Head and Neck Restraints

[Mad Dog Racing]

I have not yet seen any discussion on the note in the latest Fastrack about a request for comments about requiring some form of HNR. Apex and some of the door-slammer forums noted this and have threads going. I'm afraid I don't have as strong an opinion on this any more since I popped for a Hans (used) last spring and used it for most of this past season.

I am disappointed that the "cheap" Hans is still only available in the 20-degree form, usually not as useful for formula cars. Would the requirement by SCCA drive the change to add a 30-degree club Hans. Would it bring the cost down any?

I'm also interested that the Leatt device from South Africa is only about $350 for the auto version and in theory is adjustable for back rake so you don't need two or three for different cars. I'd have to look at one if I wanted to try out an Enduro ride in a Spec Miata or had to have a device for my Caldwell in vintage since the 30-degree Hans would not fit in either.

I didn't complain about the new helmet every five years or the side intrusion and I had arm restraints about two years before they were required and I've used a helmet support band (whether that's good or bad) for the last 15 years, but you are not talking about a $600-$1000 investment on any of those things. (But the helmet is close and it is a dead loss every five years.) Has anybody really tried any of the alternates like the G-Force or the R3? What about the back-straps the roundy-round guys have tried - Hutchens?

Does telling people that they need $2000 of safety equipment to go to a driver's school make it too hard to keep the turnover down? Can we ignore what one dead or permanently disabled racer really costs us all? What do the people here have to say?

[fv195]

I too have thinned the wallet for a HANS I think if the SCCA requires them the price will drop, but not right away. it is like the rest of the world, supply and demand. if we have to wear them then the demand will be high, at first, the all the retailers will have lots of them so the prices should go down. as for replacing helmets, not a bad idea I think, driving an open car, it can/should keep your brains off the track. I want the latest lid I can have.
my thought and rambelings,
THOR
FV70

[brian]

There's a great post on the prod site page 8 from Imafool that is very illustrative. http://prodracing.com/prodcar/viewtopic ... 44cb8c3a33

Everyone has an opinion on this subject and should be able to make their own decisions, but life in the ol USA isn't like that anymore.

[hardingfv32-1]

Yes, we can ignore one dead or permanently disabled racer. It is part of our risk management expense. The Hans systems controls only one type of risk. I would say wearing a helmet in a street car driving situation would have the same cost benefit relationship as using a Hans in your race-car. We have a much more casual perception of the risks of driving on the street.

The club needs some accurate risk data before making such decisions. Too expensive for a decision based on perception.

Brian

[supersmile]

I am disappointed that the "cheap" Hans is still only available in the 20-degree form, usually not as useful for formula cars. Would the requirement by SCCA drive the change to add a 30-degree club Hans. Would it bring the cost down any?

I believe I saw that the 30 degree "cheap" HANS will be out in a few months.

I'm also interested that the Leatt device from South Africa is only about $350 for the auto version and in theory is adjustable for back rake so you don't need two or three for different cars. I'd have to look at one if I wanted to try out an Enduro ride in a Spec Miata or had to have a device for my Caldwell in vintage since the 30-degree Hans would not fit in either.

The Defnder will be in production in a few weeks and is essentially a HANS that uses a more flexible yoke under the harness so one size fits all recline angles. Its supposedly gives some protection in lateral impacts, too. I tried a HANS a few years ago in a Spec Wrecker and after twenty minutes of having the thing compression my clavicles I couldn't move my head for a week. I think my anatomy is such that there's too much soft tissue to be compressed by the HANS yoke.

Has anybody really tried any of the alternates like the G-Force or the R3? What about the back-straps the roundy-round guys have tried - Hutchens?

Tried the G-Force briefly...I think duct tape would work better.

Tried an ISAAC and have to say that in my IT car with upright seating it was OK, but reclining in my FC there wasn't enough free room in the harness to get the shock devices spaced properly. I also found it a bit unnerving to have these large metal objects right by my helmet and I wondered if the right (wrong) impact would allow them to spear the helmet.

Tried an R3 and couldn't get it to work in the sedan or the formula car.

