Landracing Forum Home

Bonneville Salt Flats Discussion => SCTA Rule Questions => Topic started by: QikNip on February 07, 2018, 04:05:53 PM



Title: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: QikNip on February 07, 2018, 04:05:53 PM
After reading the 2018 arm restraint rule I concluded my Simpson restraints are not compliant. I called Simpson and they were unaware of the new rule, but after I explained it they suggested their part number #AR.AUD. This unit uses a slide bar, so would assume it will suffice, but since they didn't know of the SCTA rule, it's a risk. Regrettably I can't attach a photo since Photobucket went skizo on their pricing. I can however email one to anyone who might like to offer an opinion.
Rick


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: Beef Stew on February 08, 2018, 12:31:16 AM
After reading the 2018 arm restraint rule I concluded my Simpson restraints are not compliant. I called Simpson and they were unaware of the new rule, but after I explained it they suggested their part number #AR.AUD. This unit uses a slide bar, so would assume it will suffice, but since they didn't know of the SCTA rule, it's a risk. Regrettably I can't attach a photo since Photobucket went skizo on their pricing. I can however email one to anyone who might like to offer an opinion.
Rick

You DO NOT need PhotoBucket to post photos! The main problem is that the LandRacing code is so old the it can't deal directly with https://  URLs.

Here's a photos from Simpson's site https://simpsonraceproducts.com/harnesses/arm-restraints/#gallery Copy this URL into your browser, then click. You will then see the photo. If you can find the #AR.AUD. photo on Simpson's site you can than post the https:// URL here so that we can see the photo.

Photos can be anywhere on the web, a manufacturers site, iCloud, Amazon's Photo Cloud, a Racing History site—anyplace that has a URL for the photo.


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: CTRon on February 08, 2018, 08:51:52 AM
I keep reading the rule and they dont want the d rings but they want the bar type adjusters like the seat belts would have??  So those restraints in those pics would be no good?  I have sown in restraints on my jacket that have the d rings so im guessing mine are no good too?? Very confusing!
Ive been looking all morning and cant seem to find any that dont have d rings


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: deep in debt motorsports on February 08, 2018, 09:54:42 AM
I feel we need pics of what is legal and what is not legal please......


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: CTRon on February 08, 2018, 11:32:06 AM
Seems like they changed a rule and the parts to fix it dont exist :?


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: Dynoroom on February 08, 2018, 11:44:43 AM
The SCTA is looking for a 3 bar adjuster as shown here.


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: QikNip on February 09, 2018, 11:05:16 AM
The SCTA is looking for a 3 bar adjuster as shown here.

Thanks for posting the pictures! Any idea what the Deist part number is? In looking on line, I'm not having any luck finding that picture anywhere.
Rick


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: thundersalt on February 09, 2018, 01:55:30 PM
Big Ben at DJ knows what we need


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: QikNip on February 09, 2018, 02:24:40 PM
Big Ben at DJ knows what we need

At the risk of exposing my ignorance, who it Big Ben and who is DJ?  :?
Rick


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: thundersalt on February 09, 2018, 02:40:00 PM
DJ Safety and DEIST are the same company now http://djsafety.com/


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: kiwi belly tank on February 09, 2018, 11:59:24 PM
Yes, my new Deist 7point harness looks like some white guy made it. Jim would roll over in his grave if he saw it.
  Sid.


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: Buamotorsport on February 11, 2018, 01:52:15 AM
Interesting. I was with Simpson today. Their ‘D’ rings are one piece and can cert that. Trouble is they cannot make my new fire suit until the rule is clarified.


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: QikNip on February 11, 2018, 11:04:06 AM
Interesting. I was with Simpson today. Their ‘D’ rings are one piece and can cert that. Trouble is they cannot make my new fire suit until the rule is clarified.

In case you don't have it handy, here's the rule revision:

4.   Section 3.D.3 Arm/Leg Restraints: Page: 42
Add what is in bold after the first sentence in the first paragraph; SFI specification 3.3 arm restrains with a manufacture date of 2006 or later are required in all vehicles. IN ADDITION:
ALL ARM RESTRAINT HARWARE MUST BE OF A SINGLE PIECE MANUFACTURE. I.E. NO TWO PIECE OR WELDED “D” RING STYLE ADJUSTERS. ADJUSTABLE TETHERS SHOULD USE A 3-BAR SYSTEM SIMILAR TO THAT USED IN LAP BELT ADJUSTERS. NON-SOWN IN RESTRAINTS SHALL HAVE A TIGHT FIT AROUND THE NARROWEST PART OF THE ARM. ALL ARM RESTRAINTS MUST BE DEMONSTRATED TO BE EFFECTIVE.
 
