Head and Neck restraint systems

[Ed M.]

"F.Y.I. the G-Force SRS-1 system is next in line to be tested by SFI. That will be on Monday and Tuesday of next week. It'll be interesting to see the results."

 

Has anybody heard how this went or know where I can look to check?

 

Thanks,

Ed

[Ed M.]

Anybody know anything yet?

[onralz]

Jeremy at G-force told me Wednesday that he would get me the formal statement sometime this week. Unfortunately I am headed to the 24 hours at Daytona in a few minutes, but when I get back, I'll post the statement from them if I get it by then.

[Ed M.]

I'm assumming the G-Force SRS-1 didn't fair too well in the SFI test or we would have heard something by now...??? Anybody heard yet?

 

Not trying to be a PITA, just gettting real close to race time and I still haven't order my H&N system yet...

 

Thanks,

Ed

[onralz]

I've emailed Jeremy a couple times now and haven't gotten a response. The lack of information doesn't sound positive unfortunately. I'll be sure to get back to this thread if I do get a response. I'll email him again today.

[onralz]

G-Force got back to me today. Essentially the SRS-1 did not pass SFI spec. It missed it by 2%. To give everyone a comparison, the Hutchens missed it by 7%. If I remember correctly, the Han's was just barely under spec so essentially the SRS-1 will take 2% less g-force than the Han's.

 

Frankly I'm disappointed that the SRS-1 didn't make SFI spec because after wearing both it, and the HAN's device, I like the SRS-1 considerably better. It's simpler, and less confining. More importantly it's easier to get out of the car with. Personally, I am planning on sticking with that system regardless of the 2%.

[Black Horse]

Personally, I am planning on sticking with that system regardless of the 2%.

 

You may have to rethink that strategy - I believe 2006 will require SFI approval on all restraints.

[Ed M.]

Thanks Mark,

 

I'm dissappointed also. Like you, though, I'm probably gonna go with the SRS also and pray that NASA doesn't mandate that the H&N systems used must be SFI certified. I'll just cross that bridge when I get to it...

 

Thanks again,

Ed

[mwilson7]

Just remember that NASA is now part of the SFI organization so the chances of them not requiring a H&N device to meet SFI specifications is slim to none.

[Grizlbits]

I got my HANS yesterday via UPS, looks good. Thanks for the heads up on the $100 savings on their website Mark! Don't bother, the $100 savings was for January orders I believe. I am glad I went this way. It is expensive, but almost a lock for EVERY organization to accept, and less hassle in the future.

[AlanPK]

Anyone know how the Issacs faired in the test? Was the Hans the only one approved by the SFI? If so, that kinda gives them a monopoly; meaning that the price will never drop no matter how many units they sell.

I Hope someone else passes so they have a little competition.

[Ed M.]

The only other one that I know of that has passed is the R3 - http://www.lfttech.com/index.php

 

Don't know about the Issaac...

 

Ed

 

P.S. Has or does anybody use or know anything about the R3?

[onralz]

This is the email that Jeremy sent me. I had to ask him first before I posted it.

 

Mark,

 

Unfortunately the SRS-1 Restraint system did not pass the SFI spec. While the Hutchins Device failed the test by 7% we missed it by only 2%. We fully support the SRS-1 Helmet Restraint System and its continued use in all forms of auto racing. This test is a by far an excessive spec to meet and I commend any device that has met it. Our device still remains a viable alternative to the cumbersome and expensive devices on the market today but unfortunately it will not meet the spec.

 

Jeremy Curtis

Marketing Director

G-Force Racing Gear

770-998-8855 ext 114

[Jeff F]

This is certainly a frustrating issue. I'd like to get something this season, but there are so many unknowns.

 

The HANS seems like the most cumbersome of the bunch, but the others like the Issac and SRS-1 don't meet the SFI spec and don't sound like they plan on making any changes in order to meet it. It would be more clear if I had an idea what NASA might decide-- if they will require SFI for 2006, or just one from a list of approved devices. I hope that some of this will get sorted out earlier than later.

 

Alan, as I understand it, the Issac won't meet the spec because of the requirement for a single-point release.

[Tom Beverly]

I got my HANS in the mail on the 14th, it looks great and is very light weight. It also seems to fit very well. I ordered a large size, which didn't have the 100$ disscount. I also ordered it December 27th, and was told they were on back order and awaiting the new shippment for 2005 for SFI approval. Mine has the sticker and SFI rating on it, older ones I have seen in the past don't.

I have not used it yet, but will post my opinions after an event I'm running March 4,5 & 6.

 

Tom.

[Ed M.]

I've really been thinking a lot about this whole H&N thing and the SFI cert./NASA issue and these are my thoughts (and definitely my on opinion)...

