HANS to be mandatory from 2016
Discussion
bicycleshorts said:
Set of tyres for the brscc mx5 championship: £160
Cheapest hans device: £257
Cheapest helmet with hans posts: £252
Cheapest hans 2" harness: £160
Total: £670 (Prices from Demon Tweeks)
Or for reference... 4 sets of tyres.
I appreciate the device, how it works and the reason for it's mandatory requirement but without some cheaper options/solutions, it's appears to be just another money making scheme like the life of seats/harnesses. Particularly so with only 1 year of notice given.
You don't need a new harness.... also I would expect the price of both to start coming down the closer we get to the mandatory season...Cheapest hans device: £257
Cheapest helmet with hans posts: £252
Cheapest hans 2" harness: £160
Total: £670 (Prices from Demon Tweeks)
Or for reference... 4 sets of tyres.
I appreciate the device, how it works and the reason for it's mandatory requirement but without some cheaper options/solutions, it's appears to be just another money making scheme like the life of seats/harnesses. Particularly so with only 1 year of notice given.
geeks said:
bicycleshorts said:
Set of tyres for the brscc mx5 championship: £160
Cheapest hans device: £257
Cheapest helmet with hans posts: £252
Cheapest hans 2" harness: £160
Total: £670 (Prices from Demon Tweeks)
Or for reference... 4 sets of tyres.
I appreciate the device, how it works and the reason for it's mandatory requirement but without some cheaper options/solutions, it's appears to be just another money making scheme like the life of seats/harnesses. Particularly so with only 1 year of notice given.
You don't need a new harness.... also I would expect the price of both to start coming down the closer we get to the mandatory season...Cheapest hans device: £257
Cheapest helmet with hans posts: £252
Cheapest hans 2" harness: £160
Total: £670 (Prices from Demon Tweeks)
Or for reference... 4 sets of tyres.
I appreciate the device, how it works and the reason for it's mandatory requirement but without some cheaper options/solutions, it's appears to be just another money making scheme like the life of seats/harnesses. Particularly so with only 1 year of notice given.
bicycleshorts said:
Set of tyres for the brscc mx5 championship: £160
Cheapest hans device: £257
Cheapest helmet with hans posts: £252
Cheapest hans 2" harness: £160
Total: £670 (Prices from Demon Tweeks)
Or for reference... 4 sets of tyres.
I appreciate the device, how it works and the reason for it's mandatory requirement but without some cheaper options/solutions, it's appears to be just another money making scheme like the life of seats/harnesses. Particularly so with only 1 year of notice given.
Nomex is expensive too. Perhaps there should be some cheaper options, like just wrapping yourself in bubblewrap and tissue paper? Cheapest hans device: £257
Cheapest helmet with hans posts: £252
Cheapest hans 2" harness: £160
Total: £670 (Prices from Demon Tweeks)
Or for reference... 4 sets of tyres.
I appreciate the device, how it works and the reason for it's mandatory requirement but without some cheaper options/solutions, it's appears to be just another money making scheme like the life of seats/harnesses. Particularly so with only 1 year of notice given.
it would seem that there are much fewer fires than neck injuries, so in some ways the HANS device actually makes more sense than nomex.
A different way of looking at the cost is over the lifetime. So if you take the cost of the hans device over (for example) 3 seasons and break it down per race, what do you get in comparison with other costs (Radical numbers guestimated for fun).
3 seasons entries (15k)
3 seasons engines (15k)
3 seasons petrol (9k)
3 seasons tyres (24k)
3 seasons hans (£250)
Anyhow you get the idea. I don't really think it's anyone's money-making scheme though to make HANS mandatory.
Bert
A different way of looking at the cost is over the lifetime. So if you take the cost of the hans device over (for example) 3 seasons and break it down per race, what do you get in comparison with other costs (Radical numbers guestimated for fun).
3 seasons entries (15k)
3 seasons engines (15k)
3 seasons petrol (9k)
3 seasons tyres (24k)
3 seasons hans (£250)
Anyhow you get the idea. I don't really think it's anyone's money-making scheme though to make HANS mandatory.
