Impact Racing Firesuits

Jff24Gordn

FIRE
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
1,960
In case anybody hasn't herd, Impact fire suits are not fireproof. http://www.sfifoundation.com/PressRelease04-22-10.pdf

I just tested my suit made in 2008 and a bic lighter was hot enough to catch some of the threads that stitch the seams together on fire. :doh:
You would be OK, if your truck catching on fire is not as hot as a cigarette.

attachment.php

attachment.php


PS, I know that my photography skills need work.
 

Attachments

  • impact.jpg
    impact.jpg
    29.8 KB · Views: 269
  • impact2.jpg
    impact2.jpg
    32 KB · Views: 270
Lawsuit.........

Do a search for the BIG lawsuit involving impact and knock off saftey stickers. Who knows what they put on the market, or what all products were involved.
 
The whole deal was about Impact using SFI tags they got from somewhere else....after the items were SFI approved. Everything is still certed untill July 22, 2010 then SFI says they won't deal with IMpact anymore....I'm betting a lawsuit is happening somewhere already since this came up back in March.
 
I have all the stuff on this decertifcation, since NADM is SFI certified they send me all papers on this kind of stuff. If you think your suit may be in question PM me and I can send you the updates we have on it.

Chuck
 
SFI has posted everything public, shocking:

April, 2010

SFI PRESS RELEASE - Response to the Impact Racing Press Release of April 22, 2010

April 22, 2010 - Yesterday, SFI advised the racing community that Impact Racing suits bearing 3.2A/5 certifications “made prior to 2009 have been constructed with non-compliant materials that, in SFI’s judgment, pose a safety risk to users of those suits.” Impact responded by attacking SFI certification programs (although Impact and the other major equipment manufacturers have agreed to and participated in the development of these well-established programs); by claiming it could not get a fair hearing of the decertification appeal (although Impact asked for and received an expedited appeal procedure); and by claiming that “SFI’s actions have caused racers unnecessarily to question their safety.” It is this last point that requires a very specific response.

Scientific testing just conducted on 2008 Impact 3.2A/5 suits has determined that the thread melts away in a fire. This causes the fabric to come apart since there is no longer thread to hold the suit together. SFI believes this poses a significant safety risk to the racer involved in a fire. Rather than being constructed with Nomex (heat resistant) thread, the suits were constructed with some sort of unknown non-compliant thread that melts during heat testing. This thread failure is contrary to the SFI specifications that Impact agreed to follow.

The reason that this failure was not discovered sooner is that Impact provided SFI with Nomex thread samples in order to get their products tested and certified initially. Manufacturers are only supposed to provide samples of the actual materials to be used in their products. It appears that Impact failed to comply with this procedure regarding thread. Finally, one suit tested failed to have the proper thermal protective properties in the material itself. Again, such a failure poses a significant safety risk. This safety failure by Impact is consistent with a pattern of non-compliance:

1. Last year, SFI discovered that Impact SFI 3.2A/15 and SFI 3.2A/20 rated fire suits produced in 2007 and 2008 were also made with thread that melted during testing. In addition, these suits were often poorly constructed, without sufficient protective layers of Nomex material. SFI ordered the immediate decertification and recall of these potentially dangerous products.

2. Last year, SFI discovered that Impact SFI 3.3/15 and SFI 3.3/20 boots produced in 2008 were defective. Their materials failed heat resistant testing. SFI ordered the immediate decertification and recall of these potentially dangerous products.

3. Hans Performance Products discovered last year that Impact deliberately manufactured and sold counterfeit Hans helmet clips and attached them into the helmets of unsuspecting customers. These foreign made knock-offs were inscribed with the “SFI 38.1” inscription. Impact has never participated in this program. These counterfeiting activities were occurring at the same time that Impact was manufacturing counterfeit SFI conformance labels and patches. Hans filed suit against Impact in federal court last year in Atlanta. SFI intervened and joined in the suit against Impact. That suit is pending.

4. In 2004, SFI discovered that Impact gloves bearing SFI 3.3/20 specifications were made of material that was too light and failed heat resistance testing. SFI ordered their decertification and recall.

Impact’s press release claims that there “have been no burns or other injuries reported to Impact by any racer wearing Impact Race Products since its inception.” If this is true, the avoidance of injuries is due in large part to the policing of Impact products by SFI.

SFI was heartened when Impact finally admitted its own fault for previously making non-compliant gloves, boots, suits and helmet clips and acted to address those problems. SFI holds out the hope of a similar outcome regarding its pre-2009 3.2A, 3.3, 16.1 and 16.5 products, and that it will act in the best interests of the racing community without further prodding by SFI. However, admission of their fault will not change the fact that these products remain decertified and that Impact’s participation in all SFI programs will end June 22, 2010.

