Good discussion about HANS devices, roll over protection etc, etc

This is an interview with Joe Marko, who is the owner of HMS Motorsport, who are the US distributors for Schroth harnesses.  He supplies many of the race series with safety equipment, NASCAR etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=7CK8WAob8dU&feature=emb_logo

It's a long video, so if you don't want to watch it, here's the Cliff Notes

#1  Wear some sort of HANS device.  A real HANS if you have a 5/6 point harness and a Simpson Hybrid if you have a 3 point.  Spend the money!

#2  On modern cars built past 1996, don't worry so much about roof deformation in a roll over.  Worry much more about your arms and head (!!) flying out the window of the car if you're wearing a 3 point seat belt.  In other words, you're much better off with a fixed back race seat, multi point harness, HANS and a harness bar vs a 3 point belt

#3  Get a 6 point harness vs a 5 point harness

#4  If your car still has airbags installed and you're running a multi point harness, clip something into the stock seat belt receptacle so if the airbag deploys it's not going off at full strength

The video clips he shows of people's heads literally being outside the car through the window while wearing a 3 point belt are scary.  I'd still like to see a proper roll bar installed in a car with fixed back race seats and 6 point harnesses but clearly you're safer with a harness bar, fixed back race seats and 6 point harnesses vs the factory 3 point seat belt.

Thanks for posting that!

I've been procrastinating on a center net, but now I think the car will have one for our next event!

I've had a Brey-Krause harness bar for my 996 sitting in my basement for awhile.  Looks like I need to order a 6 point harness and install both for my DE's.  I can easily remove the harness bar and shoulder harness tails in between events so I can use the back seat.  I'd been holding off because I thought the harness bar was hokey and not as safe as running with the factory 3 point belts.  Watching that video changed my mind...

A lot of good info there!

However I'd like to see more data and less anecdotal speculation about #2 before I would be willing to form any real conclusions about it. While the videos of heads breaking the plane of the window are dramatic, he doesn't make it sound like much real analysis has been done on the issue related to track use. Really that's just his personal choice of safety compromise based on an wildly incomplete data set. I'm not saying he's wrong, but it can happen to even the best informed people when making judgement calls based primarily on insufficient evidence. 

My biggest concern with this statement is that FMVSS roof crush requirements aren't all that strict at just 1.5x vehicle weight, and many manufacturers didn't get more serious about rollover protection until AFTER IIHS started rating cars in 2009 with a 'good' rating requiring at least 4x vehicle weight. 

I agree, however there simply isn't any data out there to look at.  Nobody is testing this stuff, especially during track events.  So at that point you have to weigh the information that is at hand and make your own choices.

I was always was a proponent of a properly installed rollbar, preferably mounted to structural areas of the car, not the single sided steel of the floor boards and wheel wells.  That being said, I think it's pretty clear that you're still better off with a proper race seat, 6 point harnesses, HANS and a harness bar vs a 3 point seat belt.

I don't see it as quite so universally cut and dry for 3 reasons.

1) From my own anecdotal evidence, I think he overstates the improbability of roof collapse at the B-pillar at the track.

2) From my own anecdotal evidence, I think he understates the difference between a 3 point belt with mildly bolstered street seat and a 4+ point harness with fixed-back race seat  during a roof collapse at the B-pillar.

3) From the anecdotal evidence he shows, plus thinking about the physics behind it, I think he overstates the probability of a helmeted head breaking the plane of the window at the same fleeting moment that the ground is the plane of the window and causing substantial injury.

Sure, if I was in a late model Porsche like him, I'd probably think more like him. But if I was in a K (or J) swapped EK Civic or something, I wouldn't be so quick to install that fixed back race bucket, 6 point harness, and harness bar in the name of 'safety' without also at least including a properly mounted 4-point roll bar.

I'm not following your point #2. 

From my anecdotal evidence, based on doing DE's for 25 years, I've *never* seen a roll over at a DE.  Not once.  Now that doesn't mean that if a rollover happens the roof can't collapse.  Obviously the newer the car is, the better off you are.  Can't say that I argue with you about the way a more modern Porsche is built vs the tin can that an old Civic is.

As far as #3, yeah a lot of bad things would have to line up for your head to be out the window and contact something, whether that's the ground or something else.  However if that happens you're screwed. 

I completely agree that a properly mounted roll bar is the way to go and I've had them in my last two dedicated track cars.  Where things get fuzzy is on a dual purpose car that's really more of a street car.  At that point you really don't want to weld or drill into your car to mount a roll bar and also lose the utility of the back seat.  Like on my 996 for instance, I'm totally unwilling to do that.  Hence me just running the factory 3 point seat belt.  However, based on what Joe shows and the fact that he has access to far more data than I do, I'm going to install the harness bar that I have sitting in my basement.

