Let's see, where were we? Ah yes.
Vaughan,
We have no plans to put the videos on the Web site. We have no objection to it, we just don't see the value. Videos alone can be very misleading, and are being used as marketing gimmicks. They are pretty dramatic though.
The other issue we have with video is bandwidth: a full crash video from one camera at max resolution is about 115MB. Three cameras per crash test--plus data--is a huge download.
It would be interesting if one could overlay dynamic load cell data with the video, so the loads would plot synchronized with the image.
On the subject of a performance matrix, why not a polar plot of % head load reduction; 0% at the center, 100% at the edge, and every device could be plotted as an individual line about 360 degrees (interpolation required)?
BTW, I share your concern about the issue of getting reliable, relevant data to racers so they can make an informed decision. I am disappointed at how little trust there is in the racing community. Within the aerospace and medical communities, there is virtually no BSing. If you try to blow smoke the plane will crash or the patient will die. Hence, no one blows smoke. Ergo, if you say something, you are believed. But racing? Ha! Massive skepticism of anyone associated with any commercial enterprise, even if they know what they are talking about and can prove it.
Therefore, I have a suggestion: Why don't you form a non-profit group, comprised of qualified racers only, the sole mission of which is to collect and present as much unbiased information as possible on this subject? Data is accepted from manufacturers
only if the complete universe of all test data is presented--no picking only the good stuff.
We'll even throw in the domain name:
www.headrestraint.org
Dave,
I agree with what you are saying, and it is what tends to happen early on, but eventually the word/phrase just becomes a synonym. For example, if you ask someone in an office today what kind of "Xerox" machine they have, they may well say, "Ricoh" before they say "Xerox."
This is already happening with head and neck systems. We have had conversations with racers that resemble the following:
Caller: I want to buy your HANS
Us: You mean an Isaac head and neck system?
Caller: Yeah, you guys make the HANS with the shock, right?
Us: Isaac systems use shock absorbers, yes sir.
Hubbard/Downing, Inc. has rights to "HANS" and "Head and Neck Support," but not to "Head and Neck System" because it is too general and already in the public domain. We can't use the term "HANS," but we can't keep racers from using it.
Jake,
What you are seeing is a follower mentality displayed by most consumers with any new category of products. After all, if your friend really wanted to buy the best, he would buy a titanium Isaac system. He didn't buy a HANS device because he thought it was the best, he bought it because his
friends thought it was the best. To him, buying an Isaac system would be on par with wearing last year's fashion to the gathering of the high school clic--his friends don't have it, therefore it's not cool.
A lot of this is regional. Among some racers the HANS device was the best H&N restraint invented in the last millennium. If it's not Isaac, it's not current.
And then you have the really fringe racers who don't care what's popular or what the rules are. ("We don't need no stinkin' CGR!") They are perfectly secure making their own decision. Like the guys who race drag boats, run tractor trailer rigs up Pikes Peak, or have finally tuned their car up to 160 mph--with a four-year old driving.
Yeah, I agree that the Isaac product is getting very little respect, but it is getting very little respect from committees. We have a disproportionate percentage of customers who are either very technical or are health care professionals (or both). They like it when they buy it, and they love it when they crash.
------------------
Gregg Baker, P.E.
Isaac, LLC
http://www.isaacdirect.com