All in all, I've raced without a H&N device because I can't find one that's comfortable, but I also am not convinced by any means that they are all that necessary. I can recall one crash I had in a Vee where I went straight through a tire wall into a guardrail (turn 10 at NHMS). After hitting the wall and bouncing back slightly the tires all came crashing down on my head. Perhaps (and its shear conjecture on my part) being able to keep my head bent forward saved me from a compression injury to my neck when the tires landed on me. Who knows?

There will always be a crash that defies the safety equipment we've installed. But I'm not ready to conceed that every story of how the HANS saved your life is accurate, because there's no way to know if that's really true. I have a photo sequence of a crash I was in at Lime Rock some years ago where you can clearly see the back of my helmet from the front of the car; that's how much I was able to pitch forward between belt stretch and neck extension. But the only soreness I had afterward was from where the belts got me in the chest and inner thighs. Just one point of data, and it doesn't prove anything at all except to refute the idea that you'll die in a crash without a HANS on.

I'll probably try a Defnder this season and if its comfortable (or mandated) I'll wear it.

[Martinracing98]

Everyone has an opinion on this subject and should be able to make their own decisions, but life in the ol USA isn't like that anymore.

Safety requirements are put in to primarily protect SCCA or what ever the sanctioning body is. I used to do safety tech for kart racing. We raced on sprint tracks and saw speeds in excess of 70 mph. I had a person show up with a cracked helmet and was upset when he did not pass tech. That was the worst example, but their were plenty more. I personally did not care if the person felt like putting themselves at risk. It was their head. My concern is when they went and killed themselves our insurance goes up that we can not afford to race. Or our insurance is canceled. The publicity makes us look like unsafe hoodlums. The land owner decides he can not handle the bad press anymore or the risk and tells us to go play elsewhere.

We had one new person jump in to race a fun race for a day. She messed up and broke her leg. When the lawsuit came the good safety practices helped us demonstrate the efforts we take to keep people safe.

Should HNR be required? I do not know. Sanctioning bodies have a right to protect themselves. Often that happens by protecting us. Of course they need to balance it by protecting themselves by keeping things affordable.

[JimR]

While I generally don't chime in on these forums, my recommendation is to bear the cost of HANS device whether SCCA mandates it or not. I sourced a used 30 degree one in good shape about a year ago. Its use has taken some adjustment but it hasn't hindered my movements at all while driving. Having crashed a FV or two in my 30 years of racing them including one I'd like to forget, I am pretty sure a HANS device would have been an asset. If you don't believe that review the 2008 runoff's crash in slow motion if you recorded it and watch the voilence of the crash to the driver and the neck extension that occurred. Having been in something similar I can tell you at that moment you have nothing but luck and what you did in preparing for your safety to fall back on.
Jim Regan

[shirleymac]

I really don't have a problem with SCCA mandating the use of a H&N device, as long as they decide what specs they're going to use (FIA, SFI or both) and then allow each individual to decide which device will work best for there situation. And not mandate that I have to use one device that may not work in my car.

I'm heading to the PRI show next week in Orlando and plan on talking to every H&N manufacturer that is there. My main question for all of them will be how well will their device work in a Formula Vee.

I know HANS and DefNder will be there, if there's any other manufacturers that anything interesting that will be coming out I will get as much information as I can and post it when I get back. SCCA is also supposed to have a drivers seminar that I plan on attending.

[lbaconll]

Good to see this thread come up. Having survived a really nasty incident in 06 ( end over end, cartwheel, knocked out, eyeball almost out of socket), I was to quote the ER MD, " lucky to be moving" since I was not wearing a H&N device. I bit the bullet and purchased a 30 degree from Jim at SR Racing and have to say that once you get used to it, it really is worth the $ and effort to use in a small formula car. It is surely not the end all safety device. But, how much value do you put on your neck? Remember that the big DALE E basically died in a appx 56 mph actual impact from a basal skull racture, ( the brain dissconnects fron spinal cord). Should a system be mandated? If it keeps the insurance costs down, and more importantly to me saves me or a friend from potential horrific injuries, than yes, mandate it. I have residual neck issues since the shunt that remind me daily of the luck I enjoyed. Just my 10 cents.

