On Board Fire System: Servicing - Does tech even check?

I've got a '88 Reynard FC with a Lifeline Zero 360 2.25kg Novec 1230 system that is just shy of 5 years old. Been racing with ProAutoSports here in AZ where there is no real tech inspection, it's up to you to make sure you're safe. So it's never had it's 2 year 'service'.

But I plan on running a few SCCA events this year so I need to worry about passing tech inspection, so I have two questions:

Do those running SCCA events service as per manufactures specifications? Or go with 'it's there & gauge shows pressure'?

Does SCCA tech as a general rule check beyond it's there and pressure on the gauge? Actually have you pull the bottle to show the certification is current?

I hate to spend $200+ on a service if I don't need to, bottle says it's good for 10 years... but only if inspected every 2, hydrostatic tested in 5 years. Other option is just wait & see it they look, hope to get a 'fix by next event' notation - but if I do it will be over 5 years old & need the extra cost of hydrostatic testing.

You put your finger on a critical limitation on validating fire systems, and it is not just an SCCA problem.

As you say, annual tech inspection (and I have witnessed any number of them) entails checking the gauge to confirm that the needle is in the green. The same will be true for any 'club-level' racing organization.

The truth is that there is no way of confirming that the system will work properly without pulling the handle. I suppose that you could replace the bottle with a test rig of some kind to verify that the lines and nozzles are clear. But the bottle itself is a black box.

Ironically, I have participated in several crash-and-burn schools done by WDCR F&C. For those, we set fire to cars, then used fire bottles that were at end of certification and due for refilling to put the flames out. I would have strong confidence that the fire bottles at the corner stations and on EV rigs will work.

Bottom line: Drivers should make awfully darn sure that (1) they are wearing a compliant or better set of fire-resistant clothing; and, (2) they practice getting out of their car in 7 seconds or less.

All that my Tech Inspectors over the years have done is look to see the gauge is in the green.

There have been post-race Impounds where they look to see that the safety pin was pulled such that if the handle was to be pulled, the bottle would have maybe activated. Those with a pin still in place were DQ'd.
Since we're on the fire subject......Tech Inspector at a different time turns to everyone at Impound and says, "Take off your shoes." Those not wearing Nomex socks were DQ'd.

Interesting. Its $20 + shipping for its 2 year service and certification here in New Zealand (by the certified agent). Once it is 10 years old, it needs a more complex check; that is $60.

Reference GCR 9.3.22. It is RECOMMENDED...

That being said, to me your desire to save $200 is penny wise and pound foolish. I have an SPA fire system that utilizes AFFF. I had not triggered the system; it had been in the car for about 7 years. I decided to have it serviced despite the fact that the gauge indicated that it had a full charge. I took the electrical box, switch, and bottle to SPA in Indianapolis. When they attempted a controlled discharge it did not work. The pick-up tube was clogged and despite the unit still having a charge, it would not disperse the AFFF. I was told that this is not uncommon.

I would STRONGLY encourage you and others to have your entire system checked/serviced regularly. One of my good friends was just involved in a car fire and told me he had never experienced such a level of immediate and intense pain. He suffered minor burns where he did not have Nomex covering. In the end we are each ultimately responsible for our own safety and well being. If we get fried in a car that didn't have a working fire bottle that is on us, not a volunteer tech inspector.

One one hand I HATE spending the money because I’ve never had it checked.

On the other hand, I feel safer being up to date and legal so I always do it.

The bottom line to all this is, read your GCR. You need to be better informed then the "Tech" inspector. Do not take "recommended" for "required". I learned this at my first drivers school (thank you Doug Sherson). This information can save you much grief.

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EYERACE

All that my Tech Inspectors over the years have done is look to see the gauge is in the green.

There have been post-race Impounds where they look to see that the safety pin was pulled such that if the handle was to be pulled, the bottle would have maybe activated. Those with a pin still in place were DQ'd.
Since we're on the fire subject......Tech Inspector at a different time turns to everyone at Impound and says, "Take off your shoes." Those not wearing Nomex socks were DQ'd.

