New H&N device. [Archive] - SpecialStage Forums

Xman

11-19-2008, 10:48 PM

I filled out the form on the website and got an email response:

Thank you for contacting us. The DefNder Team Issue model MSRP is US 549.99. This price includes all you need so there are no secondary purchases. It does exclude shipping. The DefNder Team Issue will be on sale via our website from the 11th of December. FIA certification is imminent.

Please visit our website and if you require any further information please contact me.

Karl Ebel
Karl@defNder.com

bentmettle

11-20-2008, 05:37 AM

The collar design is mildly clever. Seems like it should be able to perform comparably to the HANS. Hopefully they'll have one at PRI to put hands on.

dekar058

11-21-2008, 12:42 AM

I wonder if I should wait for the DefNder to come out before I go order my Hans?

any thoughts?

thanks,
Derek

Jason_Grahn

11-21-2008, 05:31 AM

might as well. Hans prices won't be any cheaper.

Morison

11-21-2008, 10:13 AM

might as well. Hans prices won't be any cheaper.

unless you can still find the discontinued mid-priced one in stock somewhere.

Also, if you plan on running any RNY (from what I understand) or CARS events you'll need a H&N device that is FIA certified.

dekar058

11-21-2008, 01:01 PM

they say it will be FIA certified by the time it is for sale.

dano9988

11-21-2008, 04:28 PM

they say it will be FIA certified by the time it is for sale.

They say FIA certification is imminent. This is the FIA you are talking about! Don't count your chickens before they are hatched!

Dave Clark

11-23-2008, 01:31 PM

http://www.defnder.com/

I met these guys at an airport on the way to a race earlier this year. They came up to us and gave us business cards because they saw us wearing race team shirts. It looks like an interesting unit and I'll be looking into one. It's supposed to debut at the PRI show. We asked about FIA certification because, for example, ALMS require that and they said yeah, that's in the process.

razzmyth

11-24-2008, 11:32 AM

I wonder if it will have a 5 year expiry date?

xrian

11-29-2008, 07:29 AM

Kieth, will the new CARS rule will specifically state FIA or will SFI suffice??
Need to know soon as we have to get ours.
Also, will our current belts work or do we need to buy HANS specific belts now??

unless you can still find the discontinued mid-priced one in stock somewhere.

Also, if you plan on running any RNY (from what I understand) or CARS events you'll need a H&N device that is FIA certified.

Do_It_Sidewayz

11-29-2008, 07:33 AM

Kieth, will the new CARS rule will specifically state FIA or will SFI suffice??
Need to know soon as we have to get ours.
Also, will our current belts work or do we need to buy HANS specific belts now??

I believe the CARS rule states it needs to be a FIA device (it should be in the 2008 rulebook).

There was some noise of requiring the "hans" belts, but that would be silly since HANS themselves only recommends them, while approving "normal" belts for use.

xrian

11-29-2008, 07:43 AM

OK thanks for that. I helps to speed things up a bit and the belt issue will save us from spending $$ we don't have available for '09.

Jgardhouse

11-29-2008, 10:08 AM

Gotta be HANS (eerrrrr FIA) for CARS.

If you need new belts, but the HANS specific ones, I bought all new belts twice this year for my side of the car... Night and day difference, from a comfort and safety standpoints...

xrian

11-29-2008, 10:15 AM

Thanks for the input.
Our belts have an expiration date of 2010 so my next question is do they expire in Jan '2010 or the end of that year?

Jgardhouse

11-29-2008, 11:27 AM

If they're FIA, as far as I know its Dec 31st of that year.

My FIA belts say not valid after 2012 or whathaveyou...

Morison

11-29-2008, 12:17 PM

Kieth, will the new CARS rule will specifically state FIA or will SFI suffice??
Head and Neck Needs to be FIA.
HANS designed Belts are not 'required.'

xrian

11-29-2008, 01:42 PM

Yes they are FIA and we've used them for 2 Targa's. All that is on the date tag is 2010 so I get 2 more years out of them. That is good news for our pockets!!

Jgardhouse

11-29-2008, 02:47 PM

The date tag means nothing if the belts are not in good condition... Three years of use (including 2 targa's) and storage is a long time, so I'd be taking a long look at everything.

The rules are very clear about their cleanliness and condition.

xrian

11-30-2008, 08:18 AM

Thanks for the input but our belts look just like the day I took them out of the packaging. Also the car is stored indoors so they have very limited exposure to the sun.

Morison

11-30-2008, 10:26 AM

The rules are very clear about their cleanliness and condition.
Hard to be clear about something that is a subjective judgment.

