> On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 10:02:57PM -0500, Paul Foster wrote:
> > classes. So yes, I think the rule is stupid. Safety should come before
> > thoughts of some perceived performance enhancement.
>
Matt Mead responded:
> This is interesting. Let's toss aside the rule and legality for a moment.
> Say I chose to wear my seatbelt over top (or under) the harness
> bar with harnesses. Would that be adequate safety in the event
> of the harness bar failure?
Hmmm. That's an interesting question. The subject came up in a slightly
different form on the w2w list not long ago because racing harnesses are not
DOT-approved for the street so you could get hassled by THE MAN for being
safety-conscious by wearing them on the street unless you also wore your
3-point belt too to make it legal. Not only that but my car has a 1.5" roll
cage with a bar that extends from one A-pillar to the other. It is padded
but I worry about hitting it when I wear a 3-point belt instead of the
harness.
I guess the answer is probably yes as long as you feel a 3 point belt is
safe enough to protect you in the event of a headon collision. I saw a stock
911 smite the Armco at the exit of the inner loop at Watkins Glen nearly
headon at nearly 100 mph. The airbags deployed and ripped their helmets off
their heads (another safety thread about loose fitting helmets...), and the
3 point belts literally twisted the stock carbon fiber drivers seat over 20
degrees from the force of the driver hitting the belts (yet another safety
thread about the stupidity of Porsche for attaching their 3-point belts to
the friggin seat instead of the chassis!!!!).
To me there are no clear answers, just more and more questions... :)
Paul Foster
|