Counterfeit HANS Anchor Posts

[924RACR]

There is a patent that HANS hold on this item, so that would be the reason no other company would be able to manufacture the anchor, unless they have a license to do so from HANS.

Or unless they're in China...

[hbennett]

Yes, there are issues with trademark infringement for us, SFI and FIA. Our first concern was not about that. I'll let the lawyers sort that stuff out. Our first concern was that we didn't know who was building or testing them, neither did SFI or FIA. Impact may not be as big in road racing but, believe me, they are big in drag and circle track racing. On the suit issue, their SFI-/15 and 20 suits from 2007 through current have been decertified, even if Impact has recertified them. I don't think that has changed.

Latest news is we have filed suit and granted a restraining order against Impact. SFI has joined us. I don't know what FIA will do but they will do something, I believe. I don't have the press release with me at home but it is available on line through a google search.

Howard Bennett
HANS Performance

[Daryl DeArman]

On the suit issue, their SFI-/15 and 20 suits from 2007 through current have been decertified, even if Impact has recertified them. I don't think that has changed.

That isn't the case. Only those suits manufactured in 2007 or 2008 are affected, regardless if they have been updated, upgraded or have a newer SFI 3.2A/15 or /20 tag. It is the manufacturer date that is relevant. 2009 suits are fine. Noticed all the John Force team drivers were proudly displaying all their Impact gear on 5 hours of live TV yesterday.

Good to hear that someone has enough to be granted a temporary restraining order, maybe we'll figure out where these posts originated.

[cooleyjb]

Press release.

http://www.reuters.com/article/press...09+PRN20090908




Thanks for the followup info Howard.

[dalz]

Noticed all the John Force team drivers were proudly displaying all their Impact gear on 5 hours of live TV yesterday.

Impact, like several other brands, pays handsome retainers to high-profile racers to wear their stuff. They concentrate on the drag, NASCAR and short-track crowd.

After the drag suit flap, they said they inspected all the suits returned to them and either found them to be sound and slapped a new SFI tag on them (eventually not good enough) or they cut the defective suits open and inserted the missing layers. Does that even make sense?!?!

After all this, Bill's "All the racers are my friends" and "I set myself on fire wearing my stuff" seems like quarter-century old rhetoric. Impact's name is MUD among grassroots drag racers, and may be heading that way in all other racing circles.

Dale V.

[Daryl DeArman]

Impact, like several other brands, pays handsome retainers to high-profile racers to wear their stuff. They concentrate on the drag, NASCAR and short-track crowd.

Absolutely understand. Unfortunately, it seems to work. Many folks are lemming-like and will buy/wear whatever is good enough for their hero. The point I was attempting to make is that the new Impact suits are SFI compliant. The technical update on NHRA's website confirms this (only 2007 and 2008 manufacture dates are an issue). While this may be a smudge on Impact's reputation, am I the only one that sees a major problem with the SFI? The SFI doesn't test anything, they rely on their paying members to establish the standards and police themselves. We (racers) need an unbiased third party to establish the standards and conduct random testing and publish the results!!!

[Roger Eade]

I think, but am not quite sure, but FIA standards are tested?, or are they to just like the SFI standards or for that mater ISO rateings,ie how to make a bent nail, as long as its made to a certain written procedure,it doe'snt matter its no good as a nail but its to a ISO standard! its all in the paper work!
Roger

[Daryl DeArman]

Roger,

The FIA standards for driving suits define how the garment is to be constructed, what areas of the body it needs to cover as well as all of the various test protocol and standards. They also have about 5 or 6 test facilities that manufacturers must utilize to test the garment sample. For suits, gloves, shoes, etc. the tests are destructive so, obviously not every suit is tested (that may seem obvious, but there are folks who think that everything with a SFI or FIA tag on it was "tested") For our purposes the FIA has one current standard for a driving suit, so it's a pass/fail type thing. The FIA 8856-2000 standard is roughly equivalent to the SFI 3.2a/5 grade.

http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public...penForm&lang=a

The SFI tests are not required to be performed on an entire suit, only a sample of the fabric in the layers and materials that will make up the finished suit. Further, the SFI member manufacturer pays the SFI to be a member, pays the SFI for each patch/label and then pinky promises to only put the labels or patches on the stuff the manufacturer says will pass the test. No third party observer, no third party testing facility requirement, the participating manufacturers themselves decide what the standards will be.

[DB4 Tim]

We (racers) need an unbiased third party to establish the standards and conduct random testing and publish the results!!!