---

Also, unless it's in the Supplemental regulations for the event, the rules for post race impound say nothing about fire bottle pins nor nomex socks. (yes both should have been corrected before the race). A DQ would have been successfully overturned.l.

I have crewed for guys running in several series where they will disqualify you if they find the safety pin in the trigger lever, intentionally or otherwise ...

given the consequences, and the relatively inexpensive cost, why would anyone race without a functioning fire system ????

Our SCCA Tech guys thoroughly inspect the bottle (needle, mechanically appear to be in good working order, dates on bottle valid) if it is accessible. In my Crossle 45f, the hard mounted seat has to be removed so they take my word for it.

Vintage apparently doesn't. I just purchased another formula car and found the bottle hadn't been serviced in 20 years. It had been tech'd every year up until 2019 by multiple vintage organizations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EYERACE

...

There have been post-race Impounds where they look to see that the safety pin was pulled such that if the handle was to be pulled, the bottle would have maybe activated. Those with a pin still in place were DQ'd.
Since we're on the fire subject......Tech Inspector at a different time turns to everyone at Impound and says, "Take off your shoes." Those not wearing Nomex socks were DQ'd.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kea

....

Also, unless it's in the Supplemental regulations for the event, the rules for post race impound say nothing about fire bottle pins nor nomex socks. (yes both should have been corrected before the race). A DQ would have been successfully overturned.l.

---

Two responses:

1. The Legalistic/GCR answer

Fire bottle pins are unquestionably subject to post-race impound inspection.

From GCR 5.9.3.C.: "For each impounded car, the weight and other items appropriate for the class may be inspected, as agreed upon by the Race Director or Chief Steward and the Series Chief Tech inspector or Chief Technical Inspector."

From GCR 9.3.22.: "All cars shall be equipped with an On-Board Fire System except T3, T4, STL, Spec Miata, B-Spec, C-Spec and Improved Touring."

From GCR 9.3.22.A.: "The firing safety pin(s) shall be removed from all on-board fire systems prior to going on track."

A protest/appeal on a penalty for not having removed the safety pin would fail every time.


Nomex socks at impound are subject to GCR 9.3.19.: "All required driver’s safety equipment must be worn at all times while on track."

Again, a protest/appeal would not prosper.


2. The Steward of Everyday Common Sense answer

Post-race impound should focus on compliance issues that affect on-track performance. The tech plan can be as little as weighing cars, depending on staffing, tools, and other factors.

Safety issues are typically logbooked - "Fix before next race". For a safety pin not removed from a fire system, the most appropriate outcome would be a fatherly chat with the Chief Steward about the consequences of a fire.

The DQ-for-nomex-socks business is a weenie move on 23 different levels. That is just lazy and arbitrary on the part of the responsible officials. As John LaRue (and the GCR) point out, drivers are ultimately responsible for their own safety. We are all adults here. If someone chooses not to wear proper fire-resistant clothing or not to tighten their safety belts, they are accepting the possible outcome.

Unless they walk with me as I leave the scales, I could tell them I put the pin in as soon as I left the track, so no one would discharge it by accident. Hard for them to prove otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kea

Unless they walk with me as I leave the scales, I could tell them I put the pin in as soon as I left the track, so no one would discharge it by accident. Hard for them to prove otherwise.

---

For those with a cable operated system, put the nozzle pin in place and release the set screw attaching the operating wire to the bottle head. Then try to pull the cockpit handle. Often it is rusted in place inside it's sheath.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Posner

For those with a cable operated system, put the nozzle pin in place and release the set screw attaching the operating wire to the bottle head. Then try to pull the cockpit handle. Often it is rusted in place inside it's sheath.

