Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
How many of those were personal vs. business like ours? Bottom line is that everyone has a breaking point. You keep adding costs and you will find out you have no customers left.
Time to write those letters - Head and Neck Restraints
- Thread starter pitbull113
- Start date
How many of those were personal vs. business like ours? Bottom line is that everyone has a breaking point. You keep adding costs and you will find out you have no customers left.
It may not rise to the level of full-blown truther conspiracy silliness but it is NOT unreasonable to worry about whether rules are made keeping business relationships (sponsorship, ad revenue from pubs) at arm's length.
Granny said:
It doesn't matter. And every time someone asks that question, it perpetuates the misapprehension that it MIGHT or SHOULD. Hubbard Downing is "behind" SFI. That doesn't seem to queer the approach or standard in the eyes of people who support that option.
SCCA is a club that masquerades as a business. NASA is a business that masquerades as a club. Both options have inherent challenges.
I'm increasingly inclined to agree. The rigs at the NJMP 12 hours dwarfed what we used to see at IMSA and even CART races not so long ago. The market is changing (see also, Chumpcar and LeMons).
Jeremy said:
If you can figure out a way to prove that something DID NOT HAPPEN because of a particular action, please give me a ring. It would revolutionize the way my business works, we could get rich, and we we could get one of those big haulers...
K
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Great, .....oh, wait...not so great....I wouldn't say that.... If personal injuries that SCCA pays out on are reduced due to the effect of having a mandated HNR then the insurance costs go down. Now, whether or not SCCA passes that reduction on to the regions and thus lower entry fees or membership fees is a whole nother ball of wax!
.................because you can't have NEGATIVE PAYOUTS! SCCA has never paid out a dollar that i'm aware of that would be saved by the HNR requirement.
So, our rates won't be going down.
(In addition to Kirks point about proving the relationship, etc._)
gran racing
Super Moderator
So that's makes it okay? What's to prevent Jeremy from creating a website and posting specs from online sources.
Jeremy Billiel
New member
You guys are missing how insurance works.
You have a bunch of risks, lets say 100 and out of that 100 you have 5 payouts for varying degrees of damage (in this case to yourself).
There are 2 ways insurance is effected by new safety standards
1. Next year you have only 3 payouts and the severity of each one is less. Statistically it can be an anomoly or other safety improvements (HNR, seats, belts, you name it). The following year the insurance company feels like its not an anamoly and prices the product cheaper (assuming the competition also get's the market and is willing to price it lower)
2. The insurance company knows a new standard is being put in place (HNR mandate) and feels that they are willing to make a bet that they will get less than 5 payouts becasue of the new mandate.
lateapex911
Super Moderator
5 payouts? What if there were none? Why would an insurance company lower it's prices? Because there's a new rule making us safer than safe??
I know, I don't get it.
I know, I don't get it.
Jeremy Billiel
New member
My example is an example with too small data to be statistically relevant. Look at the point
If those specs - by which I presume you mean performance test results - are certified results released by the manufacturer then they are not only NOT worse than what SFI does, they are BETTER. With SFI we don't actually KNOW the results - just that SFI has seen the test results and that they exceed the minimum threshold.
Besides - that's not the issue that I was arguing. His complaint was about "who is behind" the standard.
The whole moving target game on this issue is maddening. Every one of these issues has had a completely reasonable resolution put forward at some point in the ongoing conversation. Opponents tend to argue each resolved issue by looping back to one that they've conveniently forgotten has been covered before.
K
gran racing
Super Moderator
But what are the actual numbers being presented and put your speculation aside. If SCCA's insurance states that by not implimenting a HNR mandate, the Club's insurance rates will be increasing in 2012 by $150,000 then state that. If it's out of fear for future litigation, than that's different.
Do you know the actual details on our insurance policy and specifically how this will impact the bottom line?
Are there other areas that could provide better returns? If you want to continue talking about insurance, what about as Jake mentioned protection for the several instances of heart attacks and potential deaths or injuries to others as well?
