Time to write those letters - Head and Neck Restraints

Greg Amy said:
Did you guys wake up and write it together...?
Click to expand...

Hi Jeff,
Thank you for submitting a request/input to the Club Racing Board. The details of your request can be found below.

Letter ID Number: #4642
Title: Approval for Additional HNR Devices



Naaa, I think it's Vaughn just hasn't woken up at all yet!! :D
 
JLawton said:
Hi Jeff,
Thank you for submitting a request/input to the Club Racing Board. The details of your request can be found below.

Letter ID Number: #4642
Title: Approval for Additional HNR Devices



Naaa, I think it's Vaughn just hasn't woken up at all yet!! :D
Click to expand...

Apparently... mine must be 4643...
 
LOL!

No, just a routine DSR build night in my garage...
DSCN7904.JPG
 
Wow, I knew this was going to be a hot issue, but JESUS.
Thanks to all the people whom took the time to enlighten me (and everyone else).

I have sent a letter my self (#4646) asking that the decision be revisited as I support my fellow members right to choose the piece that works best for them. Not a "one size fits all"
mandate.

Vaughn, I "borrowed" from your letter to make a template for mine, I hope you do not mind.

cheers
dave parker
 
I hate to be "that guy", but you are all MISSING THE POINT!

By saying ISAAC is better and you had crashes that the ISAAC helped, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH

You can not go in front of a court case and use that crap. The bottom line is simple. The SCCA lawyers believe that the only industry trade group that will stand up in court is SFI. If you don't like it make another trade group and fight each other. Betamax vs VHS.

Everything else DOES NOT MATTER.

Assume that you are in court and you are writting your letter to a judge and jury.
 
I'm really curious, and maybe some of you who frequent the other class forums (SM, AS, Prod, ???) can enlighten me; has there been the same level of opposition to the rule among other drivers & classes as we have seen here, or is it just that all the trouble-makers are racing in IT?

Oh, and I'll be revising/editing one of the 3 or 4 letters I've already sent and re-submitting today or tomorrow. I at least want to have the right to bitch and moan when the board tells us to get lost.
 
erlrich
" I'm really curious, and maybe some of you who frequent the other class forums (SM, AS, Prod, ???) can enlighten me; has there been the same level of opposition to the rule among other drivers & classes as we have seen here, or is it just that all the trouble-makers are racing in IT?"

Earl
I lurk in a lot of different forums. The majority of them are not voicing an issue. Seems to be just here in IT.com and the Sandbox.

cheers
dave parker
 
dave parker said:
I lurk in a lot of different forums. The majority of them are not voicing an issue. Seems to be just here in IT.com and the Sandbox.
Click to expand...

I think there's an easy explanation ... very few people have ever heard of the Isaac. I bought my HANS in 2004 but had never heard of an Isaac device until 2007 when I joined the IT forums (and I still, 4 years later, have never seen it discussed anywhere else, seen any ads for it, seen one at the track, etc.) Perhaps the forums where Gregg hangs out are the places that care because only those participants even know there's something to care about.
 
Yeah; everyone else seems to think that unless this rule goes through, they're not even allowed to wear a H+N restraint. So you must be suicidal and want to race without a helmet if you don't drink the kool-aid...
 
dickita15 said:
Well Kirk that is a pretty long list of nefarious things I am not allowed to do and I cannot control the actions of everyone in the process but I will do my best.
Click to expand...

It's a long list of things that I've seen too much of in the past 30 years but thank you, Dick - your best is all I can ask for.

KK
 
I'm trying to stay out of this, but there are some key points of Club liability that need to come into focus.

Jeremy Billiel said:
I hate to be "that guy", but you are all MISSING THE POINT!

By saying ISAAC is better and you had crashes that the ISAAC helped, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH

You can not go in front of a court case and use that crap...

Assume that you are in court and you are writting your letter to a judge and jury.
Click to expand...
Having been involved in over 100 product liability lawsuits as a defendant (never lost) let's see how this would play out.
Plaintiff's attorney: "Mr. Quadraplegic, severely-scorched, morphine-dieting, drooling race car driver, please explain to the jury how you came to be injured."

Driver: "Well, I researched head and neck restraints almost ten years ago. I chose the Isaac system because it performed well in crash tests -- especially in side impacts -- and, most importantly, let me disconnect and leave it behind, so I wouldn't get stuck in a burning car. Then the SCCA took it away from me. When I crashed using an SFI product I didn't have the lateral support and I fractured my neck. Then the fire started and I got cooked. That's why I'm suing the SCCA -- and everybody else -- for umpteen brazillion dollars."

[Wife and kids sobbing in the first row of the gallery.]

Attorney: "They took it away from you?"

Driver: "Yup, they were afraid they might get sued."

Attorney: "No further questions Your Honor."

​
The irony here is that SFI affiliation was once considered to reduce liability exposure. But now that it is designing products, every member can become a co-defendant.

You think it's too hard for a sanctioning body to figure out which products are safe? Go to Google, type "head and neck restraint" and click the button which reads "I'm feeling lucky." That's the defense? I'm too stoopid to Google?
 
JoshS said:
I think there's an easy explanation ... very few people have ever heard of the Isaac. I bought my HANS in 2004 but had never heard of an Isaac device until 2007 when I joined the IT forums (and I still, 4 years later, have never seen it discussed anywhere else, seen any ads for it, seen one at the track, etc.) Perhaps the forums where Gregg hangs out are the places that care because only those participants even know there's something to care about.
Click to expand...
We all tend to live in small worlds, so it's only natural to not look over the fence to see what else is happening. There are some markets we dominate.

A stink is being raised everywhere. We are on every continent except Antarctica and our fastest growing customer base is former SFI users.
 
gsbaker said:
But now that it is designing products, every member can become a co-defendant.
Click to expand...

And TESTING them. I received information directly from SFI this week that lists the authorized testing laboratory for testing the Flame Resistance of a Head and Neck restraint as "SFI Test Laboratory, 15708 Pomerado Road, Ste. N208, Poway, CA 92064.
 
A couple of impressions I picked up during an impromptu conversation on the subject last night.

1. Apparently the CRB/BOD does not believe there is test data to the current spec and that previous test data is not relevant as the spec has changed since testing in 2004(?).

2. The idea of the alternate safety group (RSI) formed to promote a publishing of performance based tests is being held against the makers of the ISAAC as they originally formed the group before handing off ownership to impartial parties.

3. There is a sense that this was already examined and significant new data will be required to sway the decision.

My letter is submitted, but I also sense the inevitable "thank you for your input" response.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top