Drivers helmet support 3.A.3 I would like clarification

[roadsterswap]

The new rule that goes into effect for this year limits lateral head movement to less than 2" per side. The rule states "the structure" shall provide restriction to lateral head movement. What I would like to know is if the new seat systems that have head control devices mounted on them are going to be enough. Or are they looking for roll cage structure to be next to a persons head to limit motion. On a car that does not have a top fuel style roll system, it may be a challenge to get the roll cage modified. And then if the cage is wrapping around then getting in and out of the car may be impossible. Would one of the systems that are worn.....cant think of the name that provide head and neck control going to pass tech. I worry about tech each season. And each new inspector and each new rule and its millions of interpretations.....that day. Just expressing myself. I am willing to go along with the program. I just want to be confident I did things right for this May. I also do not want my investment of time and money to be sent back to the pits for revision....Please help.

[Dynoroom]

Swap, I understand your concern but as in most things LSR I think it's a rule for many different class applications. Many roadsters already have less than the 2" required by the rule. Those that don't could indeed use a seat with head support structure. But I believe the rule is mainly for door type cars that have "open" cages. In this case a couple of bars protruding forward on either side of the drivers helmet would suffice, or again a specialty aluminum seat with lateral head support.
Hopefully others will post what they are going to do to conform to the rule.

[Dr Goggles]

Because we have a unitary frame/rollcage the shape over the drivers head was probably less than ideal . We have added these chin bars which are similar to what Sum has put in his car.......each time I sat in the car with a helmet on I felt uneasy  because the top of the helmet had little clearance on the top bars and so ones neck was tilted as the top of the helmet stopped and the lower part could keep moving .With these bars the top and bottom contact simultaneously , it feels a whole lot safer....any comments?

[Stainless1]

Sometimes a little space is good for vision, as Snell goes up, the helmets seem to get a little bigger.... This is how we have been complying with the rule for about 20 years....

[roadsterswap]

In a streamliner or other smaller type vehicle it seems to not be so difficult to comply with. I run a door slammer 32 coupe with a perimeter type cage. I think I can make some head limiting devices, but a seat if legal may be an easier way to go. I just want to know if I bought a seat if that was going to be ok. Or a Hans device.  Or if i put some head stop extensions on my roll cage to keep my head from slapping around.  I would like to see more peoples solution to the problem and hopefully some door slammer style cars with out the complex driver cage. Just trying to learn and get ideas.

[Sumner]

.......each time I sat in the car with a helmet on I felt uneasy  because the top of the helmet had little clearance on the top bars and so ones neck was tilted as the top of the helmet stopped and the lower part could keep moving .With these bars the top and bottom contact simultaneously , it feels a whole lot safer....any comments?

Yep I think it is a lot safer for just the reason you mentioned.  Tom Burkland recommended to me that I put the bars about where the center of gravity is for your head for that reason.  It seems that about where your ears are is close to the center of gravity for most of us.  I wondered if that is why our ears are so critical to our balance??

You don't want them to high or too low where your head would rotate around them and put a twisting motion on your neck as you mentioned.

Any word yet about maybe an alternative date for you guys or has there been any change to the surface of the lake??

c ya,

Sum

[rustyT]

Roadster.
We run a coupe with a cage like what you probably have,what we did is run a bar behind the seat side to side and built adjustable suppors for the side movement of our helmet,I think Sum may have some pictures? Anyway,we use a R-3 head and neck support system,they were not designed for side to side restraint,so if you have a hans,you still need a system for the side restraint,I think a guy(or gal) that is going to buy a seat with head restraint built in,they need to be something better than the speedway style with bolt-on head "wings", they may work ok at the 80-90 mile per hour that they were designed for, but nothing above that.Just my opinion,I could be wrong! I dont have the cash for a $2000.00 seat either,but I think a person should do whatever they have to,to be safe!!
Later,Phil.

[Dr Goggles]

Any word yet about maybe an alternative date for you guys or has there been any change to the surface of the lake??

