Is Schroth Quick Fit Pro Harness Approved for PCA DE?

[smankow]

for a better understanding, you should contact Paul (aka Wally).  He is one of our safety chairs.

My understanding is that the benefit of the 5/6 point harnesses is that the extra belts provide support to prevent "submarining" under heavy braking (i.e. sliding under the lap belts).  Also, make sure that you follow the guidelines for proper installation of the belts to ensure that they are securely mounted.

 

Steve

[Tony356993]

Todd - send a PM to "Wally". He is the expert - if you buy him a few adult beverages he'll be real nice to you.  He still will not change his mind though -

[John_Janick]

ToddPhilly wrote:

smankow wrote:

not a no-go for Schroth, just a no-go for the 4-point Schroth. Several of our drivers use Schroth belts (5 or 6 point).



steve

Steve,

Can you provide any further information on why the 4-pt harnesses are dangerous (or not as safe as factory 3-pt)? I'm just curious for my own personal benefit. If I decide to go with the Schroth 4-pt for non-PCA events, I want to feel good about my purchase. I've had a few drivers, bimmerworks in West Chester, and the tech-chair for Del Val BMWCCA recommend this particular harness as a very good compromise instead of doing a full racing seat, roll cage, 5/6pt setup. It's always good to know the other side of the argument!

Thanks!

Todd

Sorry to bump an old thread...

Most Schroth 4 points have anti-submarining systems. The real damger with running a harness, any harness, without a cage is in the event of a roll-over.

In the stock belt, if the roof comes in, you are free to be pushed to either side, prevent a compression-type injury. While in a harness, you are held upright, and therefore subjected to compression injuries should the roof come in.

Plenty of clubs, for this reason, do not allow you to run a harness without a roll-bar, period.

I'm not sure how a DOT certified 4 pt, with anti-sub is any more dangerous than a 5 or a 6 point belt, without a bar. No clubs I've ever run with distinguish between a 4,5, or 6 pt. belt (properly mounted), they distinguish with bar or no bar.

[Darren]

I doubt you're going to get the info you are looking for on the public forum...Work with Paul in PM or email to look at your specific case.

[Larry Herman]

John_Janick wrote:

Sorry to bump an old thread...

Most Schroth 4 points have anti-submarining systems. The real damger with running a harness, any harness, without a cage is in the event of a roll-over.

In the stock belt, if the roof comes in, you are free to be pushed to either side, prevent a compression-type injury. While in a harness, you are held upright, and therefore subjected to compression injuries should the roof come in.

This has been discussed ad-nauseam on various forums and it is patently false. It may seem logical that the possibility of the roof collapsing on a roll-over is greater, but the facts do not bear that out. I am not aware of more than 1 or 2 roll-overs (in PCA or other such events) where the roof was crushed into the point of driver injury. More common are injuries from being thrown around the inside of the car. 5/6 point harnesses are safer with or without a roll bar.

[John_Janick]

Larry Herman wrote:

John_Janick wrote:

Sorry to bump an old thread...

Most Schroth 4 points have anti-submarining systems. The real damger with running a harness, any harness, without a cage is in the event of a roll-over.

In the stock belt, if the roof comes in, you are free to be pushed to either side, prevent a compression-type injury. While in a harness, you are held upright, and therefore subjected to compression injuries should the roof come in.

This has been discussed ad-nauseam on various forums and it is patently false. It may seem logical that the possibility of the roof collapsing on a roll-over is greater, but the facts do not bear that out. I am not aware of more than 1 or 2 roll-overs (in PCA or other such events) where the roof was crushed into the point of driver injury. More common are injuries from being thrown around the inside of the car. 5/6 point harnesses are safer with or without a roll bar.

***I can give the the phone number of someone who can no longer walk because of this very issue.

I'm not sure what your definition of "patently false" is, but how exactly does the fact that you aren't aware of an incident, or that some other factor may also present a greater risk of injury, make somthing false?