 

Unless NASA REQUIRES that all racers HAVE to wear a H&NR system, I feel they need to stay out of the business of regulating or controling only those that we can wear. And my reason for this is simple - we all know that ANYTHING is better then nothing. If NASA decides to only allow those with SFI cert., all of sudden Joe Racer who might currently have a H&N system that's doesn't meet the cert. might just decide to not wear one at all instead of forking over $800+ for a new device that does meet the cert..

 

NASA needs to be reminded that currently, a racers decision to wear a H&NR system is VOLUNTARY. They need to make it EASIER and PROMOTE the safety and advantages of wearing one instead of limiting only those they will "except". I think requiring a SFI cert. actually does the opposite and stiffles the whole process of a racers decision to wear one.

 

The SFI certification should be viewed only as added information to aid in the racers decision on what he/she's looking for while shopping for a system - if a particular system doesn't meet the cert., he/she has to decide if this is acceptable or not based on his/her on risk level.

 

If NASA wants to do the right thing for the good of all, make a H&NR system manditory for all racers and let them decide on the one that works best for them, SFI certified or not.

 

BTW, another thought - if NASA does make the SFI cert. rule for H&NR systems, how will they police it? If I'm sitting in grid with my SRS-1 system attached and ready to go, I don't think they would make me take it off before leaving the pits...............would they?

 

Thanks for reading,

Ed

[mwilson7]

Ed,

 

Not to be argumentative but couldn't you use that same line of logic with all safety items then? Why not allow M rated helmets? How about race suits, shoes, belts etc that aren't SFI rated? Where do you draw the line?

 

In 2006 it is my understanding that NASA is going to require a H&N device and chances are it will have to meet SFI specifications. At least they were nice enough to give us a years warning so we can save our pennies. My HANS device arrived last week (thanks to who ever gave us the $100 discount tip!) and it seems to be a pretty good piece. I'll be interested to see how it works in the car.

 

Considering that I almost wasn't allowed to race once because I was missing my rear NASA sticker (I was on the grid and rolling onto the track) I'd be comfortable saying that if they saw you with a non-approved H&N system that they WOULD stop you.

Edited February 17, 2005 by Guest

[Jeff F]

Ed, I think you are missing some key information.

 

Nobody is talking about a situation where a H&N system is not allowed and someone is made to run without one. In 2005, nothing is required, and you can use any system you choose.

 

At issue is that fact that the 2005 rules state that in 2006 NASA expects to require a SFI-rated system. At this point, the spec is very new and there are only two approved systems. Many of us find some of the "other" systems (Issacs, SRS-1, etc.) more attractive (for various reasons) than the currently approved systems, but don't want to buy into them only to have them obsolete next year.

 

The big unknowns here are:

-Will NASA require SFI in 2006, or just require a H&N system, maybe from an approved list?

-Will some of the other systems become SFI legal, either through design changes, or spec changes?

[onralz]

Mark your argument about the rest of the safety equipment being SFI while valid, isn't necessarily a good comparison. A fuel cell isn't "required", a drive shaft safety loop isn't required, a fire system isn't required, only an extinguisher,etc. These are all recommended. Those are VERY important items in my opinion. I've heard of more people getting hurt in racing from fires, and drive shaft catapults than I have from neck injuries. Not that I don't take head and neck injuries seriously, I do. I've been wearing my restraint system for over a year so keep that in mind.

 

You'll note that that only one(maybe two) H&N systems have passed SFI and from what I understand, there won't be another one to pass for some time. When a sanctioning body requires SFI standards, they aren't just relying on the SFI to decide what level of protection is good for their drivers. They need to decide what level is good, and if the SFI level coincides with NASA than they can determine that is the guildeline. At this point, NASA uses some SFI spec, some FIA spec, and some of their own specs. This shouldn't be any different. SFI is usually a good easy convenient way to go about it. In this scenario, the SFI certification expectation is very high. Too high for restraint systems that do good for the drivers to pass and too high for amatuer racing. At this time I think that there are still a lot of unknowns with restraint systems and there are some systems that will aid in helping the head. Even the Han's isn't foolproof. It barely passed. When I'm in an accident, the scenarios aren't the same as whatever SFI specs are set up as. Anything can happen.

 

It's my opinion to let the drivers decide what is best for them. I'm one of the first people to criticize Dale Earnhardt for not wearing the "correct" safety gear. I am also the first person to wear a H&N device that I am aware of in the Ohio/Indiana region, and certainly in my AGS class. I believe in safety but I also believe in the need for educating people, and letting them decide what is best for them. LM did a nice job of setting up a seminar about safety. We learned a lot and with what I learned, I feel completely safe with my SRS-1 just as I would with the Isaac's system, or the Han's. I also feel that anyone attending that seminar is going to make good decisions and don't have to have it mandated what they wear.

 

I have the Sparco Circuit seat. I just got it installed in the car and tried to get out of the car in under 10. I made it in nine. With the side bolsters, it is going to make is very hard for me to get out with the Hans on my back. I've tried getting out of a car with the hans without the bolster and it was harder. My moral here is life is a compromise. I feel that some of the systems for head and neck restraint have better "options" for them and with the SRS-1 for an example, I am much less concerned about getting out of the car safely. Fire bad.