This we need

[DB4 Tim]

Here is what I found on testing

SFI and FIA Thermal Protective Performance Laboratory Comparison
May, 2000
In an effort to compare industry standards for protective clothing used in motorsports, the SFI Foundation, Inc. (SFI) and the SFI Test Laboratory performed Thermal Protective Performance (TPP) sample testing on various fabrics. The purpose of the comparison is to determine the effects that variables within the different standards have on the test results and the subsequent ratings of the protective garments.
Three standards are included in this comparison. They are SFI Specification 3.2A for Driver Suits, effective Feb. 16, 1996, the FIA Standard for Protective Clothing for Automobile Drivers, effective 1986, and the current FIA Standard which refers to ISO 14460 (Protective Clothing for Automobile Racing Drivers – Protection against Heat and Flame) and ISO 9151 (Protective Clothing for Heat and Flame – Determination of Heat Transmission on Exposure to Flame.) The major elements of these standards and their different passing criteria are show in Table 1.
Table 1
SFI Spec 3.2A
(Feb. 16, 1996)
1986 FIA Spec
Current FIA Spec
(ISO 14460 and
ISO 9151)
Thermal Flux
2.0 cal/cm2-sec
80 kw/m2
(1.90 cal/cm2-sec)
80 kw/m2
(1.90 cal/cm2-sec)
Heat Source Ratio:
Radiant/Convection
50/50
0/100
0/100
Weight on Sample
1000g
None
None
Spacer
None
3mm (1/8")
None
Pass/Fail Criteria
Various ratings based on TPP values
≥ 12 seconds to 2nd Degree Burn
≥ 11 Heat Transfer Index*
Service Life
None
None
3 Years
*Heat Transfer Index = the time in seconds to achieve a temperature rise of 24°C
Page 1
Several samples of six different types of single-layer and multiple-layer garment samples were tested to each standard. From their results, overall average TPP values (cal/ cm2) and TPP times (sec.) were calculated for each spec. In the case of the current FIA spec, an average Heat Transfer Index (HTI) was also derived. Samples of the same fabric types were tested to all three standards. The results of these tests can be found in Table 2.
Table 2
SFI Spec 3.2A
"Old" FIA Spec
Current FIA Spec
Fabric Type
TPP Value
TPP Time
TPP Value
TPP Time
HTI
TPP Value
TPP Time
Shiny Nomex and Basofil Knit (2 Layers)
22.0
11.5
24.5
13.4
14.3
23.0
12.2
Nomex and
Tri Quilt
(3 Layers)
28.9
14.6
38.3
20.4
17.8
30.1
15.9
FR Cotton
(1 Layer)
11.5
5.8
11.8
6.3
6.9
11.2
5.9
Nomex
(1 Layer)
8.0
4.0
12.4
6.5
5.9
8.4
4.4
FR Cotton and
Nomex Fleece
(2 Layers)
21.8
10.8
27.5
14.5
14.4
21.8
11.6
Nomex and
Nomex Fleece
(2 Layers)
24.1
12.1
28.9
15.3
14.6
23.5
12.5
Average
9.8
12.7
10.4
To interpret the data in the above table, the average TPP times can be used to determine how differences in the test procedures can affect the outcome of the test results. Since identical fabrics were tested, it will be assumed that variations in TPP results are due to variations in the test methods required by each standard. For example, the main difference between the 1986 FIA standard and the current FIA standard is that a spacer 3 millimeters thick is placed between the test fixture’s TPP sensor and the sample material in the 1986 test method, but not in the current method. As a result of the additional space between the sensor and the heat source, the average TPP time of the samples when tested to the 1986 FIA spec was 12.7 seconds compared to 10.4 seconds when the current FIA test method was used. Using a spacer caused an artificial protection increase of 2.3 seconds, or 22%.
Page 2
Several differences exist between the SFI spec for driver suits and the current standard required by FIA. First, the SFI spec utilized a 1000-gram weight which is placed on top of the sensor and sample fabric during testing, while the FIA standard does not. The heat source defined by SFI is a 50/50 ratio of radiant heat (lamps) and convective heat (direct flames) while the FIA spec only requires convective heat. Finally, the thermal flux of 2.0 cal/cm2-sec used in SFI testing is greater than the 1.90 cal/cm2-sec (80 kw/m2) used by the FIA.
All of these differences in test methods do have an effect on the test results. The FIA average TPP time is 10.4 seconds, which is 7% greater than the SFI average TPP time of 9.8 seconds. On average, the differences in thermal flux heat source ratios and weight on the samples cause identical fabrics to receive a higher TPP time when tested to the FIA standard compared to the SFI spec.
Page

[dalz]

Who owns the neat mannequin dude covered in heat sensors that they dress up in the latest racing fashions and turn into a gawd-awful fireball for as many seconds as prescribed, and study the results? I saw it on a Discovery Channel show about racing safety or somthing....

[steve zemke]

I bought mine a couple of years ago, when we did the group buy. Checked them with the magnet and they are genuine.