There is a reason every harness manufacturer recommends against it. There is a reason seasoned, professional drivers and instructors recommend against it (in fact, many won't get in the car with it). It doesn't matter if it's rare, or if there are other risks. The fact remains, there is still a serious safety concern with that arrangement.
If you haven't heard of it, it must not be a problem right? Regardless of what the industry and professionals say, you haven't seen it at a PCA DE (or similar), so its a non-issue?


Did you not see the pictures of the gentleman who died in a DE in the blue mini a few months ago? Roof came in, seat collapsed, fell out of the harness. Not a compressive injury, but to say that roofs don't come in...well, it's pretty clear that you haven't looked hard enough. It certainly happens. And people certainly get hurt.

Does a 5 or 6 point provide greater protection from submarining? Yes, of course it does (no where did I say they weren't safer). But that in no way, shape, or form nullifies the risk of being held upright without a harness. Again, there is a reason countless groups do not allow a harness without a bar, period.

Just to stick with your reasoning....are you aware of anyone submarining, resulting in injury, with a 4-pt belt equiped with say, AMS (schroths anit-sub system)? Again, I'm not saying its nearly as good as a 5th or 6th point...

Sorry if that came across with a bad tone...but the "I've never heard of it" so its "patentle false" kind of strikes a nerve. Do you really think everyone is just making it up?

(besides those that I am personally familiar with, I used to design harness bars at Brey-Krause during college. We would get repeated updates as to injuries related these types of occurences...afterall, we sold a lot of harness bars, many to cars without rollbars in them)

[Larry Herman]

John, the assertion that it is safer to not wear a 5/6 point harness in a rollover situation is false.  Articles that I have read and shows that I have seen based on information of all of the injuries logged by the NHTSA shows that most come from being thrown around in the car wearing 3 point harnesses.  You must admit that the likelyhood of the roof crushing in during a rollover is a small probability.

Could you be injured wearing a 5/6 point harness if the roof crushes?  Sure, but I would rather be protected against the more certain injury from being marginally restrained in the event of a crash or rollover. 

If I had to pick between a 3 point harness or a 5/6 point without a rollbar, I'd take the latter.

[AMoore]

This is a bit unrelated, but I am curious.  Has anyone ever heard of someone being injured as a result of his harness being out of date (degradation of the belts). 

Also, can a manufacturer like Teamtech recertify harnesses without rewebbing them.  I can't imagine my belts have degraded much since the car spends 99.9 percent of the time in its garage.

[John_Janick]

Larry Herman wrote:

John, the assertion that it is safer to not wear a 5/6 point harness in a rollover situation is false. Articles that I have read and shows that I have seen based on information of all of the injuries logged by the NHTSA shows that most come from being thrown around in the car wearing 3 point harnesses. You must admit that the likelyhood of the roof crushing in during a rollover is a small probability.

Could you be injured wearing a 5/6 point harness if the roof crushes? Sure, but I would rather be protected against the more certain injury from being marginally restrained in the event of a crash or rollover.

If I had to pick between a 3 point harness or a 5/6 point without a rollbar, I'd take the latter.

I'd be interested to read these articles and the data you speak of.

While I certainly don't think the possiblity of the roof coming in during a rollover is small, I of course think that the chance of a compressive injury is small. However, depending on what thoese injuries are, from falling out of a 3 point belt, I might much rather risk them, then not being able to walk.

If all the data does indeed point the other way. I'd be curous to see why so many organizations still have rules in place against running a harness without a bar...

Then again, doesn't RTR technically mandate arm restraints in verts for events which require point-by's ? We could start a whole thread on that one!

[bobt993]

John, 

I think you need to read more on the rules for open top cars at DE's.  Arm restraints are listed as a requirement for open canopy.  Larry has been racing longer than most club members have their drivers license so I would use him as a guide for safety considerations.  If you look hard and long enough you can find exceptions to all rules/precautions, but the law of averages should be followed.