For a downloadable .pdf of this press release, please click on the following link: SFI Press Release 04-22-10.



SFI PRESS RELEASE

April 21, 2010 - SFI issues the following press release. Please review this carefully:

1. Impact Racing has withdrawn its appeal of the decertifications of its products bearing SFI 3.2A, 3.3, 16.1, and 16.5 specifications manufactured in the years 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008. The decertifications of these products are now permanent.

2. The decertifications are based upon a number of the affected products being non-compliant with SFI specifications concerning labeling and construction. In addition to the presence of non-compliant SFI tags and the absence of DOMs on products, 3.2A/5 suits made prior to 2009 have been constructed with non-compliant materials that, in SFI’s judgment, pose a safety risk to users of these suits.

3. Impact Racing is permitted to maintain the certification for products bearing SFI 3.2A, 3.3, 16.1, and 16.5 specifications manufactured in 2009 and 2010. SFI’s investigation of the labeling and construction of these products is ongoing. Impact’s participation in the SFI specification programs ends June 22, 2010.

4. Any Impact product with SFI specifications 3.2A, 3.3, 16.1, and 16.5 without a date of manufacture (DOM) is deemed to be a decertified product unless the manufacturer has provided the product user with proof that it was manufactured in 2009 or 2010. This proof must be presented to track officials upon request. Impact believes that its products made in 2009 and 2010 have the DOMs affixed to products to the extent mandated by SFI specifications.

For a downloadable .pdf of this press release, please click on the following link: SFI Press Release 04-21-10.



JOINT PRESS RELEASE

April 1, 2010 - Impact Racing, LLC and SFI Foundation, Inc., in the litigation pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, have agreed that:

1. Impact Racing, LLC has provided sworn testimony that, upon review and investigation, no counterfeit SFI Conformance Labels have been used on Impact Racing products during the production years of 2009 and 2010.

2. Impact Racing, LLC has provided sworn testimony that, upon review and investigation, all Impact Racing products manufactured and sold during the production years 2009 and 2010 meet SFI specifications.

3. Based upon this sworn testimony, the decertification against Impact Racing products for the production years 2009 and 2010 is lifted. The decertification of the production years prior to 2009 and 2010 remains in effect. The parties will continue to work cooperatively in an effort to resolve the issues relating to decertification in these years.

4. Impact Racing stands behind the safety of all products it has manufactured and to which SFI Conformance Labels have been affixed. SFI will continue to monitor compliance with product specifications.

5. Impact Racing, LLC and SFI Foundation, Inc. will cooperate in determining whether any Impact Racing product bears a counterfeit SFI Conformance Label and if any safety issue exists in regard to products manufactured prior to 2009 and 2010.

6. If any Impact Racing product does not bear the date of manufacture the purchaser or user is instructed to immediately contact Impact Racing who will provide verification of the date of manufacture. Impact Racing, LLC will immediately notify SFI Foundation, Inc. of this occurrence. Impact Racing, LLC and SFI Foundation, Inc. will work with the sanctioning bodies to determine the best method for product users to present verification of the date of manufacture.

For a downloadable .pdf of this press release, please click on the following link: Joint Press Release 04-01-10.



March, 2010

March 29, 2010 - UPDATE ON IMPACT RACING PRODUCT DECERTIFICATION

On Friday, March 26, 2010, SFI filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana against Impact Racing, LLC, based upon evidence SFI has received regarding Impact’s manufacture and use of counterfeit SFI conformance labels and patches. Such actions by a manufacturer directly violate its obligations to the SFI program. SFI took similar action when it joined in Hans Performance Products’ lawsuit against Impact due to Impact’s manufacture and use of counterfeit Hans helmet clips. In that case, Impact counterfeited the clips and inscribed an SFI rating on the clips without SFI knowledge or approval. As in the Hans clip case, SFI is asking for another Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction against Impact. SFI is also seeking monetary damages. Please see SFI’s web posting of March 26, 2010 for more details on the basis for SFI’s position. At this time we do not know the exact extent of these counterfeiting activities, but through the litigation process we hope to learn all the details. During the years that Impact was using the counterfeit labeling, it was also obtaining authentic patches and labels from SFI. At this time SFI does not know how many products have counterfeit labels and patches and which ones have authentic labels and patches. Therefore, it was unfortunately necessary to decertify all the products manufactured by Impact pursuant to SFI specifications 3.2A, 3.3, 16.1 and 16.5. Please note that Impact helmets are not affected by this decertification.