LOL Kirk. I'm not arguing against RSI, I just don't really know much about it and can understand people questioning it's validity. I'm going after a resolution which involves putting to rest other people's concerns. I don't apologize for being able to see their side on this and want to dig for more information.
Do you know the actual details on our insurance policy and specifically how this will impact the bottom line?
Are there other areas that could provide better returns? If you want to continue talking about insurance, what about as Jake mentioned protection for the several instances of heart attacks and potential deaths or injuries to others as well?
LOL Kirk. I'm not arguing against RSI, I just don't really know much about it and can understand people questioning it's validity. I'm going after a resolution which involves putting to rest other people's concerns. I don't apologize for being able to see their side on this and want to dig for more information.
Last edited:
The point - I think - is that to date I have NEVER heard anyone (EDIT - anyone in the know, that is) argue that adopting 38.1 lowered our insurance costs. There's a world of difference between that and "risk management" or Lawyer for "avoiding losses due to legal action."
It's like conjoining the issues of about "health insurance coverage" and "the cost of health care." They are related but they are not the same thing.
K
Last edited:
Cobrar05
New member
i am not sure what the rigs say about our sport. part of it is the quality of the hand me downs we are getting. it wasnt too long ago where the nascar hand me downs were dually and gooseneck things. now they are big rigs.
part of it is the number of track support operations that are out there that service things like spec miata where a tractor trailer and a 44ft/dually package will bring 14 miatas to vir or road atlanta for just one team.
being in north carolina and traveling I40 often, the big rigs hauling late model stock car racers out of charlotte is outragious.
for a low budget racer like i am i have a huge rig. 38ft aluminum trailer and a dually f350. but its also a nascar roush/fenway hand me down where i paid for both what the trade in was on the truck alone. at the race track i can often look big budget while i am nearly broke.
you know what they say about appearances
part of it is the number of track support operations that are out there that service things like spec miata where a tractor trailer and a 44ft/dually package will bring 14 miatas to vir or road atlanta for just one team.
being in north carolina and traveling I40 often, the big rigs hauling late model stock car racers out of charlotte is outragious.
for a low budget racer like i am i have a huge rig. 38ft aluminum trailer and a dually f350. but its also a nascar roush/fenway hand me down where i paid for both what the trade in was on the truck alone. at the race track i can often look big budget while i am nearly broke.
you know what they say about appearances
Jeremy Billiel
New member
Dave - We are going too far down a rat hole and no I do not know the specifics about the insurance program and possible outcomes. I do work in the industry though and if SCCA is not asking that question they should be.
Again - My only point is this is much bigger than this single thread is making it.
gran racing
Super Moderator
When talking to people who even have these big rigs, most also tell stories about how they started and worked their way up. I can think of numerous people who started on shoestring budgets and over time, became one of those guys with a decent trailer. However they certainly did not start there. This is one of my concerns; will we further deter these future addicts?
Jeremy Billiel
New member
My last point and I am done with this thread. You are talking about Philospohical stuff now...
Here is the bottom line.
We don't like the SFI spec as its too narrow and we believe its fundamentally flawed, but until another industry group comes along (RSI) and ponies up the money to explain why they are better, SCCA and other sanctioning bodies are stuck in a quagmire.
This quagmire is comprised of many puts and takes and when all else fails 95% of the time the BOD's will have no other option that to side with the lawyers and protect the main entity (SCCA National in this example)
We can complain about a lot of things, but until another viable option in the industry exists we are where we are.
That's it.
Is the BOD concerned about the average racer? Yes.
Does the BOD get this issue? Yes.
Do they have any other options? No
Bottom line
Just my .02
EDIT: You are asking the BOD and National to take a legal risk that the club can not afford. Even if a potential lawsuit is bogus, do you want your memberhsip dollars fighting that battle in court with high $ attorneys? I know I do not...