The one rollover I've witnessed at a track day included the roof fully collapsing on the driver of a 90's Honda. Driver was in 3 point belt and street seat, and walked away. I have seen plenty of other similar stories with pics and videos that make me cringe to think about the physics involved with a driver more firmly held in the upright position. Would they have been no worse off if harnessed into a race seat with the roof fully collapsed in on them? HMS says specifically stated that you're in exactly the same boat either way. No better or worse off. But based on the number of people who have experienced the 3 point belt allowing their body to more easily be pushed further sideways by the collapsing roof, I can't say that I fully agree with that assessment... Or at least the basis of it. Since there are so many fewer drivers running fixed back race seats with harness and NO roll bar, the sample size of those drivers who have also flattened their roofs is simply too much smaller (none that I've seen even anecdotally) than those with 3-point belts and stock seats to be able to draw any equivalency of injury rate/severity between the two.

I guess the point is that I see reason to believe that it's considerably more car and year dependent than he's giving credit. In a post-2000 tin top Porsche, the statistical better safety compromise may very well be a conventional HANS, harness, and maybe fixed back seat. But in many other cars up to the early-2010's that ended up built much closer to the minimum federal rollover standards, I see the potential that the statistical better safety compromise may actually be something more like a Hybrid-S and 3-point.

It's a call we each have to make for ourselves. I simply saw a big enough gap in this particular one of his claims that I wanted to put the counterpoint out there, to make people think a bit harder about the specifics of their own situation before making such an important decision on which safety compromises to make.

Even modern cars can do pretty poorly in a rollover.  C7 that rolled at Willow Springs in January:

C7 rolled at HPDE

I gave this issue a lot of thought a couple years ago, and that is why our NA HPDE car has a full cage, seat, harness, fire system, etc.   It's a big committment, but if you want to push things on the track....

In reply to Rodan :

I'm not sure being just in stock safety equipment would matter in such a violent event, that's definitely a case for full cage and all the other safety systems.  There are definitely risks doing DE and I somewhat regret selling my 98 M3.  However in that car I still wouldn't have installed a full cage, fire system etc, it was still too nice/low mileage of an example to do that to.  I'm not ready to basically have a race car for DE's, which would mean a truck and trailer, place to store them and all the costs/complications involved with that.

Instead I want to be as safe as I can which means leaving time on the table.  Drive 7-8/10ths and have a fun time, bringing the car home in the same condition it arrives to the track....

docwyte said:

I'm not sure being just in stock safety equipment would matter in such a violent event...

So is your belief that the driver and passenger of that Corvette, who both walked away without injury, would have been no more likely to have suffered serious neck injuries with a fixed back seats and harnesses fighting to keep their torso in place and upright against the collapsing roof?

If you watch the handheld in-car video, you can actually even see the driver being pushed down and sideways, as allowed by the 3 point belt. Thinking back to the HMS video where the harnessed fighter pilot experienced a relatively 'mild' 15 G's of decel with their body held firmly in place by a harness, the deflection is all in the neck. Which to the best of my understanding is actually worse than a less aggressive belting that would have allowed the torso to deflect (a limited amount) more from the forces too. The multiple videos like this out there offer a good counterpoint to the HMS videos that were all specifically selected to tell a particular narrative. In this case, and numerous others I've seen evidence of, the scuffs on their helmets appear to be the lesser threat to their wellbeing. The helmets worked as intended, as did the 3-point belt safety system, because of as much as despite the additional bodily movement allowed.

Rollover protection really depends on the specific car. Even if it's just anecdotal the least anyone can do is search for pictures of flipped cars and see how they've held up. If you see picture after picture of collapsed roofs maybe that should inform your decisions.

So for whatever it's worth: I mostly do PCA events and my local group has basically said all or nothing................read either full safety gear of OEM.

If I'm driving much past 60-70% in a car I want a minimum of a roll hoop and full harness.

Safety discussions, for me, are always meant to be though provoking. One weighs the pros and cons and makes a decision.

In reply to Tom1200 :

I was the PCA Tech Chair for my region for 3 years.  At least in our region, harness bars are allowed, as long as they're paired with fixed back seats, 5-6 point harnesses and a head and neck restraint.  If you look at all the bolt in "roll bars" for most modern Porsches you'll see that they're really just harness bars.  Most of them attach with a single bolt, in shear, using the stock seat belt mounts.  The better ones have the rear points mounting to the rear shock towers but still have the forward main hoop using a single bolt, in shear.

At that point, they're just pretty, heavy harness bars, not really roll bars...

