Author Topic: hutchens head restraint device  (Read 6315 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline racergeo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 828
hutchens head restraint device
« on: December 13, 2006, 06:59:53 PM »
My read of forward head movement paragraph in new rules says sfi 38.1 but has word suggests the use of. the hutchens deal adresses the problem with out expense. would this product meet the spirit of what were " encouraged" to install?

Offline hitz

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2006, 06:42:28 PM »
   I read the rule change to RECOMMEND something that has the sfi 38.1 approval. Hans has it apparantly, as does a new Hutchens device. It seems that they are going to require a restraint to keep the head from snapping forward but the neck roll has not been given approval for that. Some have installed hard and fast restraints which sounded like a good idea to me untill I "IMAGINED" the seat belts streching a little and the head restraint not giving during a crash :| :|
  I don't know what they would call that injury but I'll bet that it would be bad!

  Most of us have a hard time affording this hobby and the saftey requirements are one of the more expensive outputs, BUT the most important. I look for the SCTA to require something to control the forces that cause the head to seperate from the neck in a crash. It would be nice if  something could be found that was easier to afford but did a good job. Whatever the SCTA decides
 should be clear to understand and a system that works as well as it can. I know that they will try to protect the driver/rider from themselves.

Harv

Offline jimmy six

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2788
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #2 on: December 21, 2006, 12:54:16 AM »
Look at the G-Force website...So far it doesn't not meet 38.1 but it appears to protect the driver from frontal movement. SCTA state the equipment should all work together. If you need new belts (as I do) and a helmet this could be an answer...Good Luck...JD
First GMC 6 powered Fuel roadster over 200, with 2 red hats. Pit crew for Patrick Tone's Super Stock #49 Camaro

Offline JackD

  • NOBODY'S FOOL
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4684
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #3 on: December 21, 2006, 03:37:30 AM »
So now we have the head all restricted from excess movement but unless we restrict the torso from movement, we are in trouble again.
"I would rather lose going fast enough to win than win going slow enough to lose."
"That horrible smell is dirty feet being held to the fire"

Offline Loose Goose-Terry#1

  • Terry
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
  • When in doubt, GAS IT!
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #4 on: December 27, 2006, 10:09:15 PM »
 :-) I agree Jack, however, wouldn't the Hans and the Hutchens both restrict head movement in unison with torso movement? I thought that NASCAR went to great extremes testing the efficacy of the Hans device before they made it mandatory (and one of their concerns was excess head movement with the torso).

Unlike NASCAR, where the cars are confined in a concrete bowl, we have no walls to run into at 220 mph. Could we not glean these safety improvements from other racing organizations and then we would not research this to death on our own? :|
If I had it all to do over again...I would!

Offline JackD

  • NOBODY'S FOOL
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4684
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #5 on: December 27, 2006, 10:55:21 PM »
Seat fitting design and driver area protection make a big contribution to the suitability of a head restraining device.
If for example the belts allowed you to travel up into the cage and jam your neck down  it might mean a problem.
If the harness was allowed to roll  and your butt moved towards where your feet go then you have other things to worry about.
A proper seat fitting and restraint system must work with a head movement limiting device or you can expect a failure.
Imagine if your single crotch strap allowed you to torpedo down towards the foot well, at the very least you would talk funny.
Think a lot about where you want to stay and make sure you do.
"I would rather lose going fast enough to win than win going slow enough to lose."
"That horrible smell is dirty feet being held to the fire"

Super Kaz

  • Guest
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2006, 10:21:13 AM »
Seat fitting design and driver area protection make a big contribution to the suitability of a head restraining device.
If for example the belts allowed you to travel up into the cage and jam your neck down  it might mean a problem.
If the harness was allowed to roll  and your butt moved towards where your feet go then you have other things to worry about.
A proper seat fitting and restraint system must work with a head movement limiting device or you can expect a failure.
Imagine if your single crotch strap allowed you to torpedo down towards the foot well, at the very least you would talk funny.
Think a lot about where you want to stay and make sure you do.

Jack,
You make a Good Point!
What about Motorcycle racer's?
Is there any new technology in Safety to Help US?
With 250+mph motorcycles I don't know what would help if something ever went wrong? :-o
I've seen the Body Air Bags but wouldn't they Pop from the Heat/Friction of a 250+mph salt Slide?
The only New Safety Piece I'm using is a Headsock to keep the Salt out of my Eye's but that thing gets Really Warm after 10 Minutes in the sun :-P!
No Room for a Neck Protector,as you have to be able to Flex your Neck to see down the Track"although I have Heard otherwise :wink:"!
So whats a Motorcycle LSR supposed too do?
Anyone with answers please feel free to say!