Bert
BertBert said:
it would seem that there are much fewer fires than neck injuries, so in some ways the HANS device actually makes more sense than nomex.
A different way of looking at the cost is over the lifetime. So if you take the cost of the hans device over (for example) 3 seasons and break it down per race, what do you get in comparison with other costs (Radical numbers guestimated for fun).
3 seasons entries (15k)
3 seasons engines (15k)
3 seasons petrol (9k)
3 seasons tyres (24k)
3 seasons hans (£250)
Anyhow you get the idea. I don't really think it's anyone's money-making scheme though to make HANS mandatory.
Bert
Exactly. If it were a money making scheme for the manufacturers they would have become mandatory years ago. The fact that they've been around enough for experienced people to suggest they should be compulsory, shows the timing is about right. A few more years down the road and more spinal injuries will have people jumping up and down why the MSA didn't act on a piece of life saving kit available for well over a decade.A different way of looking at the cost is over the lifetime. So if you take the cost of the hans device over (for example) 3 seasons and break it down per race, what do you get in comparison with other costs (Radical numbers guestimated for fun).
3 seasons entries (15k)
3 seasons engines (15k)
3 seasons petrol (9k)
3 seasons tyres (24k)
3 seasons hans (£250)
Anyhow you get the idea. I don't really think it's anyone's money-making scheme though to make HANS mandatory.
Bert
A set of tyres for us costs £160. A replacement engine (before a head skim) costs £50. The cars will barely break 100mph.
For reference to the guy who quoted radical numbers. £24k would pay for 150 sets of tyres for us. We are hoping to use 3 sets next year, so that would last us 50 seasons.
We chose an entry-level championship because we have a limited budget. Unfortunately the MSA regulate them in the same manner as a £100k/season 160mph Radical championship.
This is why replacing our current, FIA, in-date helmets at a cost of £500 is more than a slight annoyance.
For reference to the guy who quoted radical numbers. £24k would pay for 150 sets of tyres for us. We are hoping to use 3 sets next year, so that would last us 50 seasons.
We chose an entry-level championship because we have a limited budget. Unfortunately the MSA regulate them in the same manner as a £100k/season 160mph Radical championship.
This is why replacing our current, FIA, in-date helmets at a cost of £500 is more than a slight annoyance.
bicycleshorts said:
This is why replacing our current, FIA, in-date helmets at a cost of £500 is more than a slight annoyance.
You can replace HANS compliant helmets for a lot less than £500.Hans devices have been around for quite a while now (10-12 years?) and so helmets have been available with Hans posts fitted or "fitted for but not with" for a long while, even if you didn't have a Hans. Why anyone would buy a helmet in the last 5-7 years that wasn't already Hans compliant is a mystery to me.
As I have said elsewhere, when I started racing about 12 yeas ago Hans were about £500 each. My wife told me that I had better buy one or ensure that if I had an accident I died outright, because she knew that I would be a damned awful quadriplegic to live with and she did not see why she should suffer that, for the sake of a few hundered quid.
bicycleshorts said:
A set of tyres for us costs £160. A replacement engine (before a head skim) costs £50. The cars will barely break 100mph.
For reference to the guy who quoted radical numbers. £24k would pay for 150 sets of tyres for us. We are hoping to use 3 sets next year, so that would last us 50 seasons.
We chose an entry-level championship because we have a limited budget. Unfortunately the MSA regulate them in the same manner as a £100k/season 160mph Radical championship.
This is why replacing our current, FIA, in-date helmets at a cost of £500 is more than a slight annoyance.
Sorry for the Radical numbers. I was very lucky indeed to be able to afford it for me and Miss Bert for a couple of seasons, so was just being a show-off tFor reference to the guy who quoted radical numbers. £24k would pay for 150 sets of tyres for us. We are hoping to use 3 sets next year, so that would last us 50 seasons.