Based on my read, unless a D ring is stamped, or cut from a solid piece of metal, it doesn't meet the rule. Is that what Simpson will certify?
I'd love it if that's the case ... and that the SCTA will accept that assertion. :cheers:
Rick




Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: Stainless1 on February 11, 2018, 11:56:20 AM
MUST BE OF A SINGLE PIECE MANUFACTURE. I.E. NO TWO PIECE OR WELDED “D” RING STYLE ADJUSTERS

Read this again.... no 2 piece adjusters..... don't read anything into it... it will require single piece adjusters.... the adjusters are the length from lap belt connection adjusters


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: jacksoni on February 11, 2018, 12:00:21 PM
I think all "D" ring adjusters are two pieces- like a helmet strap-. Doesn't matter if the "D" ring is stamped or welded ring, there are still two of them to make it work. The adjuster needs to be one piece of metal, as shown above by Dynoroom.


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: deep in debt motorsports on February 12, 2018, 04:33:52 PM
My G-Force arm restraints have the adjusters like shown,single piece.I just clip one end to Simpson suit and other end to belts.I don’t use the part that goes around arm so I think I am still legal?Part #471-4087 adubk at jegs


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: CTRon on February 12, 2018, 09:17:27 PM
My G-Force arm restraints have the adjusters like shown,single piece.I just clip one end to Simpson suit and other end to belts.I don’t use the part that goes around arm so I think I am still legal?Part #471-4087 adubk at jegs

Interesting.. have you run bville before with that setup? I have sown in rings in my jacket too an if they will allow this ill get the same ones


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: Stan Back on February 12, 2018, 09:31:52 PM
I'm thinking that clipping on to the "narrowest" part (wrist?) of a floppy suit ain't gonna cut it.


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: deep in debt motorsports on February 12, 2018, 10:41:38 PM
Yep,ran this last year,it clearly states adjusters!!!These are the style they are wanting and doesn’t say anything about sewn in being illegal,says,if it is NON-sewn in then must fit tight at smallest part of arm so that means if sewn in must be all good!! I feel rule change is for adjuster only????


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: CTRon on February 13, 2018, 10:30:58 AM
I'm thinking that clipping on to the "narrowest" part (wrist?) of a floppy suit ain't gonna cut it.

The rings are sown into the jacket.


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: Buamotorsport on February 13, 2018, 03:14:39 PM
Having spent time with Allan from Simpson at Pomona this past weekend there is without doubt confusion as to what is acceptable and what isn’t. I know that Simpson are trying to clarify the rule and what is or what isn’t acceptable.


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: Frankie7799 on February 13, 2018, 04:33:04 PM
I just bought brand new Simpson arm restraints late last year as my previous ones were out of date. Guess Ill have to look at them when I get home and figure out if they are legal or not


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: Tman on February 13, 2018, 05:04:08 PM
I just bought brand new Simpson arm restraints late last year as my previous ones were out of date. Guess Ill have to look at them when I get home and figure out if they are legal or not

We are looking into it as well


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: QikNip on February 15, 2018, 02:50:06 PM
I got tired of trying to figure it out, so I ordered a set yesterday from Deist. Not worth $40 to waste any more time! :dhorse: :-D
Rick


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: thundersalt on February 15, 2018, 04:34:56 PM
Just Recieved


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: Rex Schimmer on February 16, 2018, 03:24:43 PM
Pegasus Racing actually has the specified adjustment plate available for 1.75 to 2 inch straps. Duke and I are going to look at his Simpson arm restraints and see if they could be converted to this type of adjuster, would that void any type of warrentee or the SCTA new rule? We also considered having some water jet cut from some stainless plate to the exact strap width. Going with the DJ stuff is probably the best way.

I know that the SCTA does not make these type of changes without a good reason, have they seen failures of arm restraints with the welded "D" ring configuration?

Rex


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: Dynoroom on February 16, 2018, 04:00:14 PM
I know that the SCTA does not make these type of changes without a good reason, have they seen failures of arm restraints with the welded "D" ring configuration?

Rex

Yes, more than 1


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: Ron Gibson on February 16, 2018, 04:29:24 PM
I think we need way more clarification of what is actually required for hardware and where. My Pyrotect restraints have a large welded D- ring on the end of the strap that the seat belt latch goes through,  a pair of small D rings to tighten the arm bands, and a one piece "ADJUSTER" on the restraint strap between the arm and the belt. I have no idea if this is legal for SCTA.

Ron


Title: Re: Simpson Arm restaint ... Does it meet the new rule?
Post by: Stainless1 on February 16, 2018, 10:11:08 PM
I know that the SCTA does not make these type of changes without a good reason, have they seen failures of arm restraints with the welded "D" ring configuration?

Rex

Yes, more than 1

Lee Kennedy kept ours after the incident... although they did not fail, he sent them to DJ for inspection... He also mentioned they had "several d ring failures" in arm restraints and was working on a rule change.... Left my arm restraints with DJ to be put in compliance with the new rules...  Must be about time to call them again and see if they are ready