#^$%@#&@*#($&%^#$%@%#&^$%@# ,

[Bob Drury]

Roadster, in early December I drafted what was to be a rule clarification petition pertaining to the lateral helmet support rule.  Before I sent it thru proper channels, I faxed my concerns and my suggested clarifications to the chairs of the tech committes to see if they had any comments.  The only one to respond was Mike Manghelli, who was very gracious in explaining how hard it is to make a rule with good intentions which will encompass all classes.  The bottom line, according to Mike, is that with a open cage car (coupe or sedan) as long as the cage follows the roll cage rules, a wrap around "NASCAR" head restraint seat is considered legal, as is any well supported bracing near the drivers head.  In answer to one of the points I wished to clarify, Mike stated that although the rule states "2" maximum to structure",  the intent is 2" maximum to SFI 45 padding.  This is important, as I don't think you could slide a Hans thru a gap of less than 1" of padding.  If you are building a new car or cage, I would definately build a full funny car cage, buy in many finished cars including mine this is not an easy fix.  After my conversation with Mike, I decided to table my petition as I feel my concers were answered.    Bob

[Bob Drury]

Doc, that bar padding you are using is not SFI 45.  You can buy the right stuff from Jegs or Summit Racing amongst others.  Its about twenty bucks for three feet, and can be purchaised in


Doc, that padding you have isn't legal.  You need SFI 45 roll bar padding manufactured by JAZ Products.  It is available thru Jegs and Summit Racing amongst others.  Cost is around twenty bucks for a three foot stick..........................

[roadsterswap]

Bob this is just what I wanted to hear. It is left open for the racers to solve. However when it gets to tech it can be a whole other issue. They will be defining what is safe or what meets the rules. I want to be safe. I am safe in the car now. These side bars may make me more safe..... I had one tech guy say that the head restraints of a sprint car seat were not strong enough. They just moved around. So there must be some grip and pull test that they will put the structure through. I have an open cage and the car is such that large hoops welded on will make things difficult. I was hoping a seat would be ok, but you never know. It will depend if the inspector feels it is safe or strong. I don't know. Can bars be bolted to the main structure or do they have to be welded? There is not much information. I sure hate to buy a seat to find out it is not strong enough because tech would say so....
I think tech inspection is the worst part of this game. The rules are there. Read and interpreted  by the racers and reinterpreted by the inspector of the day. The highlight of the weekend sometimes is just making it through tech! just being honest.

[Dr Goggles]

Doc, that padding you have isn't legal.  You need SFI 45 roll bar padding manufactured by JAZ Products.  It is available thru Jegs and Summit Racing amongst others.  Cost is around twenty bucks for a three foot stick..........................

Hi Bob, yeah , that was bought from a roll-bar and drag car suspension manufacturer ...at roughly the cost you said.....I might be wrong but they are long established and reputable suppliers.....

http://www.mcdonaldbrosracing.com.au/contact.php

it is off-set centred..........what made you think it wasn't SFI?

[JackD]

The padding you have is a closed cell foam product that is manufactured and sold for applications like you have it.
The SFI stuff is a denser foam that does not have the same bounce back characteristics, and actually can be much thinner, and still offer the same protection.
All you are really doing with it is spreading the load across a wider area to reduce the point load on the helmet.
The best comparison is a constant wound spring vs a progressive wound design.
For the limited travel you have and with it the little bit of bounce around you will ever have in an upset, it is probably just fine.
When you compare it to the protection that any of the other injury sensitive parts of your bod have like the seat against the back bone, it looks pretty good.
Many people took cheap deal insulation foam, then wrapped it tight with tape, and called it good, but we know better don't we ?
SFI is a good resource, but is a US standard that is not adopted World wide , just like Snell helmet standards.
It is certainly a good, and first choice product, but not universally required.
If you get a hold of some, compare it to other methods by smacking it with a closed fist, and that will demonstrate the difference.
Don't do it yourself, but get a buddy to try it, and just watch his eyes, that is what they are for after all.    

[Dr Goggles]

 let me say there is absolutely ,ABSOLUTELY ,no end to the usefulness of this site , Jack and Bob or should that be Bob, and Jack thank you once agin fer learnin' me sumthin!...and to think I had the cheek to ask why..............

thanks, the understudy................

[JackD]

HELP !!!!!
I am told that Bob is my dinner date next Saturday night.
It was all arranged by Ferd and somebody has to stop him !