Offline Bob Drury

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2599
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #7 on: December 28, 2006, 08:07:34 PM »
Have thick skin................... :wink:
Bob Drury

Offline jimmy six

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2788
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #8 on: December 29, 2006, 01:40:05 AM »
build your bike with a roll cage :evil:

Jack! How does any of the devices listed limit the movement of the torso. They are all attacked or rely on the same shoulder harness and lap belts for support we now use. Sooooooooo to me it makes no difference which one you use because right now we are only discussing forward head movement. The Hans device would be of no use I can see if it were not for the shoulder belts. The Hutchens at least attaches to you body but still relys on the shoulder harness to work.

If your going to respond to forward torso movement, which is really chest forward movement, The only thing to do is add another 3" "lap type" belt across your chest attached back to the cage...maybe 6 or 7"

I think I can fix all of this:

1.Radio controlled car with no driver w/tc

2. Design/Build car with known drag coefficient. Build motor with dyno sheet showing horsepower
    Send in both for record Cert and Red or Blue hat if applicable.

Works for me


First GMC 6 powered Fuel roadster over 200, with 2 red hats. Pit crew for Patrick Tone's Super Stock #49 Camaro

Offline Sumner

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4078
  • Blanding, Ut..a small dot in the middle of nowhere
    • http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/sumnerindex.html
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #9 on: December 29, 2006, 11:06:23 AM »
To me I would think these devices have been tested in a more normal seat position like you find in a circle track car.  I wonder if any testing has been done in a lay-down position like you find in a streamliner or lakester??  I would be reluctant at this point to use one in that situation unless the manufacture had done testing and states it can be used in that manner.

c ya,

Sum

Offline Peter Jack

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3776
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #10 on: December 29, 2006, 11:18:49 AM »
The Hans device is designed somewhat differently for different applications. It is commonly used in many of the open wheel series where the driver is in a much more reclined position. Talking to the manufacturer would probably result in getting one to fit the application.

Pete

Offline Bob Drury

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2599
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #11 on: December 29, 2006, 11:55:20 AM »
If I had a lakester or a streamliner, one thing I would pay a lot of attention to is leg and arm restraints, because of their penchant to pencil roll rather than spin.  In these applications I would think lateral head support would be more important than a straight forward motion.  One thing that hasn't been mentioned here is that you can buy lateral helmant restraints from Simpson and others which are simple to attach to the helmet, and simply strap around the upper arm.  These have been used by sprint car drivers for years.  In my case, I wear a G Force helmet restraint, and am adding the lateral straps for this year.  Total cost, aproxamatley 300 bucks.  Cheaper than ten visits to the Chiopractor, or one MRI.
Bob Drury

Offline jimmy six

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2788
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #12 on: December 29, 2006, 12:25:27 PM »
Bob, I believe you said you are using the SRS-1 G-Force restraint in a previous thread?  If yes, At least as far as I can see it's not 38.1 rated. To me it appears to satisfy the foward movement or at least restrict/dampen it. I like how it attaches. But until we demamd a suplimental "chest' restraint there will always be movevment in any accident.

For me spinning is a greater concern; side and rear protection is the highest importance. J.D.
First GMC 6 powered Fuel roadster over 200, with 2 red hats. Pit crew for Patrick Tone's Super Stock #49 Camaro

Offline SPARKY

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6912
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #13 on: January 13, 2007, 09:30:03 PM »
I have very limited experience--2 cars my Lakester and Skips now Liner---I dont know if I could get in or out of either of them with a Hans---but I do have HARD restraints forward and sideways and a legal head rest behind --does anyone inturpet by 1-1-08 we will have to have a HANS?
Miss LIBERTY,  changing T.K.I.  to noise, dust, rust, BLUE HATS & hopefully not scrap!!

"Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing."   Helen Keller

We are going to explore the racing N words NITROUS & NITRO!

Offline Rick Byrnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 436
Re: hutchens head restraint device
« Reply #14 on: January 17, 2007, 10:06:36 AM »
Not a requirement.  But a suggestion for complete protection.

Getting in and out with all gear is one reason my cage is a couple of inches higher than it could be.  From the beginning I planned on using a HANS.  (A little frontal area was a fair trade off for safety in my mind.)
While the others may or may not meet the SFI specifications, The HANS does outperform by a significant margin.
Bob Stroud is working on a device.  It will be interesting to see it.  I wish I could have waited for his.

I'm in agreement that in a long skinny car, side movement is probably more important than forward, but I already addressed that with my hot rod.
Now all I need to do is go fast    :-D

Rick
Rick