Mamandoli

Hello. I was wondering if anyone would install just a Shark Bar and 5 point harness without a roll bar. I'm not sure the support for the stock roof is safe in a roll over. I do mostly HPDE advanced group. Roll overs are rare at Sears Point, Sonoma Raceway, but I would like to be as safe as possible.
Thanks
Mike
2016 Z06 Z07 package. M7

RS4EVA

Prevailing opinion is that the Halo is strong enough in a rollover situation. That being said, there have been accidents where the Halo was struck by a thin solid object (sign post) it failed, but the driver was still ok.

I have one installed, but I end up just using the 3 points because of the stock seat sub belt setup, makes it kinda uncomfortable in the groin area.

Thomasmoto

To directly answer your original question, no I wouldn't do one without the other. That being said, I'm very torn about installing a bar in my daily driver.

srshaw3

While not a C7, I have a C6 ZO6 and am considering a harness bar with the Scroth ASM Prof II harnesses. Since they don't hold the occupant upright in a crash, I would think they would be more like seat belts in a roll over: https://www.schrothracing.com/produc...fi-ii-asm#1597

RapidC84B

Yes I would. There is no room for a proper bar in these cars without fully gutting them. The ones on market are a joke for road course use and are for hard parkers or maybe passing drag race tech.

andreas g.

I have a shark bar in my 2016 z,
No issues. I had one in my 09z.
I run twice a year at the Mojave
Magnum mile. In order to run A2
Class a harness is required. BTW a Z06 has a roll bar strength in the roof.

firstgear

I guess it comes down to if you feel lucky.....you buy insurance.....not sure why you wouldn't add a bit more protection if you could.....

Bill Dearborn

A roll bar is next to useless because of the halo. If you want total roll over protection you need to install a cage. The danger isn't from the halo collapsing it is from the A pillars collapsing. When they bend upward into the passenger compartment they bring the front of the roof with them pushing the occupants heads upwards while their body weight is pushing them down. The roof shoves the head forward and into the chest. All of this can happen while the halo gets nothing more than a few scratches in the plastic covering.

Here is a C6Z that flipped right in front of me and my student back in 2010. It ran up the tire wall in Turn 6 at the Glen and then dropped about 4 feet onto its roof and pivoted around for a few seconds before coming to a stop. A large part of the left side damage occurred when they had to roll it over to get it on its wheels.





I run a Shark Bar, have the competition seats and use the Schroth Profi II ASM 4 point belt assemblies that reduce the chance of submarining under the lap belt. The advantage of these assemblies is you can add a 2 point sub belt that will attach at the same point the lap belts attach while the occupant sits on the sub belt. Schroth makes adapters that can be bolted to the stock lap belt mounting locations as does BK. I have the BK mounts in my car.

Bill

arturox2

I thought this harness will hold the occupants upright in a crash. Help me understand your statement, please.

Thank you.

spearfish25

I don't understand why submarining is such a concern with 4 point harnesses but not for a 3 point OEM belt. Aren't the lower two straps on a four point still low across your lap? I figure you could submarine in either.

schaibaa

The 3 point allows your body to fold over the lap belt. With a 4 point, the force is translated from the horizontal plane to the vertical and you submarine.

spearfish25

Makes sense. So that Schroth system lets one shoulder fold over a bit and supposedly counteracts the submarining. Anyone crash and test it?

srshaw3

If you look at the linked page, you will see a photo where is shows that one side lengthens allowing your body to fold forward, this is what prevents your body from submarining under the lap belts as well. So, in a crash the lengthening of one side means your body is not held strictly upright.

arturox2

Sure, not "strictly" upright, but the inboard shoulder harness only allows for a short amount of additional travel to allow the body to slightly pivot and plant the hips in the seat. The torso's forward movement is still greatly restricted. No comparison with the factory 3 pt.

arturox2

The Schroth Profi II ASM and ASM FE address this concern with the technology they've built into the harness:

https://www.schrothracing.com/produc...fi-ii-asm#1597

Bill Dearborn

The Schroth ASM system has been tested and their are videos on line showing how it works. It has been DOT certified in certain cars for use on the streets. The main reason for that is the parts can be plugged directly into the car's stock belt mounts/harnesses. For instance they have certified the lap belts match the lap belt receptacles on certain BMWs, VWs and Fords. With the Corvette you can get a DOT certified belt release mechanism but you need to provide your own belt mounting points since Schroth hasn't certified their lap belt ends to fit into the stock Corvette lap belt system.

I have the BK lap belt mounts and clip in end points on the Schroth lap belt ends. They just clip into the BK mounts which are bolted to the same point as the stock lap belt mounts are bolted to. This means the lap belts are fastened to a known strong points that have been crash test certified. The shoulder belts wrap around the harness bar which has not been certified but guesstimatted on how well it will perform. Neither the Shark Bar or BK harness bar have been certified in any sort of crash test so there is no way to know for certain how well they will hold up in a crash Vs the stock system, Vs a roll bar or a cage. Just like the roll bar and the cage you have to take the word of the manufacturers.

Here is the video showing the testing of the ASM belts.


I would recommend viewing the Schroth Training Videos developed by HMS Motorsports because they show a lot of information on how to properly mount belts no matter which brand you use.

Bill

srshaw3

Yes, there is risk. HPDEs include inherit risk that are unnecessary. Choosing to participate is accepting risk.
Deciding how much to accept is a personal choice.
The Schroth harness provides a risk level that may be more acceptable to some than driving with standard harnesses, or even the regular seatbelts. For example, with a Schroth harness, I might retain control of the car rather than struggling with just the restraint of a seatbelt.
It is an individual choose your own risk level.

Bill Dearborn

I would have been satisfied with stock restraints except for one thing. I wanted to wear a HANS and I need two shoulder belts to do that.

Bill

arturox2

Bill, that is a key point and another the reason why the Shcroth 4 pt is a safer option. It was a key factor in my decision to use this racing harness.

For those events where it's not accepted, I will use a Simpson Hybrid with factory seatbelts so I will still have head and neck restraint.

TrackAire

I often wondered if the ASM system would be as safe as a traditional harness with anti sub belt for multi hit accidents. Every video I've seen has shown a frontal impact type test. What about accidents that include more than one hit, secondary side impacts and multiple rollovers? I'm not sure I understand the ASM system well enough to confirm if after the initial impact and stretching of the inward shoulder harness, if the car is still flipping or rolling will the extra slack of the shoulder belt cause potentially more injuries?

I am making the assumption that once the inward shoulder belt stretches, it does not retract to its original length....in essence you end up with one shoulder belt much looser than the outward belt. Is this correct?

Good thread with a lot of good info.