Driver's Suit Expiration

[turnbaugh]

How long is a driver's suit legal for?

Dean

[Rick Kirchner]

Generally, until it loses structural integrity, although I'd worry about an old proban suit losing it's protection since it's a treatment.

[D.T. Benner]

If you take care of a high quality suit they can and will last a long time.
If you A. have to wear it ALL day so everyone will know you are a Race Driver!
OR-B. insist on crawling around under and over you race car with it on!
OR C. wash it with blast-o matic high caustic cleaners and throw it in the dryer!
Then you may need a new one every year.

I believe that as of now no Club racing group has any expiration date on drivers suits?
As Rick sayes most clubs require it to be free of rips,tears abrasions and stains that could compromise it's ability to protect you.
But I have seen some guys with suits that look like they have been doing duty at the local Jiffy-Lube or worse!

[TimW]

In the August fastrack is a reccomendation to the board to no longer accept FIA suits with the 1986 standard, so only FIA 2000 and SFI suits will be allowed if the BOD agrees to the reccomendation. Since SFI standards started less then 10-12 years ago, that means that any suit from the early to mid/late 90's with an FIA cert will now be 'too old.'

Tim

[Steven McWilliams]

SO my suit from 92 is too old?

Steve

[rickb99]

What about Vintage drivers? Will they still be allowed to use suits from the same era as their car?

[Rick Kirchner]

Those vintage suits just have the same designs and fit as the old ones, but are made of modern materials. I doubt if anyone dips white coveralls in borax anymore.

[Daryl DeArman]

Since SFI standards started less then 10-12 years ago, that means that any suit from the early to mid/late 90's with an FIA cert will now be 'too old.'

SFI 3.2A has been around longer than 12 years. Did you mean FIA?

Rick, next time you shoot over to Buttonwillow from your house, would you stop by that Borax plant and pick me another batch?

[Rick Kirchner]

My wife works at the borax plant in Trona - how much do you want? They have about 20,000 tons of "off spec" stuff sitting on the lake bed.

Up until about five years ago we still used borax coveralls in our rocket motor and warhead facilities - because the borax coveralls don't generate static electricity like nomex does.

[rickb99]

Tried for a rather silly joke. And, what do you know. A wealth of rather serious knowledge comes out. This Forum is wonderful. Know, if we could just cure the common cold, I'd feel a lot better today.

[Mark Walthew]

The proposal to change 9.3.19 A in the August Fastrack makes no sense to me. It reads that a suit must have either a SFI 3.2A/1 or higher rating or FIA 8856-2000. There is no provision for an FIA 8856-1986 rating. So an SFI 3.2A/1 suit which requires the use of fire retardant underwear will be legal but an FIA 1986 which has not required the use of underwear is no longer legal. So the superior suit is not legal just because it has an FIA homologation rather than a SFI certification. Please tell me I have misread this.

[Bob Wright]

if you've ever been in a fire...you would 1) never put a suit on without underwear, reguardless of rules and 2) have the most modern, up-to- date suit/material you can buy.

Watching the runoffs on Speed about 10 minutes ago- there was an interview with a driver wearing a suit older than me...fires happen and are not scheduled

[Daryl DeArman]

The proposal to change 9.3.19 A in the August Fastrack makes no sense to me. It reads that a suit must have either a SFI 3.2A/1 or higher rating or FIA 8856-2000. There is no provision for an FIA 8856-1986 rating. So an SFI 3.2A/1 suit which requires the use of fire retardant underwear will be legal but an FIA 1986 which has not required the use of underwear is no longer legal. So the superior suit is not legal just because it has an FIA homologation rather than a SFI certification. Please tell me I have misread this.

Unfortunately, I don't believe you have misread/misinterpreted. Some POS 3.2a/1 suit with some thinned-out stretched out nomex underwear will be okay. But a pristine FIA8856-1986 with a layer of carbon-x underwear giving more than 3x the protection will be "no good" Suits in good condition don't lose their ability to protect you over time unless they are of the chemically treated materials.

I agree, to a point, with Bob. You should always wear a layer of fire retardent underwear beneath your suit and that fires aren't scheduled. But to think that you always have to have the latest and greatest is a little idealistic. I do have CarbonX underwear, but I haven't yet purchased a new suit to replace my 20 race old one. When I do. I'll get the latest/greatest protection I can...but I won't be updating it every time a new model comes out.

[cooleyjb]

Who says the latest is the greatest for suits.

The trend I've seen suits go in recent years has been lighter and more breathable. Is the nomex that is sold now any safer than the stuff from 15 years ago? It's lighter but is the TPP rating of suits (more telling IMO) increasing? Yes, there are new fabrics out but they aren't being used in suits much at all.

