SCCA HELMET UPDATE and other news!!!!

Cobrar05 said:
Dale Earnhardt said the same thing. Just sayin'
Click to expand...

And to be serious, I've come way closer to being hurt off the track than on the track (while at the track). I've also tossed out belts that had seen the light of day 20 times (stored inside and transported in enclosed trailer, but were 'no good' due to the date stamp on them. Also have had a good hit and no one marked or took the belts or made a note in the logbook about replacing them. I did replace them because I USED them. They did what they were supposed to and there was a little stretch. If we want to get serious about safety, start looking there...

Edited for stupid Droid auto-complete.....
 
Last edited:
Greg, we do run at Daytona and a guy can hit that same spot in the wall at 150mph or more in SCCA club racing cars that race there. Right? For certain we've had club racers wreck at very high speed at Road America and end up in ICU.

I ran over something at Roebling Road and blew at left front at 155mph and crashed front impact.

It only takes once. And yes, there are many ways to get killed in the paddock or on your way to and from the race track.

I personally dont care if you wear a fire suit, if you dont want to. you have to. its a rule.
 
EV said:
Might be worth an email to Defnder. Their site lists it as SFI compliant.
Click to expand...

Hi Josh -

This is a clerical issue. Your defNder and all defNders sold are SFI
approved, as shown by the SFI sticker on your device. No worries.

Thank you.
 
I am curious. What among the required safety items SCCA mandates would you pass on if they were all optional?
 
Cobrar05 said:
I am curious. What among the required safety items SCCA mandates would you pass on if they were all optional?
Click to expand...
Irrelevant. "My opinion" is unimportant to your Truth (well, that and apparently the opinion of the majority of SCCA members...)

The logic "fale" come when someone is claiming that we cannot argue about a rule that's not yet in affect because it's going to be in affect and we have to follow it. You know, all that "Cause I Said So and I'm the Mommy!" thing. Besides, "they" know what's better for us...right?

Yes, yes, I suppose someday we'll accept HANS and SFI as our own personal saviors; one day we'll cross over the bridge to everlasting salvation to join you and we'll all hold hands, rejoice in our new revelation, and sing Kumbaya together (in tune, of course).

But until then it's probably best to stay on your side of the rainbow...

Just Sayin'.

GA
 
tom91ita said:
if i race in 2012, it will not be with a HANS. i see them as part of the problem and not part of the solution.
Click to expand...

+1 to Tom's remarks.

Since the chances of getting 38.1 changed are about as good as a snowball in hell, I am seriously considering the Hybrid Pro Rage by Safety Solutions (www.SafetySolutionsRacing.com). A friend who races in World Challange uses it and reports good results in unscheduled real life tests!!!! Tried one on at the IMIS show in Indy last week in a racing seat with belts and it felt good.
 
RacerBill said:
+1 to Tom's remarks.

Since the chances of getting 38.1 changed are about as good as a snowball in hell, I am seriously considering the Hybrid Pro Rage by Safety Solutions (www.SafetySolutionsRacing.com). A friend who races in World Challange uses it and reports good results in unscheduled real life tests!!!! Tried one on at the IMIS show in Indy last week in a racing seat with belts and it felt good.
Click to expand...

Thats basically what I use. Hutchens=Safetysolutions
 
I just called defender to double check the 38.1 approval status. They said the person I need to speak with was out and will get back to me. (it is lunch time here). They thought I was one of the people sending an email about the same thing.

I dropped a note to SFI for verification.
 
almskidd said:
Hi Josh -

This is a clerical issue. Your defNder and all defNders sold are SFI
approved, as shown by the SFI sticker on your device. No worries.

Thank you.
Click to expand...

But how does one know that the SFI sticker/patch is real and actually 'still' valid? The ?Impact? situation with items sold as SFI, but then not, then OK, then not all (or whatever the current status of that mess is...) has caused (at least me) confusion on the whole SFI thing. So how is someone to know if their item is / is still SFI certified?
 
downingracing said:
So how is someone to know if their item is / is still SFI certified?
Click to expand...
Same as how we know for the Impact stuff: assumed valid unless otherwise specified. As a scrutineer, if I see a sticker and don't have any notification from Topeka that's it's invalid, it's assumed valid. And the Impact thing was not new: we had the same thing with FIA certs on some seats a few years ago.

So, as far as I've heard, the deNder is still SFI certified.

