None
Nitro Member
Those with the sock as part of the helmet are SFI rated and will not be allowed after the date unless you use a separate pull on fireproof sock. You are correct about the Snell rating but not the fireproof part from SFI.
Nitromater
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Impact & SFI
- Thread starter Adam
- Start date
Those with the sock as part of the helmet are SFI rated and will not be allowed after the date unless you use a separate pull on fireproof sock. You are correct about the Snell rating but not the fireproof part from SFI.
Randy
Nitro Member
Bingo. You hit the nail on the head. Here's a history lesson for you.
When John Lombardo Jr was going to drive my TA/FC in 2008 and got his new lightweight Impact firesuit made out of Impactanium or whatever they called it I called BS on the suit. I wore a Simpson -20 suit when I used to drive in the 90's and it was a thick sweaty mess all the time. Notice I said "thick." Lombardo's suit seemed like it was no more material than a pair of winter pajamas.
When Daniel Oliver's new suit showed up in 2008 we sent it to SFI for an opinion. They confiscated the suit. tested it (destroyed it in testing) and the results from the disection of a brand new suit showed it did not come anywhere close to the -20 certification label sewn into it. And guess what??? We did not order a lightweight suit like Lombardo did. It was the standard deal much heavier than Lombardo's. Next thing you know SFI tested more suits including -15's, boots, etc., and the decertifications began.
No matter who it was in the building, someone somewhere at some time decided to cut corners and put my drivers in danger. First they denied it and threatened to sue. But the evidence was so overwhelming they finally had to recall everything. I see nothing new here. Possible company employees are back posting on message boards accusing SFI and everyone else all of sorts of things while the company itself threatens to sue like they did with Richard Putz whose -15 suit wasn't fit for super comp for going public. And now the latest looks like NASCAR is washing their hands of the whole deal, too. Read me the definition of fraud.
Seems to me during the last go-round in 2008 the company was given every opportunity to turn around and make things right. Now this. How many times should Arnie (SFI) get slapped around by an arrogant manufacturer before he says enough is enough? Knowing him like I do I'm sure this decision was made with a heavy heart. He doesn't want to hurt the racers with his decision so a time frame was adopted. The racers are smart enough to decide whether or not to wear the stuff one more day or drag an old suit out of mothballs. Either way, SFI is the standard bearer. When your company produced products that rely strictly on certifications as well as following the rules of the certification governing body why would you be inclined to slap the certification body in the face in the first place?
I wouldn't by a roll of toilet paper from them. They need to go away so the racers and legitimate manufacturers with some ethics can move on.
RG
Last edited:
Dragracer
Nitro Member
Randy, I don't disagree with you. If I had gotten some inferior equipment I would be pretty pissed too and wouldn't buy from that manufacturer again.
What I'am having a hard time getting through my head is why someone with the history of Bill Simpson would basically ruin the stellar reputation he made over the years with outstanding safety equipment. That's what baffles me.
Maybe it's money, I don't know. Money has made a lot of good people make some real dumb decisions and ruin their lives.
If that's the case with IMPACT it's too bad as Bill has probably saved more lives in auto racing with his safety products than anyone else. But if that's the way IMPACT is working they should be shut down as they are putting people at risk and the results of inferior equipment can be catastrophic and I agree you can only give them so many chances before you have to say "no more".
You have a great driver in Daniel. We have had his dad do some engine work for us in the past. Good luck.
Take a look at my post on 4 wide racing today. Would like to get your opinion.
What I'am having a hard time getting through my head is why someone with the history of Bill Simpson would basically ruin the stellar reputation he made over the years with outstanding safety equipment. That's what baffles me.
Maybe it's money, I don't know. Money has made a lot of good people make some real dumb decisions and ruin their lives.
If that's the case with IMPACT it's too bad as Bill has probably saved more lives in auto racing with his safety products than anyone else. But if that's the way IMPACT is working they should be shut down as they are putting people at risk and the results of inferior equipment can be catastrophic and I agree you can only give them so many chances before you have to say "no more".
You have a great driver in Daniel. We have had his dad do some engine work for us in the past. Good luck.
Take a look at my post on 4 wide racing today. Would like to get your opinion.
Gettin' HOT now.......... Bill might have to buy a new Taylor suit to go to court!
Linky:SFI Web Site
Linky:SFI Web Site
Tony
Nitro Member
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.
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.
Dragracer
Nitro Member
Looks like this is likely to get nasty.
On 3/26/2010 the attorneys representing Impact filed an appeal to the SFI suspension. A hearing is set for this Thursday April 1st. I don't know if that is a hearing with SFI or with a court.
I am glad to see that at least initially this is being taken care of quickly.
But if Impact is not satisfied with the SFI appeal decision and decides to take it to court it could drag on for years.
SFI has requested the courts to immediately issue a TRO against Impact, which with the information available seems to be perfectly justified. A TRO can be granted in a very short timeframe (days) and at the same time if the requesting party requests it the court can recend the TRO immediately. The only bad thing here is you never know what a court is going to do. I would hope they do the right thing and grant the TRO until this is totally resolved.
This all seems fair to me.
Bottom line, we don't need any defective, counterfeit or any other type of questionable items used in racing. The sport is dangerous enough without these type products being sold.
On 3/26/2010 the attorneys representing Impact filed an appeal to the SFI suspension. A hearing is set for this Thursday April 1st. I don't know if that is a hearing with SFI or with a court.
I am glad to see that at least initially this is being taken care of quickly.
But if Impact is not satisfied with the SFI appeal decision and decides to take it to court it could drag on for years.
SFI has requested the courts to immediately issue a TRO against Impact, which with the information available seems to be perfectly justified. A TRO can be granted in a very short timeframe (days) and at the same time if the requesting party requests it the court can recend the TRO immediately. The only bad thing here is you never know what a court is going to do. I would hope they do the right thing and grant the TRO until this is totally resolved.
This all seems fair to me.
Bottom line, we don't need any defective, counterfeit or any other type of questionable items used in racing. The sport is dangerous enough without these type products being sold.
Mike Racer
Nitro Member
Looks like they kissed and made up 
Randy
Nitro Member
From the SFI web site:
April, 2010
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.
April, 2010
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.
