January Fastrack
- Thread starter lateapex911
- Start date
chuck baader
New member
It boils down to "single point release" language. Hans and others have it, Isaacs doesn't: ergo, non compliant. Chuck
lateapex911
Super Moderator
It's more complex that that Chuck, the language of the spec is very limiting, obviously to limit competition, and sadly innovation. Much more than the one point of release.
SFI actually has some decent specs, but this one is just awful
X
xr4racer
Guest
Not just HANS under 38.1 http://www.sfifoundation.com/
seckerich
New member
My wife and I bought each other a Hans for Christmas so this Fastrack is no big deal. Made a decision after some of the recent accidents that took our friends lives that we were not racing again without doing all we could to enhance our safety program. Right side net, full fire system in every car (after Daytona fire), and redesign of seat mounting.
I would hate to see the BOD of our club make any other decision based on where we are today. Most sanctioning badies and even clubs that have racing programs are requiring the same thing SCCA is now implementing. They have neither the background or knowledge as elected representitives to go on their own and risk the assets of the club in general to appease the Anti-SFI/Hans crowd. I lost a hell of a lot more investment in RR shocks than you are on your Isaac and they didn't do a thing to save lives.
I would hate to see the BOD of our club make any other decision based on where we are today. Most sanctioning badies and even clubs that have racing programs are requiring the same thing SCCA is now implementing. They have neither the background or knowledge as elected representitives to go on their own and risk the assets of the club in general to appease the Anti-SFI/Hans crowd. I lost a hell of a lot more investment in RR shocks than you are on your Isaac and they didn't do a thing to save lives.
Tom Donnelly
New member
You and quite a few others. And there was talk on bringing RR shocks back.
The irony is there if you look.
I've lost a hell of a lot more investment from just dumbass driving too. And not just my own. It's all good though.
What upsets me though, Steve, is that I researched all of the options and bought the Isaac because it offered both better performance (based on sled tests) and features that I thought made it qualitatively more likely to keep me safe than other options on the market. I'm now being told that I can't use a system that is demonstrably superior in terms of actual impact performance, because the manufacturer isn't a member of a trade organization promoting its self-interests.
That's just not right.
K
EDIT - To be clear, I don't give much of a damn about the $350/year I have to set aside to pay for this decision. That is NOT what this is about.
Last edited:
gran racing
Super Moderator
I too bought an Isaac because it provides better protection. That's the primary reason I'm upset about this new requirement, along with the fact is was put out for membership feedback and this is NOT what membership replyed back with. Why even ask us then?
For me, yeah, the $350 a year does also bother me considering last year I could only afford three race weekends.
For me, yeah, the $350 a year does also bother me considering last year I could only afford three race weekends.
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
While one of the most expensive routes, I feel that my R3 and my Racetech H&N seat provide the ultimate in crash protection. It's not ALL about the restraints when you think about multiple crash situations.
VERY TRUE. I'm a seat snob, too, and advocate that a good safety system starts right there. Seat mounts are part of that.
I've never used a Racetech seat but they seem to be of EXCELLENT quality.
k
Off the thread a wee bit. But also in Fastrack:
On Friday October 16, 2009, during the non-SCCA track test day at Sebring International Raceway, an SCCA member entered
the facility without signing a waiver. After the test day was completed, this individual drove his personal vehicle onto the portion
of the course not in use for the SCCA event, lost control, and subsequently died when his vehicle caught fire.
This is bad. Anyone know what happened here?
On Friday October 16, 2009, during the non-SCCA track test day at Sebring International Raceway, an SCCA member entered
the facility without signing a waiver. After the test day was completed, this individual drove his personal vehicle onto the portion
of the course not in use for the SCCA event, lost control, and subsequently died when his vehicle caught fire.
This is bad. Anyone know what happened here?
Either that or he was a member of the France family!
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Steve, to further Kirks point, those of us that did the research made the call based on lots of factors. I feel strongly that I am SAFER now then I will be when the SFI mandate arrives. Why? Because of lateral protection issues with the SFI products. To achieve the same protection that I currently enjoy, I'll need a new seat. But the new seat will reduce the available real estate of the window, which is an escape route. So, While I might get the same crash and impact safety, I'll go backwards in my ability to get out of the car. And while money isn't everything, the total change will be in the $1600 range easily, (Seat, mounting, SFI device, etc) NOT including the money I've already spent.
I hear you on the RR dampers thing, but you can't use that to justify something else. That was a bad move, I understand why they did it, but I think it was misguided.
I hear you on the RR dampers thing, but you can't use that to justify something else. That was a bad move, I understand why they did it, but I think it was misguided.
iambhooper
New member
There are 2 references in this thread to "$350/yr"... what are you talking about? Are we going to have to pay some extra fee to go race? If that's the case... then it might be time to go to the other side.
hoop
erlrich
Super Moderator
They're talking about the money we'll all have to set aside to pay for the new H&N restraint. Most systems run $600-$800, and we have two years to save for them.
RacerBill
New member
How about a redesign of the Isaac, so that the release teathers tie into the seat belts and release when the seat belts are released. Would this not qualify as a 'single point of release?
Seriously, I will be writing a letter to the SFI requesting that 38.1 be changed in order to permit devices that afford greater protection to the driver in crashes involving lateral contact with other objects. I think that it is very interesting that some specifications are viewable on the SFI website, and others - noteably 38.1 - are not. Does anyone know what changes were made to the specifications in March 2009?
Seriously, I will be writing a letter to the SFI requesting that 38.1 be changed in order to permit devices that afford greater protection to the driver in crashes involving lateral contact with other objects. I think that it is very interesting that some specifications are viewable on the SFI website, and others - noteably 38.1 - are not. Does anyone know what changes were made to the specifications in March 2009?
seckerich
New member
I know what you mean about exit window size. Some of the halo seats give you very little room to get out if you sit close to the wheel. We had the same problem with some of the drivers in the GT cars and went with the Sparco slider as it is a FIA style captive design slider. I have seen them take some serious hits including Nick Hams cart wheel at miller and come out intact. One big bar in the front slides the seat back quick. We have them in our cars now. Don't get me wrong, I think you should be able to use the device you choose but lawyers (sorry Jeff Y) have screwed up the reliance on personal responsibility.
Mike Mackaman
New member
This infatuation the world has developed with political correctness is taking us to hell in a handbag. And that bus is being driven by lawyers. I like and respect a large number of lawyers. The actions of the few should not spoil the reputation of the whole. It all comes down to personal accountability. A lawyer who files a frivolous law suit should be stomped just like someone who does something incredibly stupid should be held accountable. A business that can't make it should go under, and those who can run a business profitably should reap the rewards. As much as that crowd in Washington refuses to believe it, right is right, wrong is wrong, it always has been, it always will be!
Mike
Mike
iambhooper
New member
duh! i guess i missed out n the obvious. thanks for the clarification.
so, in 2 years time, i will have to replace a helmet (SA2000), suit and add a HnR... nice!
maybe it's time to go back to autocross!
hoop