I guess I'm just venting for a sec. here.......and looking for explanations.

I remember about a year back I went to a Porsche Club of America race day at the Streets of Willow. At the time my only helmet was a brand new AGV motorcycle helmet....Snell M2005 though it may have been, it was still a brand new high dollar full-face helmet.

I got a new a-hole torn because it was not Snell SA approved......I fully understand the whole roll bar impact and fire retardant qualification. BUT this is my real problem with the whole debacle .--------------> How the hell can an OPEN-face helmet get the SA approval and qualify for roll bar impact protection??????? WTF protects the drivers face in case of a fire?? (assuming a fire retardant face gauze isn't worn??)

Maybe I'm being naive, but I would think that even a non SA approved full-face helmet gives minimally more protection than an open-face SA approved helmet.

What the hell am I missing here?

 

Some perspective.

Did the orgainizers have a published requirement for safety gear? Did you meet it?

If you don't think an open face SA helmet is safe then don't wear one. But if they said "SA helmet required" and you showed up with an M helment, then you made a mistake.

 

You really need to wear goggles when using an open face helmet and a visor when using a closed face helmet or there is no fire protection, especially for your eyes. Getting out of a burning car in under 9 seconds is one thing, getting out of one blind and in agony is another.

The fire rating will only do what it will do. Fire rated shoes aren't going to protect your hands. For open face helmets you need to cover your face in NOMEX or similar.

There are a host of inconsistencies. For example I require 3 layers of NOMEX in my suit but only a 1 layer balaclava so while my chest has 9 seconds if fire protection my neck has only 3 and my head only 6 (including the one layer in the helmet. My face has none because the visor isn't fire retardant, it just prevents direct contact with flames of combustible material for as long as it lasts.

The main thing about SA is that the helmet contains no Nylon (particularly the strap) which will melt and stick to your burning flesh. That means they won't peel your face off with the helmet but not much else.

Each layer of NOMEX offers roughly 3 seconds of fire protection before the heat burns you anyway.

 

Hey! It's PCA. It's their event. You play by their rules.

 

The issue i had with the group i was running with, was the fact that a plethora of old guys in $100K+ porsches were driving with no goggles, nomex, or neck protection and open-face helmets. It was just stupid.

They never stated the SA requirement, they stated "a helmet is required", it was assumed (but I've participated with Redline Track Events and Speed Ventures with varying helmet requirements, so......). And I know open face helmets aren't as safe, and soon after invested in a full-face Bell SA helmet. But that's besides the point. I'm trying to figure out what makes open-face SA helmets qualify for the fire retardant portion of the testing.


cthree- that perspective was very informative, thank you.

 

Ah, well then I have sympathy for you. I do recommend in the future that if somebody gives you similarly vague requirements that you confirm in advance what it is that they mean.

I disagree that "open face helmets aren't safe". No helmet is "safe" or "unsafe". They all provide certain levels of protection. It's up to you and the event organizers to determine how much of which types of protection you are comfortable with.

I drive with no fire protection to speak of. But I am basically driving a street car, doing HPDEs. A race car is a different beast, and racing is a different situation. Were these actual races, or was this an HPDE, or what?

Basically, these "old guys in $100K+ Porsches driving with no goggles, nomex, or neck protection and open-face helmets" may or may not have been "stupid" (by which it seems you mean "taking more risks than you would be comfortable taking"). You haven't really given us enough information to judge.

 

Well I got all my venting out on the initial post. What I am wondering about isssssssssssssssss:

Assuming NO protective head garments are used and no goggles are used. I don't see how open-faced helmets pass flame SA qualification tests..........I'm not being pissy here, I would honestly like to know.

Anybody know the testing protocol???

 

It's published on the Snell website.

It is basically what Eric said it is: 1) the shell is insulating and 2) the materials won't burn. Open face can meet that just as easily as closed face.

 

Interesting how the logistics of that works out.

 

As others have mentioned, it is really about the fire resistance of the area that is covered.

Think about gloves as an example. Take a glove with a long cuff and a glove with no cuff. Would you expect the glove with no cuff (even if fire rated) to protect your wrists?

An open faced hemlet protects the area that it covers and doesn't protect your face in the same way that a closed faced helmet doesn't protect, say, your legs.