Jgardhouse

11-30-2008, 03:28 PM

Hard to be clear about something that is a subjective judgment.

Fair enough. Nothing wrong making sure your belts are clean and safe so nobody else has to give it a second thought.

Morison

11-30-2008, 05:32 PM

Fair enough. Nothing wrong making sure your belts are clean and safe so nobody else has to give it a second thought.

Agreed.

Safe Drives

12-08-2008, 10:26 AM

Hi All,

I have gotten a lot of emails and PMs from SS users about this product. I was waiting to give an opinion on this product until I had a chance to hear opinions from the experts at the SAE Motorsports Conference that I attended last week.

It was a great week for me and I learned a lot. :)

After talking to the experts I have come the conclusion that the Defnder is not currently a product that I even want to consider selling for a few reasons.

1) The biggie for me is that like the HANS Device, Defnder solely relies on the harnesses to re-direct impact energy. This is the exact same reason that we do not offer the HANS Device. R3 offers two load paths for energy and the Hybrid devices offers three load paths for energy dispersion. If your harness fails or your harness mounting positions fail then with the HANS or Defnder you are screwed.

2) Defnder is quite plainly imposing on design patents from HANS and Safety Solutions. Both companies will likely present law suits against Defnder after its introduction at PRI 2008 this week.

3) Defnder has made public claims of FIA Homologation coming soon but the folks from the FIA never mentioned this at all. They did mention that the Hybrid devices that we have sold for two years now, will be FIA Homologated in January 2009. Again, no mention of Defnder or any other device having FIA Homologation soon.

So to sum up, 1 load path for energy means that there are safer HNRs out there that we already offer. Defnder seems that they are a bit shady in design and marketing wise and that's not what I want to be offering at safedrives.com.

Please let me know if there are any questions that I can anwser.

Best regards,

Charles Buren
Safe Drives LLC

Phlyan Pan

12-08-2008, 11:31 AM

3) Defnder has made public claims of FIA Homologation coming soon but the folks from the FIA never mentioned this at all. They did mention that the Hybrid devices that we have sold for two years now, will be FIA Homologated in January 2009. Again, no mention of Defnder or any other device having FIA Homologation soon.

Not an issue for me, but would a device purchased 2 years ago be retroactively considered FIA compliant once the device gains homologation? Or do only new ones count?

Sorry, I don't know how FIA rules work.

razzmyth

12-08-2008, 11:42 AM

1) The biggie for me is that like the HANS Device, Defnder solely relies on the harnesses to re-direct impact energy. This is the exact same reason that we do not offer the HANS Device. R3 offers two load paths for energy and the Hybrid devices offers three load paths for energy dispersion. If your harness fails or your harness mounting positions fail then with the HANS or Defnder you are screwed.

If your belt fails you have bigger problems than what type of H&N restraint you bought.:eek:

If you have a belt or belt mounting point failure you won't need a H&N restraint. Because you body will now be deccelerating at the same rate as your head. Thus little to no neck strain.

jimmy

12-08-2008, 11:54 AM

NO!

FIA is the ultimate bureaucracy (and income stream).

It must have the FIA sticker. Only new ones (after homologation) have these.

Not an issue for me, but would a device purchased 2 years ago be retroactively considered FIA compliant once the device gains homologation? Or do only new ones count?

Sorry, I don't know how FIA rules work.

press on,

Safe Drives

12-08-2008, 12:00 PM

Not an issue for me, but would a device purchased 2 years ago be retroactively considered FIA compliant once the device gains homologation? Or do only new ones count?

Sorry, I don't know how FIA rules work.

Call me, ;) I'm sure we can figure something out.:):D

jimmy

12-08-2008, 12:00 PM

If my harness fails (in a big crash), I am screwed no matter what sort of H&N I am wearing. Period.

If my harness fails without wearing any sort of H&N, I am screwed.

If your harness fails or your harness mounting positions fail then with the HANS or Defnder you are screwed.

press on,

Phlyan Pan

12-08-2008, 12:25 PM

Call me, ;) I'm sure we can figure something out.:):D

Eh, I don't have one and won't be in the market for one most likely until after the devices in question have their fate decided on. I was just curious more than anything.

Safe Drives

12-08-2008, 12:39 PM

If my harness fails (in a big crash), I am screwed no matter what sort of H&N I am wearing. Period.

If my harness fails without wearing any sort of H&N, I am screwed.

press on,

All true Jimmy, a harness failure is bad no matter what way you look at it.

I have seen video of harness failures in the test lab at very low forces though. Improperly mounted, adjusted, routed, maintained or installed webbing can lead to failure at rather surprisingly low levels. Rally teams need to be especially vigilant with respect to harness safety.

