05-07-2013, 05:59 PM
(05-07-2013, 02:01 PM)jmr3 Wrote: Larry -- I am starting to question your earlier statement
"It should go without saying, but of course I don't want to compromise on quality and safety for the sake of saving a few bucks."
I prefer to base my decisions on most things on hard facts -- as distinguished from, for example, seemingly arbitrary demarcations, whose underlying logic (if any) is never explained to me. I have no doubt that Myles has made a very valid point, and exposure to UV rays may be harmful. But of course that source of degradation varies considerably -- surely, if that were the only concern, it would be absurd (or at least almost completely arbitrary) to say that a dedicated track car that was garaged throughout the year and outside only for a half dozen DE events should have its harnesses replaced every 5 years solely due to suspected UV damage.
So, assuming there's some demonstrable logic behind the 5 year replacement rule, has anyone seen, and can point me to, any serious studies that convincingly show that after 5 years the integrity of most harnesses has deteriorated so significantly that it was reasonable to use them in the fifth year but not in the sixth? What in the world is the 5 year rule based on? Someone's hunch?
'95 993