Last edited:
gran racing
Super Moderator
But dude, you don't race. 
As were you in many posts, but for arguments sake we'll be nice and call it speculation. The BOD does have options just as they have for many years when this club was founded. Every decision has a risk.
Obviously we'll just disagree on this one.
As were you in many posts, but for arguments sake we'll be nice and call it speculation. The BOD does have options just as they have for many years when this club was founded. Every decision has a risk.
Obviously we'll just disagree on this one.
spawpoet
New member
You keep talking about the big picture, but what if the SCCA loses more income in entry fees then they save in insurance costs with this decision? You are only looking at one side of the equation. At least one person has pointed out that you only have to lose a couple of entries to more than equal the total cost of ins. for a single event. It seems that member recruitment and retention of active participants is more critical than keeping ins. costs down.
going back a little:
While the club seems apprehensive about accepting it, at least we have FIA homologation which does involve actual testing and verification by a 3rd party, for suits and seats and the like, and snell for helmets as well. A problem with H&NR is that the SFI and FIA specs are built around the HANS - differently, and with differently requirements and criteria for certification, but devices such as the ISSAC don't fit either for what amounts to a technicality.
the fact that as of now the club uses SFI, FIA, along with their own language for necessarily bespoke items (a'la cages), means that the device chosen for H&NR is going to be from one of those 2 organizations' lists. I'd love to see a US-based, independent organization certifying these things, but I don't think getting that organization approved by the old guard is very likely. what works isn't as important as what the "recognized leaders" say works. and that's hans.
It's a shame, because the capitulation to fear of litigation and/or monied interests is pushing the "club racer" out of the club by making these CYA rules palatable, and profitable, if not defacto required. it's as if they are saying "open trailer guys: a parking lot beckons." yeah.
look we all know the club will survive this, in some form. SFI companies will get bigger and stronger, insurance companies will still be profitable, racing will go on, and it will still be dangerous. the average joe road racer will just have to be a bit more above average, economically, than he already is in order to keep racing. And I think thats the part that stings, because most of us aren't getting any richer.
While the club seems apprehensive about accepting it, at least we have FIA homologation which does involve actual testing and verification by a 3rd party, for suits and seats and the like, and snell for helmets as well. A problem with H&NR is that the SFI and FIA specs are built around the HANS - differently, and with differently requirements and criteria for certification, but devices such as the ISSAC don't fit either for what amounts to a technicality.
the fact that as of now the club uses SFI, FIA, along with their own language for necessarily bespoke items (a'la cages), means that the device chosen for H&NR is going to be from one of those 2 organizations' lists. I'd love to see a US-based, independent organization certifying these things, but I don't think getting that organization approved by the old guard is very likely. what works isn't as important as what the "recognized leaders" say works. and that's hans.
It's a shame, because the capitulation to fear of litigation and/or monied interests is pushing the "club racer" out of the club by making these CYA rules palatable, and profitable, if not defacto required. it's as if they are saying "open trailer guys: a parking lot beckons." yeah.
look we all know the club will survive this, in some form. SFI companies will get bigger and stronger, insurance companies will still be profitable, racing will go on, and it will still be dangerous. the average joe road racer will just have to be a bit more above average, economically, than he already is in order to keep racing. And I think thats the part that stings, because most of us aren't getting any richer.
Last edited:
Online sources? From some marketing department?
RSI publishes test data that has been verified by the lab that ran the test. None of it is from online sources. The data is 100% transparent and 100% real -- and anyone can challenge it.
mustanghammer
New member
Well stated, thank you.
Received via email:
Dear SCCA Drivers:
Beginning January 1, 2012, Head and Neck restraints will become mandatory in SCCA Club Racing Regional, National and Driver School events. In December 2009, the Board of Directors approved the motion to require a device meeting SFI 38.1 or FIA 8858 specifications, and the announcement appeared in the January 2010 Fastrack® News.