[FV80]

I have to say that SCCA's possible MANDATE of a H&N will affect all of us in various ways. I am TOTALLY AGAINST it for a very specific reason. If done, SCCA will likely mandate OUT fully functioning and fully satisfactory H&N's in current use.
I bought one of the FIRST HANS (made for 'sit up' ALMS type cars) way back in '91 (right after watching Ernie Sikes go end over end off T1 at Atlanta and ending up partially paralyzed) and used it quite successfully in FC and marginally in FV. Over the years, I have modified mine several times (Downing wouldn't even CONSIDER giving me a break because I had the older model -even though I was a pioneer ). After several modifications, I have reached a point where I consider the unit to be PERFECTLY functional IN MY CAR - it cost me only a few hours of work instead of ANOTHER $1000. It works JUST LIKE THE NEW ONES - only it probably wouldn't survive a crash in excess of 190 MPH. Fortunately for me, I don't TRAVEL that fast. Secondly, I would be HAPPY to have my device 'give its life' up for me if need be. It might crack or bend under the wrong set of conditions, but NOT before providing most of the intended purpose of the device.

In my view, the new devices are specifically designed to THEMSELVES SURVIVE THE ACCIDENT. They are THOUSANDS of times stronger than they need to be to get the job done (anyone game to put one of these things on a press to see what they'll take??). I know what I've seen 1/4" thick fiberglass survive and these new things are 1+ INCH of carbon fiber !! No wonder it cost so much money.

SFI certs are a joke as well. What I have is more than adequate for my purposes - I have had several incidents where it came into minor play. But, rest assured, if SCCA takes the mandatory stance, they *WILL* specify something so far up the line, that I'll have to go **BUY** some stupid certificated device that provides absolutely NOTHING more than mine does beyond the sticker ... and I don't LIKE the new HANS anyway -the breast plates are WAY too narrow and won't hold the belts properly. You are ASKING for rib fractures using the new ones.

The original HANS had WIDE breast plates that held the belts nicely - SCCA even reduced the belt requirement to 2" *IF* you used a HANS... THEN HANS started narrowing up the plates an making them thicker and harder. I tried one at the Runoffs - the curvature of the plate is such that it really DIGS into your chest. And it no longer 'spreads the load' like the old ones (like MINE does). I could almost GUARANTEE you a cracked rib (or breast bone) in a significant head on... that is, IF the belts stayed on. I had GREAT difficulty keeping the belts from sliding off the plates - even though they are tight around my neck. I went back to MY OWN trusty unit. *FAR* superior in my car.

FWIW (nothing, I'm sure <g>).
Steve

[Ed Womer]

I have been using the G-Force system for the last two years and am very happy with it. I do not like the fact that the hans is so expensive since it has been on the market for so long that it shouldn't be but half the price.

The problem with the G-Force is they want you to use their helmit but I was getting a new one anyway and I like the G-Force helmits.

I am not sure that they should be required and needing a FIA cert is a joke since anyone who watches F1 knows how stupid that organization is.

Ed Womer

[Dave]

If you took the liability insurance out the HANS would be 1/3 the price they charge.

Dave

[SR Racing]

NASA has mandated the HANS. They delayed full implementation until the Sports Models were available.

The HANS is a MAP pricing product, so no distributors (like us, SR) can ADVERTISE at lower prices than you see now at most dealers. (Note "Advertise")

You can certainly debate the overall risk/cost analysis of a HANS, but .. We get all the tests and press releases from just about all of the H&N devices. The HANS is clearly the best as far as protection goes. How much better vs. cost, comfort, etc. is up to you.

Considering the cost of all your other safety equipment that has a life span (wear and/or date life). The HANS price is not terrible (a set of tires). (But, of course I am a dealer <g> ) In a serious vein, the new sliding tether HANS is a big improvement. For those with the non-slider, an upgrade is available. With the non-slider your right to left movement was much more limited.