In reply to Driven5 :

Hard to say what would've happened.  Both the driver and passenger in that corvette could've had fatal injuries in that event, maybe they were just lucky.  I do agree that HMS cherry picked videos to illustrate their points.

docwyte said:

In reply to Tom1200 :

I was the PCA Tech Chair for my region for 3 years.  At least in our region, harness bars are allowed, as long as they're paired with fixed back seats, 5-6 point harnesses and a head and neck restraint.  If you look at all the bolt in "roll bars" for most modern Porsches you'll see that they're really just harness bars.  Most of them attach with a single bolt, in shear, using the stock seat belt mounts.  The better ones have the rear points mounting to the rear shock towers but still have the forward main hoop using a single bolt, in shear.

At that point, they're just pretty, heavy harness bars, not really roll bars...

This had been my reservation with off-the-shelf roll bars, especially bolt in. They're only as good as the location they're attached to and if those points aren't strong enough to support the weight of the car plus some difficult to determine amount that varies based on the violence of the crash, all you've done is add a lot of steel to the interior of the car that could be hugely detrimental to the safety of the occupants.

If I'm driving an old car with an old car crash structure and no airbags I'm probably looking for a local welder with cage building skills, especially if I've made significant improvements to that car's performance. But if I'm driving a modern car with a modern crash structure and airbags in every direction I'm going to place my faith in the engineers who designed that system.

I might still go with fixed back seats, a harness, and a HANS device, but that's probably all I'd do. I mean... rigid, fixed back seats and five point harness are recommended or required for small children so it stands to reason that it would offer a higher level of general safety for adults as well.

docwyte said:

In reply to Tom1200 :

I was the PCA Tech Chair for my region for 3 years.  At least in our region, harness bars are allowed, as long as they're paired with fixed back seats, 5-6 point harnesses and a head and neck restraint.  If you look at all the bolt in "roll bars" for most modern Porsches you'll see that they're really just harness bars.  Most of them attach with a single bolt, in shear, using the stock seat belt mounts.  The better ones have the rear points mounting to the rear shock towers but still have the forward main hoop using a single bolt, in shear.

At that point, they're just pretty, heavy harness bars, not really roll bars...

First I'll admit that I don't pay super close attention when they talk about this because I have a race car. I do know that they wanted people with caged cars to have full gear. For cars with instructors (they don't do non instructor passengers) they want like for like as far as gear went. I frequently hear them talking about one or the other and no in between. I will have to ask on the harness bar on the next event.

In reply to MrFancypants :

That's exactly my point.  The makers of those bars are careful to label them harness bars and not roll bars.  They've also done no testing with them nor are they approved for use by any race organization.  So my thought was why add 100lbs of metal to the car, that's difficult to install/remove vs a harness bar that does exactly the same thing but weighs almost nothing in comparison and can be installed/removed in ten minutes?

In reply to Tom1200 :

PCA considers a multi point harness bar adequate for use with fixed back seats/harnesses/HANS.  You have to run all together and if you have a passenger they must have the same restraints.  You can't just use a harness bar that's two points, IE from B pillar to B pillar...

In reply to docwyte :

yup, I was just elaborating on your point and running through how I came to the same conclusion.

What I wish we would do more frequently is name the specific car you're working with when talking about safety modifications.  Because I'm probably going to have completely different thoughts if I'm going to the track with an E30 BMW as opposed to new Civic Type R.

I'd like to know your opinion on purchasing and running an expired HANS device for HPDE? Is it good enough? No competition, about 10 days a year. Expired is still better than none. 

In reply to thebird996 :

I wouldn't use an expired HANS device.  I know they can be cheaply re-certified, last time I checked it was under $100, maybe $60-70.  So maybe make an offer for it with that cost in mind, buy it and then send it off to get re-certified.

docwyte said:

In reply to thebird996 :

I wouldn't use an expired HANS device.  I know they can be cheaply re-certified, last time I checked it was under $100, maybe $60-70.  So maybe make an offer for it with that cost in mind, buy it and then send it off to get re-certified.

Other than changing the tether what's involved in recertifying a HANs........specifically HANS brand?

In reply to Tom1200 :

Pretty sure that's all that they do, replace the tether and stick an updated sticker on it

When I was young and didn't think it through very well, I ran a harness in a street-driven 80's Toyota Corolla, and got away with it.  Lately I've been in the all-or-nothing camp, and have stock systems in my daily-driver/trackday FR-S. 
 

I have been using one of the old-school foam helmet support collars, figuring that if E36 M3 really hits the fan, something that might do a little bit to limit the forces on my neck is unlikely to hurt, but that is mostly conjecture/gut feeling. What do you guys think?

My dad used to run HPDE in his stock street car with a neck collar and fire suit, but otherwise stock safety systems. Unlike a harness and HANS, these small steps don't require a roll bar and race seat, and might be worth considering for those of us who can't lose utility and interior comfort on the weekdays, but still get to the track occasionally on weekends.