We chose an entry-level championship because we have a limited budget. Unfortunately the MSA regulate them in the same manner as a £100k/season 160mph Radical championship.
This is why replacing our current, FIA, in-date helmets at a cost of £500 is more than a slight annoyance.
t 
However, when your car hits the barrier head on at even 40mph as I have done (along with many far more capable drivers than me at Brands), that's a huge deceleration and you will be glad someone made you wear a HANS device. Cheaper racing is not without the same basic problems of physics. As I think Jeremy Clarkson said, it's not the speed that's dangerous it's the stopping.
So I support the compulsory HANS rules and think you are ill advised to get all prissy about it - that's just daft. My view is that if you can't afford a HANS device, don't go racing. Of course YMMV.
Bert
bicycleshorts said:
A set of tyres for us costs £160. A replacement engine (before a head skim) costs £50. The cars will barely break 100mph.
For reference to the guy who quoted radical numbers. £24k would pay for 150 sets of tyres for us. We are hoping to use 3 sets next year, so that would last us 50 seasons.
We chose an entry-level championship because we have a limited budget. Unfortunately the MSA regulate them in the same manner as a £100k/season 160mph Radical championship.
This is why replacing our current, FIA, in-date helmets at a cost of £500 is more than a slight annoyance.
If you can't afford the safety items, you can't afford to race. For reference to the guy who quoted radical numbers. £24k would pay for 150 sets of tyres for us. We are hoping to use 3 sets next year, so that would last us 50 seasons.
We chose an entry-level championship because we have a limited budget. Unfortunately the MSA regulate them in the same manner as a £100k/season 160mph Radical championship.
This is why replacing our current, FIA, in-date helmets at a cost of £500 is more than a slight annoyance.
Sorry sounds harsh but it's true!
Drop the entry for one round and cover the cost and if you are paying £500 for a HANS helmet you haven't done your homework. Unless you are including the cost of the HANS in that £500...
It does make me wonder though, those willing to skimp on personal protection, where else are they willing to skimp? Is that roll cage fitted correctly? Extinguisher? Cut off? It worries me when people bemoan this kind of change when they have already willingly shelled out 10 times the cost on other items?
geeks said:
If you can't afford the safety items, you can't afford to race.
Sorry sounds harsh but it's true!
Drop the entry for one round and cover the cost and if you are paying £500 for a HANS helmet you haven't done your homework. Unless you are including the cost of the HANS in that £500...
It does make me wonder though, those willing to skimp on personal protection, where else are they willing to skimp? Is that roll cage fitted correctly? Extinguisher? Cut off? It worries me when people bemoan this kind of change when they have already willingly shelled out 10 times the cost on other items?
I think that that is a very blinkered narrow minded view..Sorry sounds harsh but it's true!
Drop the entry for one round and cover the cost and if you are paying £500 for a HANS helmet you haven't done your homework. Unless you are including the cost of the HANS in that £500...
It does make me wonder though, those willing to skimp on personal protection, where else are they willing to skimp? Is that roll cage fitted correctly? Extinguisher? Cut off? It worries me when people bemoan this kind of change when they have already willingly shelled out 10 times the cost on other items?
Driving ability seems to be much more about the size of someones wallet today..!!
Lets talk about the big players writing rules to line their pockets.
At the end of next year I have a set of harnesses, an A/FR helmet all destined for the bin hardly used, not a scratch…And why..because a big organisation decrees that an A/FR helmet is no longer of an approved standard…b
ks!!By all means have scrutineers scrute cars but lifing everything is plain silly..Are your car seat belts lifed?? NO. they are inspected once per year and if defect free passed as fit.
I don't mind improving anything to take account of safety. I do however mind changing items at the behest of no good reason..the latest ploy is to line the pockets of the manufacturers..no more no less.
Hans is merely a distraction to the other legislation sneaked in.
N.
The last rule that really annoyed was harness points where the governing body actually outlawed the single rear belt point in tension over a twin point in shear!!! again..rules for the sake of them without proper thought.