[tonyc]

Let's hope that the same screwballs who weasled the racing harness replacement / shelf life rules don't get hold of the fire suit issue. That's already a farce.

The decision to replace a driver's suit (or safety harness for that matter) should be based on the condition of the suit (which is for the most part based on the amount of use it has had) and not solely how long it may have sat caringly hung in a closet or folded in a gear bag. Let's hope someone in the driver's suit manufacturing industry doesn't pursuade($) some sanctioning bozo to recomment that all suits should be replaced after 5 years because like safety restraints they magically go bad one day after their fifth (FIA) or even second (SFI) "birthday". (How many of us have stacks of perfectly good restraints in the garage which the only problem they have is that they are past their "date"?)

Let's try to keep some sense of reality (including logical thinking) in racing rules and avoid acting like the local motor vehicles department.

[Mark Walthew]

Tonyc that is what this propoal is doing! It makes FIA 1986 suits illegal after 11/1/2007. I can't find anywhere what the outcome of this proposal was so we need to act now but it may already be too late.
In my opinion this propsal is worse than the seat belt rule because it only effects FIA suits. It isn't making things safer overall it's just forcing some members to buy new suits because they have FIA rather than SFI rated suits. As Quickshoe stated said I could still wear a POS 3.2a/1 suit. Here's the link to the proposal.
http://www.scca.com/documents/Club%2...uleChanges.pdf

[Rick Kirchner]

Dont ya just love the way the "process" works? Okay - who was responsable for the wording change, and why? They shouldn't get away with anonymity.

When you make changes on engineering drawings you produce a change notice stating the technical reasons for the change and who proposed it. We should demand the same for the rules making process.

[Daryl DeArman]

look at the members of the some of the SCCA committees. Then look to see if they have any vested interest in any SFI products. Draw your own conclusions....

The harness deal in my opinion is almost as bad, but not so much because they do lose some effectiveness over time. The head restraint situation with the SFI is the worst!

[Larry]

I doubt the "vested interest" theory. There isn't enough $ in seatbelts to make it worthwhile. Instead, I'd consider the "insurance company" theory, and threat of lawsuit/legal action for not having adequate safety standards.

Regarding drivers suits and committees, you can safely assume that committees feel like they need to create some kind of change, or else there is no value in having the committee. Believe me, I'm not saying that there is value, but when a committee exists, you can be certain that they will try to change something!

Larry Oliver
International Racing Products

[Daryl DeArman]

I'm not saying that there is value, but when a committee exists, you can be certain that they will try to change something!

I was not inferring that there was big money to be made in sales of seat belts. Money to be made in the trend towards mandated SFI equipment and more frequent replacement intervals whether it be suits, head and neck restraints, window nets, gloves, etc.

I am waiting for ATL and Fuel safe to join the SFI, change a spec for the cell a tiny bit and come out with a SFI spec for fuel cells that none of the FIA cells will meet. Then mandate the use of SFI approved fuel cells to be replaced every 3 years.....half joking.

[D.T. Benner]

If you don't think this proposed change is good then let the CRB know in an Email. I did and recieved a fast reply. Vent your opinion where it may have some effect.

[Roland V. Johnson]

Think about it Larry, a few bucks for a SFI cert on all these products adds up. Everything that gets a unnecessary life span then generates more money for SFI.

[Bill Steele]

My guess would be that the date associated with the FIA homologation makes it possible to obsolete a given suit carrying this cert, like mine for instance.

In my case, my suit is over 10 years old and looking pretty ratty, so I decided I would put a new Sparco Suit on my list for Christmas anyway.

[tomdalrymple]

I just read the link to the proposed changes, and did not see any reference to safety equipment. Where is it to be found?

[Mark Walthew]

Well it's no longer on the link I posted because it appears to have passed. The new rule is in the 2008 GCR so everyone can now toss there FIA 1986 suits because they are worthless. Thank you SCCA.

http://scca.com/documents/Club%20Rul...egulations.pdf

[Mark Walthew]

It appears our e-mails to the SCCA did some good. FIA 1986 suits are now good for one more year. I think we still need to fight the 2009 rule. I just can't see how they can allow an SFI 3.2A/1 and not allow an FIA 1986 suit at all. Also why do they strike the line in 2009 that FIA homologated suits and underwear are recomended?

http://scca.com/documents/Club%20Rul...rovedbyBoD.pdf

see item 3

[Daryl DeArman]

Also why do they strike the line in 2009 that FIA homologated suits and underwear are recomended?

Baby steps? SFI probably wasn't too happy with that verbage. You do realize that SFI 3.2A/10 and higher rated suits are dated with expiration dates....how long before they do the same thing to their "5" suits? When they do, what do you think the SCCA will do?