In an effort to have everyone prepared for the new equipment requirement, we have put together the following information. This is by no means comprehensive, and it is not an endorsement of one product over another. Just as when buying a helmet or any other piece of safety gear, each driver is encouraged and expected to do their own research and select the product that they feel best suits their needs.
Why is SCCA requiring a head and neck restraint system?
Testing and data support that use of head and neck restraints greatly reduce the possibility of severe injury or death in specific racecar accidents.
Which products are approved?
Like many of its equipment requirements, SCCA recognizes both SFI 38.1 (www.sfifoundation.com) and FIA 8858 (www.fia.com) standards. You can visit these sites to see their approved list of devices. As of Aug. 10, 2011, the following devices are approved by SFI or both SFI and FIA:
HANS Performance Products – HANS Device (all series)
Safety Solutions R3 Device
Safety Solutions R3 Rage Device
Safety Solutions Hutchens Hybrid Pro Device
Safety Solutions Hutchens Hybrid Pro Rage Device
Safety Solutions Hutchens Hybrid/Hybrid Rage Device
Safety Solutions Hybrid X Device
For more information about these products, including a list of dealers for each, visit:
- www.hansdevice.com
- www.safetysolutionsracing.com
What if I use a device not currently approved by SFI 38.1 or FIA 8858?
Only the devices approved will be permitted and one of the approved devices will be required. These two organizations have strict guidelines for head and neck devices and these guidelines have become the industry standard that SCCA has elected to adopt.
I already have one of these devices. I’m all set, right?
Not necessarily! Make sure your device has the SFI or FIA approval/certification on it.
If you have a HANS Device
- If you have a HANS Device with a SFI or FIA approval/certification sticker on it, you are all set.
- HANS Devices built prior to 2005 will not have a sticker from SFI or FIA on it and are not eligible for use without it. These devices can obtain the sticker through HANS direct approval. HANS will inspect the device, replace the tethers with an upgrade to the Vision Advantage Plus sliding tethers and ship it back to you upon approval with the sticker for approximately $75. Additional costs may be incurred if additional repairs are necessary. Contact HANS directly to arrange for this.
- HANS Devices built in or after 2005 but not carrying an SFI or FIA sticker will need to go through the same process as the pre-2005 devices before being eligible for use.
If you have an approved Safety Solutions Device:
- If your device has a sticker from SFI or FIA, you are all set.
- If you do not have an SFI or FIA sticker, there are three levels of get it re-approved:
[FONT="]o [/FONT]For stickers that have gotten wet and faded or fallen off, devices are inspected by Safety Solutions for cracks or any other anomalies and a replacement sticker is applied. The cost for the inspection and sticker is $5.50 plus return shipping charges.
[FONT="]o [/FONT]For $75, the device can be re-webbed. This includes new tethers, padding over the shoulders and webbed fabric replacement. This price assumes all hardware and carbon fiber can be re-used. A new SFI sticker is applied during this procedure.
[FONT="]o [/FONT]If the SFI sticker is removed by an event official after a significant incident, the device can be sent for inspection. If the carbon fiber and hardware is undamaged, the device will undergo the $75 re-webbing service. If there is damage to the structure of the device, it will be discontinued from service. If this is the case, be sure to ask about return-customer discounts that may be applicable if you need to replace your device.
Does the SFI or FIA approval expire like seat belts?
There is currently no time-based expiration for SFI 38.1 or FIA 8858.
If you have any additional questions about the devices, please contact the manufacturers directly.
Please remember that these devices will be mandatory after 1/1/12. Arriving to the grid without one will be the same as arriving to the grid without your helmet—you won’t be permitted on track.
The Board and staff hope that this document has been useful and if there are any more general questions, please contact the staff at [redacted. You know where to find them].
Dear SCCA Drivers:
Beginning January 1, 2012, Head and Neck restraints will become mandatory in SCCA Club Racing Regional, National and Driver School events. In December 2009, the Board of Directors approved the motion to require a device meeting SFI 38.1 or FIA 8858 specifications, and the announcement appeared in the January 2010 Fastrack® News.
