IMO Harnesses do provide a safety feature ESPECIALLY in stock class, but not
from crashes which are unlikely, but from loss of control due to driver
sliding out of position on the seat, quite likely. We are required to use
OEM seating, many of which provide notoriously poor support and security in
hard maneuvers. Remove the use of harnesses and the only thing else we have
to hang on to is the steering wheel. In any other class you are allowed the
use of racing seats to provide latteral support, so if you want to eliminate
harnesses anyplace that's the more logical place to do it. Leave the stock
class harnesses alone, if it ain't broke don't fix it!
Stock class rules DO require that the OEM belts remain in place and be
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Sirota" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Loren Williams" <Loren@invisiblesun.org>; <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: Harness bar...
> --On Tuesday, August 23, 2005 3:24 PM -0700 Loren Williams
> <Loren@invisiblesun.org> wrote:
> > Honestly, with all the specs they have on roll bars, I'm surprised SCCA
> > doesn't spec minimum requirements for a harness bar. The way the rule
> > is currently written, you could make a harness bar out of electrical
> > conduit and compete in a car that is LESS safe than stock, which I'm
> > sure is not the intention.
> The way the rules are currently written, you could put a piece of rope
> around the back of your seat and your hips and be legal, no other belts
> or harnesses needed. (To be more protest-proof, use a piece of flat
> nylon webbing.)
> The rules are amazingly non-specific about seat belts and harnesses.
> There are no specifications, no mounting requirements, nothing of the
> sort. When I was on the SEB I tried to push this button but there were
> always more pressing matters...
> I think the right solution is in Stock, require the OE seat belts to be
> worn (with the existing exception for pre-1968 (?) cars), and disallow
> harnesses and harness bars. Those can be allowed in other categories
> that also allow seat replacement.
> The fact of the matter is that the only justifiable reason to wear
> harnesses in Solo II is for driver performance, not safety. If it was
> about safety, we'd have definitions for harnesses and mounting systems,
> like the GCR does. These driver aids do not belong in Stock, IMHO.