Bogus safety equipment

Warning: serious OT coming, complete with political drippings.

While I agree that everyone is on the honor system when the inspectors aren't looking, do you seriously believe, for example, that food-poisoning due to salmonella isn't going to shoot through the roof in this country if and when the idea of no longer having any USDA inspectors goes through?

I'd, of course, smoke a joint with Ron Paul and his son. But this free-for-all, let-the-market-decide stuff needs to stop when there's money involved (and almost no risk to the owners via limited liability nonsense). People are going to be killed.

it all boils down to cash

---

I would rather drive a slow car fast as a fast car slow!
first rule of cars: get what makes you happy, your the one paying for it!

Quote
heymagic
Think SFI is considered the independent lab. At the end of the day every manufacture is on the honor system. No one can test every product that comes off the assembly line, not Snell, nor SFI, nor UL or things as mundane as Coast Guard required flotation in small boats or gas pump accuracy , food inspectors . Everyone is on the honor system as soon as the inspector leaves and no one is watching. We live in a world that runs on faith, luck and hopefully integrity...but mostly luck I think. I have a much bigger issue with the whole Snell thing than any SFI procedures.

Hmmmm, Gene, not trying to be contrary, but I don't see where SFI does the testing; they make that pretty clear on their site. They may be/have a certifed lab themselves, but all indications in their own words is that they only review the test results from others in the SFI process. Again, this is more the standard practice for certification in this day and age in general; the UL's and CSA's and Snell's have become the exception; I have managed a UL test of a product and believe me, the costs of having the standards body do the testing is ridiculously steep. That is why mfr's of all types favor contracted testing in general: it costs a lot less. Plus, you can get your own lab certified and have better time and cost interraction between the developers and the test process.

I am sincerely curious as to why you have an issue about 'the whole Snell thing' as you put it; I am not challenging you...you probably know something we don't. BTW, Snell actually DOES the certification testing themselves: "Helmets must first pass Snell certification testing by Snell technicians in Snell labs to qualify for Snell programs. Then samples of these helmets regularly acquired directly from retailers and distributors must continue to pass test requirements in order to remain in the Snell programs."

Mark B.

Irregardless of who does the testing, SFI is the responsible party. Seems like Hurst mentioned their lab where he works and both the manager and assistant . I remember him traveling to Mexico for a lab test also. I'll try to find out what the scoop is.

Snell, I think they also charge to cert a helmet. I think they are really scraping trying to find an excuse for an upgrade. I have no issue with new helmets and really dislike scruffy old helmets. We have 2 new helmets in boxes still that are now outdated and a 3rd that will be gone at the end of this year.

A Snell helmet is still manufactured independently of Snell over sight. A manufacture can still change materials or techniques. Remember the Corbeau seat deal anf the FIA? Corbeau wasn't the only one to lose certs for seats that were not up to standard.

If 'these people' are willing to cut vorners after certification, make bogus products or forge a label, what would they do woth no over sight? Too much stuff being made offshore is a problem alsi but that is a different political rant .

Anyhow hate SFI or not, there are some phony suits on the market and people should be aware that they aren't going to pass tech with them. That was the only point of the post. Watch out for the deals on EBay or Craigslist in a couple months...

Quote
heymagic
. Remember the Corbeau seat deal anf the FIA? Corbeau wasn't the only one to lose certs for seats that were not up to standard.

No I don't remember Corbeau seats a few years ago that "were not up to standard".
I remember some bullshit that Corbeau had not renew or submitted or something--paper work and money exchange, in this case FIA, Gene, not "not up to standard".

Different thing

Just like this thing---all of the whole scandal goes on and on with only one reference to "gloves doesn't have flame-proof layer under the..."
Leaving the fairly lasting impression (by its glaring absence) that they didn't test anything about those, or double check materials etc.

Just "this patch isn't ours " and the IMPLIED thing that "therefore it is dangerous?

Gene, it stinks.

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

I dunno.
I'm glad to have standards organizations around that look at and enforce a range of specs.
The paranoiacs who see conspiracy and graft all over the place are going to see conspiracy and graft everywhere.
(Sort of makes me think they see conspiracy and graft because that is their default way of thinking...)

Let me ask you this:
If you want to set standards and test prototypes to that standard (and, presumably, random samples during production) how would you go about funding that process? Somebody, somewhere, somehow is going to pay for the standards process, shouldn't it be the manufacturers who will ultimately profit by making and selling certified products? (then again, it is always the end user who pays in the long run.)

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

I have no problem with the idea that the people who will ultimately profit from the sale of X should be the people who pay for the testing of X. I also like the idea that the users of X should get together and decide on a common set the standards, maybe via a third party (such as SFI).

What I do have a problem with is the idea that the people who will ultimately profit from the sale of X should be the people who test X (regardless of who decides on the standards), or -- in some ways worse -- the idea that the people who will profit from selling X should directly pay someone else to test their product. That last option is what we had in the banking and mortgage industry; unless you've been under a really heavy rock, that didn't work out so well, did it?

Quote
Iowa999
I have no problem with the idea that the people who will ultimately profit from the sale of X should be the people who pay for the testing of X. I also like the idea that the users of X should get together and decide on a common set the standards, maybe via a third party (such as SFI).

What I do have a problem with is the idea that the people who will ultimately profit from the sale of X should be the people who test X (regardless of who decides on the standards), or -- in some ways worse -- the idea that the people who will profit from selling X should directly pay someone else to test their product. That last option is what we had in the banking and mortgage industry; unless you've been under a really heavy rock, that didn't work out so well, did it?

Further, the ones who will profit are paying --we are told--somebody to test things ------are close associates of those writing the rules mandating the use of X, or in some cases, the same people...

We saw that for more than 25 years with SCCA "risk management advisor" or whatever fatuous bullshit title it was being paid to decide who SCCA should buy insurance from---which just so happened to be....

His own insurance agency.

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

I really don't give a shit about the SFI or FIA or UL or Goast Guard approved or any of the yes or no , tinfoil hat arguments. I didn't make the rules or procedures , nor can I change them. Much bigger things to worry about in the world today. I'm a scrutineer, I live in a pretty much black and white world when it comes to aproved standards. Rule book says 'must be SFI.Snell or FIA approved" then that is the deal. When something is no longer approved it won't pass tech. Really simple concept. I don't have much to say about the underlying procedure nor do I care. So if it 'stinks' (probably more a case of a bath time JV, you really shouldn't question others business practices) then so be it. Don't show up at tech with one of the fire suits mentioned in the bulletin. Pretty simple. Carry on, maybe we need to change the name of the place to Rally Argumentative. I apologize for posting the notice and shant do it again.

Gene -

I'm sorry that two separate issues got mixed together in your thread. Your very practical warning that certain items would not be acceptable was good for you to post. It doesn't affect me, personally, but I appreciate it, anyway. I'll wager others do, too.

My bitching in this thread is about the process -- how it is now and how I think it should be. That's a separate issue, but it's a pet peeve of mine. I see it as related to what's going on with the USDA, the banking & mortgage "industry," and a few other things. Creating huge conflicts of interest and then, later, saying things like "no-one could have predicted [insert: deaths from salmonellla, a market crash, etc]," when it WAS easily predicted really annoys me. Making people think that they're safe when they are almost completely at the mercy of those with money and power is cruel. Better to just be honest with them: your child may die from eating this product, or you might lose your house, and you need to know that the only thing stopping us from doing this to you is our desire to stay in business; we will push it right up to the line in our desire for profits, which means that some kids will die and some houses will be taken away and there is nothing you can do about this other than cross your fingers that it isn't you.

Quote
Morison
If you want to set standards and test prototypes to that standard (and, presumably, random samples during production) how would you go about funding that process?

I'd use the money from the profits made by the virtual monopoly of the HANS device.

Anders

---

Grassroots rally. It's what I think about.

Quote
Anders Green

Quote
Morison
If you want to set standards and test prototypes to that standard (and, presumably, random samples during production) how would you go about funding that process?

I'd use the money from the profits made by the virtual monopoly of the HANS device.

Anders

What profits? After the $22 worth of material in the carbon fiber model and the $5 in the molded plastic one...you know, there's a lot of overhead to be dealt with (*rimshot*).

I was just going to have my friend make me a copy of a HANS at his office/lab/shop's big 3d-printer, even doing a one off that way would be cheaper.

---

Andrew Steere
Lyndeborough, NH
KB1PJY

Well for the very knowledgable audience....SFI does testing in their own lab about 3 miles from the headquarters in Cali. Hurst says they have two full time lab people and likely do more Thermal Perfomance testing on fire suits etc, harness testing than anyone. They test stuff from drag car wings to chest protectors and fuel cells. A huge variety of stuff. There are also several labs across the country that do testing for them on specialized equipment. So guess Mark needs to back to the Honey Boo Boo reruns .

For those who actually care to read a bit page 43.. http://read.uberflip.com/i/119664

Racing safety is a big business and concern (except here). All of the racing organizations that do business with SFI is a big number. A voluntary number seems to me. SFI doesn't force anyone to do 'business' with them. Unlike FIA they have no authority over motorsports organization that I'm aware of.

Honestly there are times this rally anarchy bullshit gets a bit much. JV likes to lead the charge most days, anti everything that he can. Any sport that doesn't have regulation won't be around long. People are basically stupid creatures, Homer repeatedly touching a hot stove isn't far from the truth. I heard the other day that SFI is going to establish a spec for tin foil hats..what are you guys going to do then??

This is someone of a derailment, but hey, it's RA so I can do that.

That's somewhat like griping that stage notes should only cost $10, for the cost of printing and binding.

The expense isn't in the cost of materials or production, it's in the cost of research.


That being said, I'm not entirely defending HANS. I'm pretty irritated that they jacked up the prices of the carbon-fiber ones when they came out with the lower-end plastic ones. The difference in weight is appreciable, and clearly they were sustaining themselves just fine with the pricepoint of the carbon-fiber ones, so they could've brought out the lower end ones at an even cheaper rate. However, they chose to reposition things so the plastic one is at the old carbon-fiber base price, and the carbon fiber ones are several hundred bucks more. Supply-and-demand (and FIA certification, which contributes to the demand) has let them get away with that.

Still, if you guys are irritated by the added charge that "being certified" allows manufacturers to tack on, try buying aviation parts:

40W AM transceiver, CB frequencies: $40 at any truckstop
5W AM transceiver, aviation frequencies, FAA certified: $4000

---

Self-righteous douche canoe

Quote
hoche
This is someone of a derailment, but hey, it's RA so I can do that.

That's somewhat like griping that stage notes should only cost $10, for the cost of printing and binding.

The expense isn't in the cost of materials or production, it's in the cost of research.

Yeah, I get that, but the cost of research was probably amortized a decade ago. And yes, I know they probably have a high legal extortion liability insurance premium to pay...but I look at my SA2010 full face helmet, then look at the borrowed HANS next to it in the Rubbermaid bin, and it sure looks to me like it would cost more to manufacture the helmet.

Quote
hoche
That being said, I'm not entirely defending HANS. I'm pretty irritated that they jacked up the prices of the carbon-fiber ones when they came out with the lower-end plastic ones. The difference in weight is appreciable, and clearly they were sustaining themselves just fine with the pricepoint of the carbon-fiber ones, so they could've brought out the lower end ones at an even cheaper rate. However, they chose to reposition things so the plastic one is at the old carbon-fiber base price, and the carbon fiber ones are several hundred bucks more. Supply-and-demand (and FIA certification, which contributes to the demand) has let them get away with that.

Still, if you guys are irritated by the added charge that "being certified" allows manufacturers to tack on, try buying aviation parts:

40W AM transceiver, CB frequencies: $40 at any truckstop
5W AM transceiver, aviation frequencies, FAA certified: $4000

Doesn't hurt that whenever a competitor shows up, the established companies give their team of Samoan attorneys Zero Halliburton briefcases full of cash to sue the competitors out of business, regardless of the merits of any suit.

A 40W CB? That's not legal! But neither are most of the VHF/UHF radios in race cars run around the country every day.

Anything involving the Z-axis and the FAA automatically adds two zeros to the price. Which is why, despite my urges to take flying lessons for both fixed wing and helo to check it out, I stick to cars.

---

Andrew Steere
Lyndeborough, NH
KB1PJY