Quote:
|
Are we saying that when a cageless 3 point belt car rolls you get less injured than in the same cageless car, same wreck with 4/5/6 points and HANS?
|
"We"? I don't have a mouse in my pocket and I'm not practicing my French.
The potential for certain injuries in a rollover using a harness bar/harness combination, without a cage, is greater than with the OEM system, yes. The OEM system is designed for the street and legal street speeds.
The harness bar/harness combination, by design, restricts movement and as I stated was intended to help maintain the optimal driving position for autocross use. In the event of a rollover, without a cage, the risk of injury is greater due to the fact movement is restricted. The roof can collapse from the B pillars forward and as a result injury can occur since the driver may be unable to consciously duck or be forced downward. Which assumes they can release the harnesses in time that is. Even then, they would be without the protection afforded by the belts themselves.
This is one of the reasons cages are mandated for racing and not harness bars. Not because cages look cooler. The OEM system is a carefully engineered system.
The harness bar/harness combination is designed for the purpose for which I outlined, nothing more.
Todays cars are safer for their intended purpose (the street) than any cars in history. They are not designed for the track or track speeds. Those that are do not rely on a harness bar/harness combination. Again, something they were simply never designed for.
There is no argument here and further debate is pointless.