Dollyman1850 said:
I think that that is a very blinkered narrow minded view..
Driving ability seems to be much more about the size of someones wallet today..!!
Hasn't it always been that way?Driving ability seems to be much more about the size of someones wallet today..!!
Dollyman1850 said:
Lets talk about the big players writing rules to line their pockets.
At the end of next year I have a set of harnesses, an A/FR helmet all destined for the bin hardly used, not a scratch…And why..because a big organisation decrees that an A/FR helmet is no longer of an approved standard…bks!!
By all means have scrutineers scrute cars but lifing everything is plain silly..Are your car seat belts lifed?? NO. they are inspected once per year and if defect free passed as fit.
Your road car has airbags and seatbelt pre-tensioners. If it's been in a crash big enough to stretch the belts, those have fired and the belts will most likely have been replaced. It's also got a pretty good chance of being written off. If your race car has been crashed, have your stretched belts been replaced? What about when those belts get sold on eBay and the next guy buys them without knowing they've already been in an accident? 10 years down the line, that might have happened several times. Would you trust your life with a pre-crashed belt? The MSA wouldn't and they're mitigating the risk by lifing components. There's only so many times a set of belts can be crashed in a specified period.At the end of next year I have a set of harnesses, an A/FR helmet all destined for the bin hardly used, not a scratch…And why..because a big organisation decrees that an A/FR helmet is no longer of an approved standard…b
ks!!By all means have scrutineers scrute cars but lifing everything is plain silly..Are your car seat belts lifed?? NO. they are inspected once per year and if defect free passed as fit.
andylaurence said:
If your race car has been crashed, have your stretched belts been replaced? What about when those belts get sold on eBay and the next guy buys them without knowing they've already been in an accident? 10 years down the line, that might have happened several times. Would you trust your life with a pre-crashed belt? The MSA wouldn't and they're mitigating the risk by lifing components. There's only so many times a set of belts can be crashed in a specified period.
An answer to this would be for scruts to attach a seal in the same way that some engines are sealed. The harnesses could only then be removed by breaking the seal which would then identify them as second hand as possibly should be avoided for the reasons you suggest. If the car is involved in a heavy impact the scuts examine it anyway and could at that point break the seal thereby rendering it obsolete.The practice of replacing something just because it is x number of years old is frankly ludicrous.
Trev450 said:
An answer to this would be for scruts to attach a seal in the same way that some engines are sealed. The harnesses could only then be removed by breaking the seal which would then identify them as second hand as possibly should be avoided for the reasons you suggest. If the car is involved in a heavy impact the scuts examine it anyway and could at that point break the seal thereby rendering it obsolete.
The practice of replacing something just because it is x number of years old is frankly ludicrous.
Isn't it easier than that? If the vehicle has received heavy frontal damage the scrutineer/senior marshal cuts the belts. I think there are some marshals who will do that anyway.The practice of replacing something just because it is x number of years old is frankly ludicrous.
Mobsy said:
Trev450 said:
An answer to this would be for scruts to attach a seal in the same way that some engines are sealed. The harnesses could only then be removed by breaking the seal which would then identify them as second hand as possibly should be avoided for the reasons you suggest. If the car is involved in a heavy impact the scuts examine it anyway and could at that point break the seal thereby rendering it obsolete.
The practice of replacing something just because it is x number of years old is frankly ludicrous.
Isn't it easier than that? If the vehicle has received heavy frontal damage the scrutineer/senior marshal cuts the belts. I think there are some marshals who will do that anyway.The practice of replacing something just because it is x number of years old is frankly ludicrous.
When the front wishbone failed going into Paddock Hill I was expecting to be heading the hospital. Bit of luck and skill managed to get most of the speed off before clipping the barrier at around 40mph but I still felt that the next day in my body but my neck was fine
http://youtu.be/a2DCWRqoZUk
http://youtu.be/a2DCWRqoZUk
Gassing Station | UK Club Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff