Helmets
- Thread starter bennyboy
- Start date
It's not unknown for fire extinguishers to hit drivers in the face during an accident either.
Neil Haughey
New member
Good point, this is why I have been deliberating like mad about the roll cage for my S2 and will likely end up getting a custom built job, or rather a variation on an existing product. I have decided one has to have the dash bar due, for a start the 944 is just empty space there (apart from dash) and the added safety. If I can have the triangulation to the front bulkhead I want that to (drawing 11 in the blue book, not sure if allowed as yet for this car as I can't find it in the text).
944 man
Active member
Remember too Neil, that everything stretches and moves... With regards to triangulation: it will mean that the cage will integrate with the chassis, which it wont do otherwise (another forum myth). The down side is that it will remove the crumple zone, which, in a serious off, may absorb enough energy to save your life. If that isnt there then your internal organs will bear the brunt. Chassis rigidity and crash safety are always a trade-off. Persoanlly, I would advice you to only incorporate front suspension tie-ins in a fully prepared car, on a comprehensive welded in multipoint cage and never as an addendum to a six point 'national' type cage as depeicted in drawing no.11. You can do whatever you like to your car: whether it will be allowed to compete as it is will depend on the regs for the championship & class that youre running in.
Neil Haughey
New member
Well that sounds like a yes then, I have paid for the car to be insured now as a road legal competition car, no going back now, the car will be converted towards circuit race spec ala PCGB for as long as I have the funds to keep going. Cage will be full weld in naturally exploiting the MSA regs as far as possible. The Custom Cages example on their website is a pretty extreme example of the like I am contemplating but there are 1 or 2 minor details in their design I am not overly keen on and would like to alter, back stay location for example. I am also surprised that the new A post strengthener post in their design is homologated with the MSA as I can't see it in the blue book.
Hilux
New member
If you mean you lean back at a steep angle then seriously think `submarine` Your head wont hit the wheel, instead your gonads will hit the column.
Very very true. Upside down or with a `yump` or violent rocking side to side you will lose the seat cushioning if its a standard seat and will `hang` out certainly on the shoulder straps by some 50mm minimum and similar when they compress the shoulder cushions so if your head is in contact with the roof when wearing a lid then lower the seat accordingly or at least be mindful of this. Its not so bad in a proper thinly padded bucket seat
Fair enough. As the font of all knowledge we could obviously all e-mail you to get the answer for everything. Unfortunately, that would rather diminish the enjoyment of a forum. On the other hand we could give others the courtesy of assuming they might know something about something. I made the point that an FR lining to a helmet had merit - you took the opportunity to rudely ridicule my post. I suggest that most of us would agree that, in the event of a crash, a cage approved for international events would provide greater protection than a hoop required for national events. By the same measure it would seem reasonable to assume a helmet mandatory for international events is going to provide greater protection than one which would not reach that standard. In the event of a fire wearing a wet sack over your head is perhaps preferable to a nylon wig. You only get one head in this life so it is, perhaps, advisable to provide it with the best protection you can. We cant go around smashing helmets and standing in fires to see which performs the best so we rely on independent approved standards. It is reasonable to assume a helmet, approved for international events, will (generally) provide greater protection than one that doesn't meet the test criteria to achieve such certification, in the event of a crash in a car.
]Neil Haughey
New member
Thanks Paul, the points you raise are all ones I am well aware of and do concern me especially when I have been on track in the standard seats, I bought a pair of G-locks for this reason. Ppl are killed by submarineing, not a nice way to go having your internal organs wrenched. Suffice it to say that the seat choice will be a similar process to the helmet, last time I was up at GPR the other year they had about 1/2 dozen seats you could sit in and get a feel for. ISTR the Sparco evo seemed just about perfect. Just like helmets some of the seats I have sat just don't work for me.
944 man
Active member
Superficially, this makes good sense, but when you look a little closer I dont think so. Allow me to explain: the difference is the fireproof lining. If youre driving your car at a track day (where youll be wearing a helmet along, possibly, with goves and boots), the fireproof lining wont make a jot of difference to you if your cabin is englulfed in flames. Similarly, if youre driving at an FIA sanctioned event, meeting all of their standards, then I dont think it will make any difference there, if youre unfortunate enough to end up in the same circumstances, because youll be wearing a nomex balaclava. If the fire is so severe that the GRP shell has burnt, then things are far too severe for a nomex lining in your lid to make a difference... Nomex doesnt burn and it doesnt melt, so it doesnt add to your problems, but it doesnt protect you for more than a few seconds.
pauljmcnulty
Active member
Blimey - I'd have thought that Jos Verstappen was pretty grateful for the few seconds between his car catching fire and the extinguishers kicking in....[&o] Surely the point is, if you can afford it then any protection is better than none. The more layers of protection the better. Hence, I have a smoke alarm and insurance. And I back up my computer off-site in case of a fire. That's my work, I'd consider my head even more important. Why is it a problem that one person wants to add a few more seconds of protection? [8|]
Obviously I'm no expert, but if the FIA consider it of sufficient merit to make it mandatory I am inclined to side with them. The cost difference isn't that great so why skimp if there is any advantage. As you said, Nomex doesn't burn and gives a few seconds of protection. Burning nylon gives no protection at all and adds to your problems so it is a double whamy. Balaclava + Nomex lining may give you six seconds - balaclava + nylon lining may give you two. I know which I find the more atractive conclusion. A balaclava is a must - it helps to keep the inside of your helmet clean, reduces wear, and gives protection should the worst occur. Even with a balaclava I wouldn't want the edge of my helmet catching fire, eating into the few seconds of protection my balaclava might give me, if I could avoid it. Why deliberately add combustible material to a fire you don't want if there is another option?
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