In an effort to have everyone prepared for the new equipment requirement, we have put together the following information. This is by no means comprehensive, and it is not an endorsement of one product over another. Just as when buying a helmet or any other piece of safety gear, each driver is encouraged and expected to do their own research and select the product that they feel best suits their needs.
Why is SCCA requiring a head and neck restraint system?
Testing and data support that use of head and neck restraints greatly reduce the possibility of severe injury or death in specific racecar accidents.
Which products are approved?
Like many of its equipment requirements, SCCA recognizes both SFI 38.1 (www.sfifoundation.com) and FIA 8858 (www.fia.com) standards. You can visit these sites to see their approved list of devices. As of Aug. 10, 2011, the following devices are approved by SFI or both SFI and FIA:
HANS Performance Products – HANS Device (all series)
Safety Solutions R3 Device
Safety Solutions R3 Rage Device
Safety Solutions Hutchens Hybrid Pro Device
Safety Solutions Hutchens Hybrid Pro Rage Device
Safety Solutions Hutchens Hybrid/Hybrid Rage Device
Safety Solutions Hybrid X Device
For more information about these products, including a list of dealers for each, visit:
- www.hansdevice.com
- www.safetysolutionsracing.com
What if I use a device not currently approved by SFI 38.1 or FIA 8858?
Only the devices approved will be permitted and one of the approved devices will be required. These two organizations have strict guidelines for head and neck devices and these guidelines have become the industry standard that SCCA has elected to adopt.
I already have one of these devices. I’m all set, right?
Not necessarily! Make sure your device has the SFI or FIA approval/certification on it.
If you have a HANS Device
- If you have a HANS Device with a SFI or FIA approval/certification sticker on it, you are all set.
- HANS Devices built prior to 2005 will not have a sticker from SFI or FIA on it and are not eligible for use without it. These devices can obtain the sticker through HANS direct approval. HANS will inspect the device, replace the tethers with an upgrade to the Vision Advantage Plus sliding tethers and ship it back to you upon approval with the sticker for approximately $75. Additional costs may be incurred if additional repairs are necessary. Contact HANS directly to arrange for this.
- HANS Devices built in or after 2005 but not carrying an SFI or FIA sticker will need to go through the same process as the pre-2005 devices before being eligible for use.
If you have an approved Safety Solutions Device:
- If your device has a sticker from SFI or FIA, you are all set.
- If you do not have an SFI or FIA sticker, there are three levels of get it re-approved:
[FONT="]o [/FONT]For stickers that have gotten wet and faded or fallen off, devices are inspected by Safety Solutions for cracks or any other anomalies and a replacement sticker is applied. The cost for the inspection and sticker is $5.50 plus return shipping charges.
[FONT="]o [/FONT]For $75, the device can be re-webbed. This includes new tethers, padding over the shoulders and webbed fabric replacement. This price assumes all hardware and carbon fiber can be re-used. A new SFI sticker is applied during this procedure.
[FONT="]o [/FONT]If the SFI sticker is removed by an event official after a significant incident, the device can be sent for inspection. If the carbon fiber and hardware is undamaged, the device will undergo the $75 re-webbing service. If there is damage to the structure of the device, it will be discontinued from service. If this is the case, be sure to ask about return-customer discounts that may be applicable if you need to replace your device.
Does the SFI or FIA approval expire like seat belts?
There is currently no time-based expiration for SFI 38.1 or FIA 8858.
If you have any additional questions about the devices, please contact the manufacturers directly.
Please remember that these devices will be mandatory after 1/1/12. Arriving to the grid without one will be the same as arriving to the grid without your helmet—you won’t be permitted on track.
The Board and staff hope that this document has been useful and if there are any more general questions, please contact the staff at [redacted. You know where to find them].