Mad Mike

12-12-2008, 06:56 AM

http://www.defnder.com/

Anyone interested in this thread might want to take a peek at this link - http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/HANS-Files-Patent-Infringement-Suit/story.aspx?guid={1C30A4E2-866B-466A-8754-DC2FB999C51B} (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/HANS-Files-Patent-Infringement-Suit/story.aspx?guid=%7B1C30A4E2-866B-466A-8754-DC2FB999C51B%7D)

razzmyth

12-12-2008, 07:05 AM

I think there are enough differences in the design for it not to be patent infringement. But that's up to the courts to decide. Hopefully Defender won't run out of money before the judgement.

xrian

12-12-2008, 08:22 AM

What a crock!!! They want to keep thier little monopoly all to themselves. The damn thing doesn't even look at all like the HANS.
What a great way to piss off even more people!

ajax

12-12-2008, 09:18 AM

That's bull, I think HANS is more pissed about defNder figuring out a way of making HANS's product better (i.e. cheaper). By the way, it doesn't matter if the defNder looks different than the HANS if the patent is for how the HANS restrains your head. Patent law is tricky like that but if Innovative Safety Technology can show that the defNder is even slightly different in function then they can win this lawsuit.

If the lawsuit goes through and IST gets pwnd then I'm probably going to buy an R3 out of spite.

Bruce

12-12-2008, 09:37 AM

Wedge

12-12-2008, 11:28 AM

If anyone is interested, this is the patent that HANS claims is being infringed upon:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,009,566.PN.&OS=PN/6,009,566&RS=PN/6,009,566

Read through all the claims in there. From what I can tell from pictures and the descriptions on their website. I'd say the Defnder easily does not infringe on the majority of those claims. And the claims that they *might* infringe upon, probably should never have been granted to HANS in the first place.

Something a lot of people don't realise about the US Patent office, is that it's supposed to be self-policing. Any company can file any patent, and it's a pretty sure thing that it will be granted. It will remain a valid patent until it gets contested. HANS should be careful, if Defnder gets really lucky, not only could they win, but HANS could have this patent revoked.

Bruce

12-12-2008, 12:15 PM

Something a lot of people don't realise about the US Patent office, is that it's supposed to be self-policing. Any company can file any patent, and it's a pretty sure thing that it will be granted.

Hmmm...this is the organization that refused to grant a patent to the Wright Brothers because heavier-than-air powered flight was "impossible."

The one thing you CAN'T do is file a patent that is infringing on its face. The search is commonly the expensive part of patent filing. Many, many patents are turned down every year.

Bruce

Josh wimpey

12-12-2008, 12:30 PM

Sorry, guys. HANS is a business, and has to answer to their investors and/or stockholders. They did all the upfront research and development (read $$$) before they sold ONE device. Some other company shouldn't profit from that. They deserve their day in court to determine if that's what happened. That's what patents are all about.

Bruce

I agree that HANS should get their day in court. However, cases like this demonstrate why patent laws need serious revision.

The patent system was intended to ENCOURAGE innovation and was intended only to apply in very limited cases. If dfender offers a significant improvement in safety and effectiveness over the HANS (at least for a subset of users) and is found to be infringing on HANS's patent, such a ruling will STIFLE innovation. Furthermore, HANS would be using patent law to make a subset of potential dfender owners LESS SAFE.

Wedge

12-12-2008, 12:32 PM

Well, the company I work for was sued a few years ago for violation of 45? patents. The court through out all but 3 of them immediately. We lost the remaining 3. But now the patent office is in the process of retroactively revoking all the other company's patents.

Wedge

12-12-2008, 12:38 PM

In any case, there's no way Defnder didn't see this coming. They must've read through it in detail before beginning any design, and I'm sure they must already be prepared.
Actually, the more I read between the lines of that patent, and examine the released pictures of the Defnder. It looks a lot like they specifically designed the Defnder around many parts of that patent specifically not to infringe upon it.

JeremyN

12-12-2008, 03:35 PM

Hmmm...this is the organization that refused to grant a patent to the Wright Brothers because heavier-than-air powered flight was "impossible."

The one thing you CAN'T do is file a patent that is infringing on its face. The search is commonly the expensive part of patent filing. Many, many patents are turned down every year.

Bruce

You are also talking about an organization that is legally not responsible for the correctness or accuracy of its patents it grants. It is the defendants responsibility to prove that a) They did not infringe or b) that the patents presented are invalid (mostly this is due to obvious prior art or other conflicting patents).

The good news is that an injunction on the sale of the device is nearly impossible. The courts only ever grant injunction in the case of a direct knock off.