---

Great advice.. When i was skydiving, the rigger, when it was time for a reserve repack made me put the rig on and pull the reserve handle. It was to give you an idea what force was needed to release the reserve. A number of years ago I was doing a complete rebuild on the car and decided to pull the fire bottle release...it was rusted and no matter how hard I pulled it was stuck... Now before every season I lube the cable and make sure...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by halcyon

Our SCCA Tech guys thoroughly inspect the bottle (needle, mechanically appear to be in good working order, dates on bottle valid) if it is accessible. In my Crossle 45f, the hard mounted seat has to be removed so they take my word for it.

Vintage apparently doesn't. I just purchased another formula car and found the bottle hadn't been serviced in 20 years. It had been tech'd every year up until 2019 by multiple vintage organizations.

---

Mine is under a panel beneath my thighs that requires 6 button head screws to be removed in order to read the labels. There is a notch on on end giving access to the pin and guage. I replaced the complete system 4 years ago, still had the original fire bottle dated 1988...

I've never found in the GCR (specifically 9.3.22. FIRE SYSTEM) where it is a requirement to have a pressure gauge read in the green, only that the bottle be weighed. Certainly checking a gauge is far easier than removing a bottle, and it is the common practice. Just odd that is not in the GCR.

Merry Christmas,
Eric

Both SCCA Club and vintage events I attend (CSRG, HMSA, HSR West and VARA) all inspect the fire bottle, pressure gauge in the green, nozzle location and activation device.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EYERACE

All that my Tech Inspectors over the years have done is look to see the gauge is in the green.

There have been post-race Impounds where they look to see that the safety pin was pulled such that if the handle was to be pulled, the bottle would have maybe activated. Those with a pin still in place were DQ'd.
Since we're on the fire subject......Tech Inspector at a different time turns to everyone at Impound and says, "Take off your shoes." Those not wearing Nomex socks were DQ'd.

---

Checking safety gear after the race seems to me to be silly, the horse is long gone from the barn. I would expect the grid folks check for fire bottle pins before a car rolls off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zonker

Checking safety gear after the race seems to me to be silly, the horse is long gone from the barn. I would expect the grid folks check for fire bottle pins before a car rolls off.

---

Or you could just wear the required safety equipment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zonker

I would expect the grid folks check for fire bottle pins before a car rolls off.

---

Checking the fire bottle pins is not possible with me in the car. It is necessary to slide your hand between the seat and frame rails, and know exactly where the pin is at to pull it because you can't see it with the seat in place.

I have a pre-session checklist that has a box for asking if the pin has been pulled. Seems to me that having a checklist with this item is a no-brainer.

The overall problem here, is lack of appropriate specs that allow the firing mechanism to be removed from the bottle and tested, without discharging the bottle.

And if a major manufacturer has issues with the system operating as designed, then that manufacturer's product should not be approved for use.

As we bring cars into our shop, we always replace or service the systems. Out of curiosity, I recenly tested 4 of the removed bottles that would have passed tech based on gauge in the green and weighing. 3 of these did not deploy properly.

We service our bottles every other year regardless of what tech requires. Why take chances with safety equipment to save a few dollars?

When selecting suppressant type, I also suggest considering what chemical you want sprayed on your skin should you have to deploy a bottle.

Any suggestions for a replacement manual system? Considering space, weight, agent and budget.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrh3

Any suggestions for a replacement manual system? Considering space, weight, agent and budget.

---

Great products and service. Only ones I know who also build systems for aircraft and other industries.

https://safecraft-inc.myshopify.com/products/model-lt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by halcyon

As we bring cars into our shop, we always replace or service the systems. Out of curiosity, I recenly tested 4 of the removed bottles that would have passed tech based on gauge in the green and weighing. 3 of these did not deploy properly.

---

On the other hand, I bought a replacement bottle for a system that was 30 years old (or more) and was using the old bottle, which was in the green "safe" zone, to relocate the bracket someplace safer and accidentally set the bugger off. About gassed myself out of the garage.

Glad I was using the old "out of date" bottle for a mock up.

