy to not even bother with the halo unless he also installed shoulder braces. Apparently, one without the other is not very safe. It's amazing how all this stuff works together and one or two pieces of the system make or break it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catsailor Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 Hey guys, Good discussion about both safety items. I use and R3, and so does my brother and a few other guys that race Spec E30 and we all really like the device, its comfortable and comes with quick release on both sides so you can free up your head at any time (HANS requires you to order that extra) and it does not rely on your harness being perfectly in place for it to work. As a retailer for a couple of big distributors I can get either brand of H&N restraint, but the test results clearly show the R3 provides more protection and it works with any kind of harness or even a regular seat belt (good for those of us who instruct). The SS side net seems to be the way to go when you look at several brands in different cars, and it too comes with a quick release which is good in case you ever need to climb out of the passanger side of the car. There are a few different configurations available. We will be at Roebling Road Sept. 28 - 29 and will have R3's there for people to try on and purchase, as well as SS side nets. Let me know what you need and I'll get pricing to you. Email me at [email protected] Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.