 

Just my opinion, no arguments here, just theories. I'm confident that NASA will do the right thing in the end and I'll work with whatever ruling, or lack of ruling they decide on.

[Black Horse]

One of the obstacles that the restraint makers are facing is the fact that the person that is involved with the Hans Device, also wrote the specificiation/requirements for SFI certification.

 

I spoke with Jay Wright ("Wright Device" http://www.over40racing.com) about this subject today. His problems with getting his device certified are strictly financial. He doesn't make enough money off of selling his unit (he believes that safety should be affordable and available to EVERYbody) to finance the $7-$10k annual certification expense. Jay even supplies the design for his restraint FOR FREE so you can make one of your own (now THAT is affordable!)

 

Jay feels his unit can meet SFI certification, just that he need help getting it done. Anyone have any ideas to help him out?

[Ed M.]

Mark L.,

 

Very well put - you did a much better job of explaining my frustrations/thoughts then I did - I never was good in English...

 

Nevertheless, I also understand Mark W. and Jeff's points/concerns and I would like to point out that I may have been a little confused on the proposed rule - I didn't realize that NASA was going to require a H&NRS for 2006. I was thinking that it would still be "recommended" but if used, it must be SFI approved. Must of been the caffine this morning...

 

Anyway, I just also want to point out that I feel the H&N systems are a slightly different "animal" then a lot of the other safety items and this must be considered. I'm a big guy (6'1", 235lbs) and though I feel I'm pretty agile - I'm not gonna be as agile as a guy whose 5'10", 185lbs. Even though we may have the same size head and wear the same size helmet, we shouldn't be required to wear the same H&NRS. I know this is crude but stay with me here. The HANS might work great for the smaller guy as it doesn't hinder his ingress/egress, however, for me it might be more of an issue. The device I may be required to wear might save me in a hard impact but kill me if I'm on fire. My point again is that NASA should allow us more flexibility with H&NRS simply for the fact of all the variables that are involved.

 

Again - these are just my thoughts and opinions and if you know me, you know that I'm too laid back to be argumentative. I think this is a great discussion and I hope more people chime in with their views and opinions. I also know and feel that NASA will make the right decisions.

 

peace out,

Ed

[Tom Beverly]

Anyway, I just also want to point out that I feel the H&N systems are a slightly different "animal" then a lot of the other safety items and this must be considered. I'm a big guy (6'1", 235lbs) and though I feel I'm pretty agile - I'm not gonna be as agile as a guy whose 5'10", 185lbs. Even though we may have the same size head and wear the same size helmet, we shouldn't be required to wear the same H&NRS. I know this is crude but stay with me here. The HANS might work great for the smaller guy as it doesn't hinder his ingress/egress, however, for me it might be more of an issue. The device I may be required to wear might save me in a hard impact but kill me if I'm on fire. My point again is that NASA should allow us more flexibility with H&NRS simply for the fact of all the variables that are involved.

 

I'm 6' tall and 250lbs. I'll let you know how the HANS works out for me. Chris G. doesn't look to small in the pics I have seen either.

[Tom Beverly]

The HANS worked fine. It took about two laps for me to get used to it.

I drilled the mounting holes in the helmet on Thursday night (in the hotel room ), directions took a while to figure out, and could be written clearer.

I then ran Friday without it because I hadn't lengthened the shoulder harnesses to compensate for the HANS, and I had two students (so no free time). I ran it all day Saturday and Sunday without issue though.

 

I can see why the WRC guys had an issue with them, in extreme situations where you would have to look through the passenger side window (or really far to the left), the HANS will in fact limit your ability to turn your head far enough with the pre-set tether lengths. I think the head rotation could be improved if you lengthen the tethers to the additional 1" limit that is recommended by HANS.

In road race situations the amount of rotation is fine, even in some of the very tight corners on the big track @ Summit Point.

It had no impact on my ability to exit the vehicle promptly with my door bar setup. It did make it harder to get in the car though. It also takes a couple of seconds longer to get all your crap on to get out on track, I think the trade off is well worth it should I ever “need” it.

[HBennett]

If NASA does go with requiring an SFI spec H&N system, will the earlier HANS systems be grandfathered in or something? Where does that leave someone who purchased the HANS six months ago? With so few choices (2) for an SFI approved system, I've got a feeling NASA will only require something to be used.

 

By the way, if I remember right, NASCAR tested the HANS, Hutchens and SRS-1 a year or so ago. The SRS-1 passed their tests with results comparable to the HANS. The HANS and SRS-1 both outperformed the Hutchens.

 

Howard Bennett

Racer Wholesale

[Tom Beverly]

I'm pretty certain I remember reading that they will back date the SFI rating if you already own a HANS device from before the certification. I would check on thier website.