I talked to the Safecraft guy more than 20 years ago when he re-filled my 1972 FSV bottle. Back in the mid-90s after the US Government signed the CFC treaty without thinking of all the ramifications, they suddenly realized they had no replacement for aircraft fire systems.

So the word went out - if you had halon, the fire department would come around and take it and give you a new dry chemical bottle. This also left big computer facilities with no recourse but to put pressurized water overhead...

All that halon went up to the Naval Weapons station at Concord in the bay area and stored outside until they could figure out what to do with it - it became the Navy Halon repository.

Well, some county knuckleheads decided it was hazmat (its not, but it is dangerous because its oxygen displacing) and some overly risk averse Navy dude presented the case that they should just sell it off at auction. The Safecraft guy got it all for something like pennies a pound (market price was about $20 a pound).

If you're doing a building demo and come across an old computer room with a couple hundred pounds of Halon in old bottles, he'll solve your disposal problem for a small fee.....

[QUOTE=Rick Kirchner;660387]The overall problem here, is lack of appropriate specs that allow the firing mechanism to be removed from the bottle and tested, without discharging the bottle.

This is the point. Of the numerous bottles I have taken out of old cars (I wrote about this two years ago re taking the original bottle out of my RF 90), they almost always discharged IF you could get the valve to open. Almost every time, the valve/handle mechanism was corroded in the closed position and would not open with the cable. And I don't recall every having a cable seized. Until there is a spec where, as Rick suggests, we can remove the handle/valve mechanism to test it/repair it, we will be taking a risk. Unless we replace the bottle every 2-3 years as suggested elsewhere (I am not endorsing that!).

best
bt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrh3

Any suggestions for a replacement manual system? Considering space, weight, agent and budget.

---

This what I went to - bottle is the exact same size as the one Reynard used:

(H) Lifeline Zero 360 2.25kg Novec 1230 Fire Marshal, FIA - Pegasus Auto Racing Supplies

So, did an annual SCCA tech for the first time since 2006. I had a picture of the fire bottle when I installed it in 2019 - Showed the label with the Homologation number, date of manufacture, weight, type... all the info needed. Showed the picture, he checked for nozzles (5: 2 engine, 1 fuel bladder & 2 cockpit), stickers by handles (have 2), gauge and all was fine. Same on the fuel bladder (since you can't see either without removing panels) - picture showing it installed with date of manufacture & FIA standard, checked the fuel cap & asked if it had a check valve - said yes, I'd just function checked it.

No hassles at all - maybe SCCA is becoming more consumer friendly...

[QUOTE=billtebbutt;660460]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick Kirchner

The overall problem here, is lack of appropriate specs that allow the firing mechanism to be removed from the bottle and tested, without discharging the bottle.

This is the point. Of the numerous bottles I have taken out of old cars (I wrote about this two years ago re taking the original bottle out of my RF 90), they almost always discharged IF you could get the valve to open. Almost every time, the valve/handle mechanism was corroded in the closed position and would not open with the cable. And I don't recall every having a cable seized. Until there is a spec where, as Rick suggests, we can remove the handle/valve mechanism to test it/repair it, we will be taking a risk. Unless we replace the bottle every 2-3 years as suggested elsewhere (I am not endorsing that!).

---

Maybe I'm the odd man out. I've used push cable systems for 25+ years and never had problems removing or installing them. With the pin installed it's almost impossible to discharge even during removal/installation. Maybe it's also partially due to me having to mess with mine for various reasons at least every 3-5 years, so nothing gets rusted or corroded before the next removal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kea

The bottom line to all this is, read your GCR. You need to be better informed than the "Tech" inspector. Do not take "recommended" for "required". I learned this at my first drivers school (thank you Doug Shierson). This information can save you much grief...

---

Truer words are seldom spoken. So, FYI, GCR fire system requirements from the January 2024 GCR:

The "required" part starts with "Cars shall meet..."

If you haven't had your bottle serviced in a while, i.e., expired date, it's time. Now.