SFI De-certifies Impact Racing Products!

irish44j wrote:

Keith wrote: are pretty easy to find, and it's a very dramatic drop. "http://www.schrothracing.com/img/webbing1.jpg" I have no idea how often military harnesses are changed, but you can bet they're not made out of

and where that chart is from....if SFI, it would be pretty self-serving.

I absolutely agree about the 2-year thing... not for its supposed intent, but its implementation.

What ticks me off is how I'm not allowed the responsibility to decide for myself about my belts. "No, sorry, we don't care if you kept the belts in the refrigerator for two years, we're going to treat them as if you left them in the backyard in the sun." Or, "Sorry, we don't care that your car can't go 200 mph, we're treating it as though it can and does." That's BS.

And why was it that belts lasted longer before (did they?) and now they don't. What happened, did the formula change? I think it did, and it's called money and lawsuits. Hell, I worry that if some driver dies with 23-month old belts, what's next? Replacing them ever year? Every month? It's getting out of hand.

I also absolutely agree what was said above and I've said it myself. If Ford/GM/import belts last a decade, make the competition belts from the same material! About the fact that OEM car's don't go 200mph... more and more of them do, plus, aftermarket belts are at least twice as wide, doesn't that count for anything?

Grrrr....

I really would like to know more about belt construction and why various materials are chosen. For me, it's scientific curiosity. For others, it's obviously a real sore spot Might make a great article for the magazine.

The graph I linked is one that's hosted on the Schroth website, but I've seen it elsewhere and the non-english title (is that German?) indicates it's certainly not from SFI. I've seen similar ones usually connected to FIA certification documents. In fact, last time I think I actually dug into the FIA site to find it. Water also has an effect on the strength of nylon SFI belts and far less of an effect on polyester FIA belts apparently.

Safety rules are going to be conservative. If we let racers make their own choices, a number of them will make the smart choice. But others will make their roll cages out of 0.040 wall tubing because it's lighter, and some will run the same sun-blasted belts for five years even though they've lost 75% of their strength. Racing's a lot safer than it used to be, and certifications are a big reason why.

kb58 wrote: And why was it that belts had longer before (did they?) and now they don't. What happened, did the formula changed?

In a down year you gotta generate some revenue somehow, no?

Back on the Impact Racing issue, a buddy in the aftermarket racing industry said: "Last year he got busted installing bogus Hans posts on his helmets and the year before his suits got de-certified from SFI."

Not good.

sounds like he has been begging to have this happen

Snell certifies helmets so I don't see this affecting the helmet business, unless the Snell stickers are bogus too.

For a guy who makes his living from safety gear for racers he seems to have a blatant disregard for his clients safety.

Guys, read between the lines. You can spin this all that you want but why would Impact place a counterfeit sticker or patch on a product? Face it, the product probably hasnt be submitted to SFI testing but is sold "certified". I remember having a Sports Renault engine that had counterfeit seals on a motor sold by the Fla CSR. It didnt matter to SCCA and shouldnt matter to you. It was a cheater part!

Nylon 6-6 does lose tensile over time. What's amusing is that it's always listed as a % loss (SFI) and not an actual lower tensile limit and a spec number for when it's actually not fit for use. Keeps someone in business for sure. If you had poly or kevlar or blend belts, there's no reason to keep replacing them. I can't find the spec online but it might lock you into Nylon.

My guess... they used the fake tags on their recertified belts. We just got our set of belts recerted. $25.00. Same hardware came back with it and we're 99% sure that the belts are the same ones we sent in. Hard to really tell as they only had about 12 hours of track time on them and looked brand new when we boxed them up.

A small part of me says good job BS for screwing the SFI, but the rest of me is just p($$ed that now I have to get new belts.

Glad my harness are Safety brand and Diest.

I didn't buy the impact stuff because it looked a bit "ricey" for my taste.

I'm sure the belts were made to spec but the tags were bogus, probably happens more than you think.

I'm just happy I don't have to buy new gear.

We had a similar situation at work. Some of our bandsaws, which are UL and CSA approved came from china with the wrong approval number on the sticker.

The saws were exactly the same as the ones that had been approved before, just a typo in the sticker.

We had to have new, valid stickers made to prove certification.

I'd bet something along the same lines happened here.

Shawn

kb58 wrote: ." Or, "Sorry, we don't care that your car can't go 200 mph, we're treating it as though it can and does." That's BS. I also absolutely agree what was said above and I've said it myself. If Ford/GM/import belts last a decade, make the competition belts from the same material! About the fact that OEM car's don't go 200mph... more and more of them do, plus, aftermarket belts are at least twice as wide, doesn't that count for anything? Grrrr....

ya not only does my car not go 200 mph, it barely goes 115.... so I still need belts certified to 200... meh

keethrax wrote:

irish44j wrote: but I suspect the answer will be "yes, a consistent schedule" but that's because whatever contractor who makes them knows that the military will pay up, so they probably "say" something just like SFI does about harnesses.

So if the answer is rarely it proves your point because they don't change them often. And if the answer is often instead, it *still* proves your point because it's clearly a scam. With your mind so clearly already made up, why bother even asking?

If the answer is "often" then I will ask the expert who tells me this answer "why" and take his expertise at face value (e.g. if he says "for safety" or "because the material weakens" I will believe him). I mention the alternate only because I work for the military and know how things are done...