GA
 
When are THEY going to start mandating all of this stuff in SoloII??? They dont, have to have HANS, fuel cells, dated belts, etc. But solo drivers could die just the same. I mean, it COULD happen.

Russ

I am not in favor of mandated hans devices. my car wouldn't see 150mph with a 175mph tail wind.
 
Cobrar05 said:
Greg, we do run at Daytona and a guy can hit that same spot in the wall at 150mph or more in SCCA club racing cars that race there. Right? For certain we've had club racers wreck at very high speed at Road America and end up in ICU.

I ran over something at Roebling Road and blew at left front at 155mph and crashed front impact.
Click to expand...

And if I'm doing 150MPH in my racecar, an SFI-certified head and neck restraint system won't save my life because hitting the ground at the bottom of the cliff is going to do me in.

The requirement is stupid. How many SCCA drivers have died as a result of basal skull fracture in the last 5/10 years? How many were incidents were an SFI 38.1-certified device would have been useful?

Now ask youself... how many SCCA drivers have died, while in their car, on track, because of suspected heart attacks? You do realize that the fire suits we are mandated to wear add stress to our hearts?

I have directed my estate to ignore any on-track death unless I have a heart attack and if I do, I'm requiring my estate to sue SCCA for its gross negligence in requiring these heart-stressing safety devices when SCCA had ample evidence indicating that on-track heart attacks were the leading cause of on-track injury and death.
 
Cobrar05 said:
Dale Earnhardt said the same thing. Just sayin'
Click to expand...

Not the best comparison. Earnardt was warned my many that his belts were installed incorrectly, and that he wore them way too loose. He told them to pound sand, he was Dale Earnhardt, and he wanted to be comfortable.

His death resulted in a lot of changes, but, we will never know what would have REALLY happened if he had installed and worn his equipment properly, and as it was designed for.
 
jjjanos said:
Now ask youself... how many SCCA drivers have died, while in their car, on track, because of suspected heart attacks? You do realize that the fire suits we are mandated to wear add stress to our hearts?
Click to expand...

Maybe SCCA should mandate we all go on a diet and work our way up to running on a treadmill in 100+ heat to develop a tolerance to heat stress? just sayin'..... :026:
 
Yes, I DO find it comical that I often witness guys in seriously poor condition being allowed to race. They drip out of the car after a 30 minute session looking like they just completed a marathon.
Seriously? yet we continue to see regular deaths from mysterious health issues that have nothing to do with car or racing related incidents.
And there are those that will say, "Personal choice, if they wish to risk their lives in that condition then that's their freedom".
uhhh, no, it's not, as the unbraked car that carries the unconscious victim can plow into other innocent participants.

But the SCCA blindly looks the other way, as enforcing stricter requirements (stress tests, physical conditioning tests and standards) would severely limit participation.

yet bogus standards are forced upon us ...eliminating superior solutions to the issue.....because of the fear of being sued.

Most galling is that "Standard" was written by a self serving company masquerading as a organization only interested in perpetuating safer racing, when in fact, it's internal pitch to manufacturers uses "more sales" as a cornerstone.

I understand that the club needs to balance differing priorities, but it's particularly saddening when common sense is last on the list.
 
Matt93SE said:
Maybe SCCA should mandate we all go on a diet and work our way up to running on a treadmill in 100+ heat to develop a tolerance to heat stress? just sayin'..... :026:
Click to expand...
Actually, would that be so wrong? Seriously, the club SHOULD enforce that we are capable of operating in the stresses we are likely to encounter. Sorry, but I see A LOT of guys who are far far from what any even charitable person would consider 'physically fit'.
 
I've never run with NASA and i don't think I will run again with SCCA in the future if this stands. Ove the years, i started racing in 1988, I have done 90% of my racing with MCSCC and I will stay there for now. Also I can attend all of their board meetings if I choose and vote on changes like this in person. I don't think MCSCC will ever make a Hans type device manditory, not if I can help it!

SCCA does not listen to the membership. It's run to much like a business and less like a "club".
 
raffaelli said:
I just called defender to double check the 38.1 approval status. They said the person I need to speak with was out and will get back to me. (it is lunch time here). They thought I was one of the people sending an email about the same thing.

I dropped a note to SFI for verification.
Click to expand...

I did get a returb call from defender. Voice mail saya that there is an adminstrative thing which has caused its removal from the sfi site. It is certfied.


No return email from sfi yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top