It is important to keep in mind that any such use of counterfeit labeling is in violation of the SFI specification programs. Whether it involves counterfeit helmet clips or counterfeit labeling, such activities can undermine the integrity of the product ratings system that exists in motorsports. This system depends upon trust. If this system is damaged, all of motorsports can suffer the consequences. Manufacturers that agree to the SFI specification programs must meet rigorous and strict requirements. Those stringent standards are in place first and foremost to promote safety and product reliability. Racers and sanctioning bodies must have confidence in a manufacturer’s representation that its products are in compliance with SFI requirements. The conformance label is a manufacturer’s solemn statement to the racing community that it followed the rules in bringing its product to the sport. When this trust is violated, the racing community suffers. The level playing field for other manufacturers becomes uneven. Sometimes the consequences of a breach of trust are severe and can hurt innocent victims. This is why it is so critical that manufacturers follow the ratings system at all times.

SFI will continue to update the racing community as more information becomes available.

For a downloadable .pdf of this update, please click on the following link: Impact Decertification Update 03-29-10.



March 26, 2010 - NOTICE OF DECERTIFICATION; NOTICE TO CEASE AND DESIST AND TERMINATION OF ALL CONTRACTS OF PARTICIPATION ISSUED TO IMPACT RACING

SFI Foundation, Inc., has issued a Notice of Decertification; Notice of Cease and Desist, and a notice terminating all Contracts of Participation to Impact Racing. Effective April 27, 2010, all products manufactured and/or distributed by Impact Racing pursuant to SFI Specification Programs 3.2A, 3.3, 16.1, and 16.5 are decertified. Evidence obtained by SFI shows that over a period of years Impact Racing has engaged in the production and use of counterfeit SFI conformance labels and patches, and affixed them to Impact products for use in motorsports. Under the Contracts of Participation between SFI and Impact, SFI conformance labels and patches may only be obtained from SFI and no other source. Evidence shows that Impact had counterfeit SFI labels and patches made in Asia and then affixed them to Impact products it distributed to members of the racing community. To SFI’s knowledge, Impact never advised its customers that its products contained phony SFI labels and patches. Impact never advised SFI of its systematic and longstanding practice of counterfeiting and distributing SFI patches and labeling.

Impact has been directed to cease and desist from this practice. SFI has directed Impact to immediately notify all affected customers to remove the counterfeit labeling and to offer the affected customers a full refund of the purchase price. SFI is requesting that all counterfeit conformance labels removed from Impact products be sent to SFI.

SFI has elected not to decertify these products immediately in order to minimize the potential hardships to members of the racing community that have been brought about by Impact’s counterfeiting activities.

SFI has also elected to terminate all Contracts of Participation with Impact Racing effective 90 days from March 24, 2010. Under the terms of the Contracts, either party may terminate the agreements without penalty upon 90 days notice. This means that Impact will no longer be able to participate in any SFI programs after this 90 day period.

SFI has taken these actions in the best interests of the safety and integrity of the racing community. This is in keeping with SFI’s mission and purpose.

For a downloadable .pdf of this notice, please click on the following link: Decertification Notice 03-26-10.
 
To summarize all of that - if your suit was made prior to 2009 (i.e., 2008 or earlier) it is decertified (i.e., only useful as a fashion statement) IMMEDIATELY. Looks like Wayne has himself one of the ones with non-Nomex thread. I was sooooo close to buying Impact when I replaced my firesuit a couple of years ago. I ended up getting one from the G-Force factory "seconds" website for much less money, planned to upgrade to an Impact when I could afford it.
 
Items that are required for the ET/speed ran...yes.
Fire suits, helments, bell housings, flex plates, etc
 
davids coming up with excuses to try and get me to dq trucks this friday so he can win....
 
There's some pretty open questions here that I'd like to expound on to clarify how SFI works and the role it plays.

Just what role does SFI play, one might ask?

SFI is an independent laboratory that tests safety related components under scientific conditions to insure they are worthy of their marketed function. For each specification (listed clearly in many rulebooks) there is a series of tests all products intending to serve that certification level must pass. If a product passes the test and their manufacturing practices are consistent, they then meet the SFI Specification and can sell accordingly.

"My, thats nice. Why would SFI do this? How do they keep their doors open? ", you ask.

One word, Safety.
Manufacturers pay for these tests. Sanctioning bodies pay to use these specifications. Competitors benefit from these tests and certifications.

Manufacturers who attain these specific safety criteria are basically given an open market to anyone racing in any competitive establishment associated with SFI. This approval means their products in essence automatically make them compliant with the rules. They do so with SFI independently insuring your safety. Kind of like an endorsement, only SFI has never been on a Wheaties box. More like an underwriter.

Why would sanctioning bodies care? Sanctioning bodies pay for their association with SFI and the ability to use their specifications in their rules. Besides the safety benefits to members and competitors, another reason they participate is the effect it has on liability. SFI's backing of a products construction means that in the event of an accident and injury, with the inevitable lawsuits of today, the sanctioning body through their requirement of safety equipment meeting these specifications in their rules did everything in their power to insure you were mitigating risk by using good quality equipment. It is also a requirement for many competition insurance policies. SFI also works with sanctioning bodies with advisement on necessary safety equipment and the prudent implementation of their specifications to respective competitive classes.