If you do decide to go HANS give us a call. Now might be a good time to upgrade to a HANS, Helmet and Belts, depending upon the dates of the ones you have. See you at the PRI show...

(Dave, I doubt the HANS liability costs are anywhere near that. I am sure they are no worse than a set of belts, helmet or firesuit. Like many manufactures, they have a device with a patent and multiple certifications, so they can ask what the market will allow.)

Jim

[flat tappet]

I really don't have a problem with SCCA mandating the use of a H&N device, as long as they decide what specs they're going to use (FIA, SFI or both) and then allow each individual to decide which device will work best for there situation. And not mandate that I have to use one device that may not work in my car.

I'm heading to the PRI show next week in Orlando and plan on talking to every H&N manufacturer that is there. My main question for all of them will be how well will their device work in a Formula Vee.

I know HANS and DefNder will be there, if there's any other manufacturers that anything interesting that will be coming out I will get as much information as I can and post it when I get back. SCCA is also supposed to have a drivers seminar that I plan on attending.

I think SCCA would need to be very careful(from a liability standpoint) in pushing this. Unless they allowed every single type of HNR on the market to be mandated, how could they come up with one that was good for all the different classes of vehicles? What's good for spec pinata is not necessarily good for VEE's. Sounds like as much liability from users if they make the wrong choice as no rule at all.

This seems kind of like the States with no helmet law for motorcycles. As much as it might be easier not to wear one, we know that we may be alot safer wearing one. Let it be an individual choice and let us all sign a waiver if we choose not to!

[SR Racing]

I Let it be an individual choice and let us all sign a waiver if we choose not to!

I am not sure what the waiver would cover? "If I experience any head or neck injury, I waive my right to any insurance
claims." ? I don't think that would fly.

My issue with the SCCA risk rulings is what appears to be their lack of real analysis. For example, we were given the new seat belt rules. Were there any KNOWN SCCA seat belt failures that caused this ruling? (Not an installation problem, but a real failure due to aging.) They might be able to show some neck injuries for lack of head and neck restraints, but that would be argumentative.

They MIGHT have a great deal of resource involved in analysis and testing but I doubt it. e.g. The belt deal seemed to be a knee jerk reaction to the Dale crash. If they do any real safety analysis, I don't think they would have implemented the fuel testing port as they did, as an example. While the Helmet replacement rule isn't terrible, even that is an arbritrary ruling.

I am happy to sell you guys belts/rewebs/helments and Hans, but I am not sure if "safety" is really driving these issues.

[flat tappet]

Kudos to you, Jim! It's like the towing issue for faired Vee's in the Dec/Jan Fast Track. Why was it ok(for 40 years, on the part of the Caldwells) and all of a sudden, a problem now?

[Rickydel]

Flat,

It's not as simple as that. For years formula cars ran without roll bars, and then for many more years, ran with skinny roll bars that were far below the level of the driver's head. How many drivers today would want to race without a roll bar? Would you race without a fire resistant suit? Safety can and should evolve just like every other technology.
I believe Jim's point has nothting to do with status quo being fine for however long, but that if you are going to mandate a change, make sure there is a good reason (or good data) and not just for the sake of making a change becasue the equipment is available or knee jerk reactions to celebrity deaths.

Just because something was done for years doesn't make it right. Personally, I also think it is a waste to throw away a set of safety belts after only a couple of seasons, but the rule is there. I was witness to a driver's death, and the medical concensus was that a HANS device would have saved him.
Head restraints may not be such bad idea, but I do think a particular brand should not be mandated.

With regard to the tow strap issue, I would guess it is being done so that it is not only easier for the tow truck operators to lift a car safely without causing damage to the race car, but to make the tow job quicker as well. Cleaning up the carnage will result in less lost track time for everyone else. Is that a bad thing? A universal location for tow straps is the easiest way to go. If a driver has devised a "special" way to lift his car with straps or a bar that is just below a small removable body panel, that kind of system does the tow truck operator no good if the driver is either unconcious or in the ambulance and unable to explain how the car is to be lifted.


Ricky del