DILYSI Dave wrote: SFI is a corrupt organization that masquerades as a product safety organization while really just collecting money from racers pockets.

This is the most truthful comment anyone has made regarding this situation. On this board and all others.

Another reason SFI may be alarmed is it's not clear just how closely Impact's Asian fake SFI label company is under their control, or if, like a lot of clothing factories, it's fairly independent and would have no qualms if somebody else asked, "Hey, could you make us a run of those little tags you make for Bill?"

If you're in the business of certifying something, it's never a good example to let a source of the certificates get out of your control. In the motorcycle world, anyone can make "DOT approved" stickers, and you can just go out and buy a roll of them and slap them on some Halloween costume biker helmets. Snell keeps their stickers under tighter control, and counterfeit Snell helmets are nearly unheard of.

irish44j wrote: I've always thought the 2 years for new belts is the biggest scam ever. How is it that Subaru or Toyota or GM can make seatbelts that are perfectly safe 10 or 15 years sitting out in the sun in the driveway, in the humidity, etc....but expensive harnesses supposedly disintegrate and become unsafe after 2 years of limited use, probably sitting inside a garage and not exposed to the elements.

I would imagine that they are made of different materials.

Certainly, I'd hope that a harness stretches a whole lot less than a production seatbelt. I'd never been in a collision with my 5 point on, but if it stretched as much as the seatbelt did in the collision I was in, I bet my liver would have an RCI stamp on it.

man, racing for real is a HUGE PAIN IN THE ASS!

maybe i'll just stick to running for slips on the frontage road.

kb58 wrote: What ticks me off is how I'm not allowed the responsibility to decide for myself about my belts. "No, sorry, we don't care if you kept the belts in the refrigerator for two years, we're going to treat them as if you left them in the backyard in the sun." Or, "Sorry, we don't care that your car can't go 200 mph, we're treating it as though it can and does." That's BS.

While I am all for personal responsibility and this sounds good, unfortunately up to date safety equipment is typically at the bottom of the list of where a racer will spend their money. I used to work for a racing safety equipment company and the things I heard out of the mouths of racers and what I saw at the race track amazed me. A good number of racers would keep the same safety harnesses in their car and use the same helmet for twenty years if they could.

I've seen racing suits so contaminated with oil that they would be like a candle wick in a fire. Helmets the racer wanted to keep because it fit so well even though the protective liner had long since become like a rock. The lowest SFI-rated suit they could get because it satisfied the rules and was cheap. The list goes on...

We are junkies and in denial. What do you expect?

bobpink wrote:

kb58 wrote: What ticks me off is how I'm not allowed the responsibility to decide for myself about my belts. "No, sorry, we don't care if you kept the belts in the refrigerator for two years, we're going to treat them as if you left them in the backyard in the sun." Or, "Sorry, we don't care that your car can't go 200 mph, we're treating it as though it can and does." That's BS.

While I am all for personal responsibility and this sounds good, unfortunately up to date safety equipment is typically at the bottom of the list of where a racer will spend their money. I used to work for a racing safety equipment company and the things I heard out of the mouths of racers and what I saw at the race track amazed me. A good number of racers would keep the same safety harnesses in their car and use the same helmet for twenty years if they could. I've seen racing suits so contaminated with oil that they would be like a candle wick in a fire. Helmets the racer wanted to keep because it fit so well even though the protective liner had long since become like a rock. The lowest SFI-rated suit they could get because it satisfied the rules and was cheap. The list goes on...

So what. If that is what someone wants to do, it's their prerogative. This sport started with guys wearing Jeans and T-Shirts running around in open top MGs, Triumphs, Spridgets, etc. with no roll bar, and often not even a seat belt. How we got from that to the world of 2 year harnesses and mandated H&N's amazes me, and is part of the reason our sport is on they dying part of the life cycle curve.

Keith wrote: I really would like to know more about belt construction and why various materials are chosen. For me, it's scientific curiosity. For others, it's obviously a real sore spot Might make a great article for the magazine. The graph I linked is one that's hosted on the Schroth website, but I've seen it elsewhere and the non-english title (is that German?) indicates it's certainly not from SFI. I've seen similar ones usually connected to FIA certification documents. In fact, last time I think I actually dug into the FIA site to find it. Water also has an effect on the strength of nylon SFI belts and far less of an effect on polyester FIA belts apparently. Safety rules are going to be conservative. If we let racers make their own choices, a number of them will make the smart choice. But others will make their roll cages out of 0.040 wall tubing because it's lighter, and some will run the same sun-blasted belts for five years even though they've lost 75% of their strength. Racing's a lot safer than it used to be, and certifications are a big reason why.

Too true. If you read Mario Andretti's autobiography, he talks about a CanAm car with an aluminum roll bar pop riveted to the chassis. Very safe.

I wonder if impact racing will sell me some fake sfi labels? My belts are 3 years old and still safe enough for me.

Racing will cease to exist if the sanctioning bodies are unable to obtain insurance for the events. I dont like it but if the insurance underwriter adds a new requirement, you have to comply or go without insurance. Which do you want? And if you know that a company has a supply of counterfeit labels, how do you proceed?

bit of a silly question, but is there any rule that says that safety equipment used in the SCCA and NASA competition HAS to be SFI certified, or can it be FIA certified? seems like if you were pissed at SFI and wanted to get at them somehow, buy FIA-certified equipment and race with that. provided it's legal per the letter of SCCA and NASA rules, of course