There is a benefit in technical inspection as well. SFI tests and certifies technical inspectors for sanctioning bodies. These tests insure the inspectors are fluent with the rules they are teching and the SFI specifications they are utilizing in them. The benefit in the tech line is this: Tech inspectors can then simply look for the applicable SFI tag and date on a piece of equipment and wave the competitor on through inspection. Ba Da Bing.

What does this mean to the competitor? Redundantly, I'll say it anyway, the equipment you buy with SFI tags on it has been tested and its designs proven worthy of the caliber of crazy you are about to partake in. It also limits lengthy rules and clarifies any technical disputes.

Case in point:
Instead of a Fire Jacket rule that says that (Example BS only) "Competitors are required to wear a long sleeved jacket with 1/2 inch fire resistant insulation and a one ply nomex outer layer. This jacket must include overlaps on all zippers. Its construction must be seamed with fire resistant thread that passes the 20 second Jeff24Gordon lighter test. Neck and cuffs must include an elastic or cinched draw mechanism that is also of fire resistant composition. It must be commercially available. In the event that the jacket does not appear to meet these criteria, the technical inspectors reserve the right to set it on fire to evaluate its construction. Jackets that pass or fail this test must be replaced before the competitor is allowed to participate." It says, "Fireproof Jacket meeting SFI spec 3.2/A5 required." Show the patch, you're done.

Hope that answered some questions nobody officially asked.
 
......Its construction must be seamed with fire resistant thread that passes the 20 second Jeff24Gordon lighter test. ......

If it took 20 seconds to catch on fire that would be one thing, but it went up as soon as I touched a lighter to it.
From the lack of complaining from other people, I guess I am the only one who bought a $300 winter coat.
I'm gonna give my helmet to my little cousin who rides 4 wheelers around the woods. I assume Snell has been watching this play out and they will can the helmets too.
 
Thanks for the edumacation.

LOL Now Lott's even typing like he talks. :poke::D

Mush love, my 7.3 brother. :Cheer:

If it took 20 seconds to catch on fire that would be one thing, but it went up as soon as I touched a lighter to it.
From the lack of complaining from other people, I guess I am the only one who bought a $300 winter coat.
I'm gonna give my helmet to my little cousin who rides 4 wheelers around the woods. I assume Snell has been watching this play out and they will can the helmets too.

I just pulled that out of my Amish ass to illustrate the measures necessary to accurately spec a level of quality absent independent testing. Your counterpoint is still valid and disappointing. I guess the jacket would fail both SFI and the Amish BS spec. LOL

Here's a fun conundrum. SFI tests helmets too. The Spec 31.1 is flame Resistant Motorsports Helmets. The non-FR helmet spec is 41.1

Does your Impact helmet carry Snell, SFI or both??
 
On some other forums they have mentioned that Impact has never been certified by SFI for helmets, so theoretically there should not be any helmets affected by the SFI decertification. However, if I were running an Impact helmet I would think twice given the corners they were cutting elsewhere.
 
.

T The benefit in the tech line is this: Tech inspectors can then simply look for the applicable SFI tag and date on a piece of equipment and wave the competitor on through inspection. Ba Da Bing.

.

Case in point:
Instead of a Fire Jacket rule that says that (Example BS only) "Competitors are required to wear a long sleeved jacket with 1/2 inch fire resistant insulation and a one ply nomex outer layer. This jacket must include overlaps on all zippers. Its construction must be seamed with fire resistant thread that passes the 20 second Jeff24Gordon lighter test. Neck and cuffs must include an elastic or cinched draw mechanism that is also of fire resistant composition. It must be commercially available. In the event that the jacket does not appear to meet these criteria, the technical inspectors reserve the right to set it on fire to evaluate its construction. Jackets that pass or fail this test must be replaced before the competitor is allowed to participate." It says, "Fireproof Jacket meeting SFI spec 3.2/A5 required." Show the patch, you're done.

.
It wouldn't be so hard to find tech inspectors if we told them they could light drivers on fire....:clap:

I think I'd be calling somebody and getting my Impact Cash back.
 
Yea the helmet is a SA2005.

I bet Impact will be in chapter 13 before any racer gets their $$$ back for this.

impact racing said:
Unfortunately, SFI’s actions have caused racers unnecessarily to question their safety.
:huh::
Maybe I should race in a leather helmet, t shirt and jeans.


This just in. Bill Simpson was wearing one of his suits and somebody flicked a cigarette at him. :lolly:
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Simpson_Fire.jpg
    Simpson_Fire.jpg
    26.4 KB · Views: 28
Back
Top