The most likely series of events is HANs will huff and puff, and claim that they will get an injunction, which will never happen. Realistically they will either court cost defNder out of business or get them to settle for a crap load of money + licensing. If defNder has more money then HANs thought they did they will go to court, defNder will probably win and HANs will be screwed, since a loss in court is essentially, and often literally, the invalidation of their patent. There isn't a lot to that Patent to hang their hat on and the probability is that they want licensing fees sufficient enough to move the cost of the defNder inline with the HANs Sport.

ajax

12-12-2008, 04:33 PM

The good news is that an injunction on the sale of the device is nearly impossible. The courts only ever grant injunction in the case of a direct knock off.

And even in that case Smith & Wesson knocked off a Glock design so much so that the parts were even interchangeable and they still sell the S&W weapon.

Another case is Gibson Guitars suing Paul Reed Smith guitars over the PRS Single Cut-away after both companies have been selling that style of guitar for how many years? A friend of mine was poised to make a lot of money if the lawsuit went through because he had one of the PRS guitars and the value would have shot up if Gibson had won.

Odds are that they will settle out of court as history dictated by blatant rip-offs. My question is, will they be selling for $550 as advertised before a conclusion is reached?

C_Eixen

12-12-2008, 04:46 PM

Back to the topic of new H&N...Isaac is producing another restraint. Not SFI, but he's selling it for $99. It attaches to the helmet chin strap.

http://www.isaacdirect.com/html/OtherPages/SuperSecretNewLinkPage.html

Bruce

12-12-2008, 04:52 PM

It is the defendants responsibility to prove that a) They did not infringe or b) that the patents presented are invalid (mostly this is due to obvious prior art or other conflicting patents).

Not quite correct. FIRST the plaintiff must reach the burden of proof that the defendant's device DOES infringe (thus surviving summary judgement). THEN the defendant's defenses are those you pointed out. You cannot merely allege that there was an infringement and make the defendant prove a negative.

And you don't prove this stuff up before the PTO...it's in a regular court.

Bruce

ajax

12-12-2008, 04:56 PM

Two things:

1) Does it pass the single release rule?

2) If it's not SFI other than "something is better than nothing" I don't really see how it helps us.

C_Eixen

12-12-2008, 04:59 PM

Two things:

1) Does it pass the single release rule?

2) If it's not SFI other than "something is better than nothing" I don't really see how it helps us.
1) No
2) Agreed, it's just FYI...there are still companies doing development and testing, although I doubt Isaac has any intention of ever trying to make a SFI compatible device.

dekar058

12-13-2008, 09:01 AM

I heard that RNY has given the ok for SFI approved H&N devices, anyone else hear this?

The Defender is sounding better everyday, if so...

Rallycat66

12-13-2008, 03:04 PM

I heard that RNY has given the ok for SFI approved H&N devices, anyone else hear this?

The Defender is sounding better everyday, if so...

Yes, RNY is accepting SFI head and neck restraints. Search the US forum - Walter Clark posted that a week or two ago.

CARS is the main sticking point right now. They are allowing only FIA (probably due to their ties to their ASN for insurance and sanctioning).

1fastben

12-18-2008, 03:18 PM

I just called Defender and ordered one, (gulp, there goes half my race budget). They said they are in stock, shipping within about a week or so and ARE 38.1 SFI certified.

Just thought I'd throw that out there. I figure I'd get one before the lawsuit potentially screws up everything.

Oh, they're taking phone orders for right now, but will have the online cart up soon. 888-NECKBRACE

Joe Average

12-18-2008, 06:35 PM

I ordered a Defender today also. Very easy and nice people to deal with.

Sean Gallagher

xrian

12-18-2008, 07:11 PM

Wish I could order mine but have to wait for either them getting the FIA rating or CARS alowing SFI rating.

Joe Average

12-30-2008, 04:49 PM

Got my Defender today. Nice unit. Lots of adjustment. Shipped and delivered as promised. And came with a hat and 2 stickers! Who Hoo!

Sean Gallagher

xrian

12-30-2008, 07:17 PM

How much did you pay for it if you don't mind?
Any more word yet on the FIA approval?

Got my Defender today. Nice unit. Lots of adjustment. Shipped and delivered as promised. And came with a hat and 2 stickers! Who Hoo!

Sean Gallagher

Joe Average

12-30-2008, 07:28 PM

It was $549.00 + shipping, and sales tax since I'm in California.
Total $610.00 to my door.
A very cool unit. I don't think HANS has a huge shot in court as they have a bunch of units based on your size and seat. This is an adjustable, one- size -fits -all, and has the side to side force tethers.

Sean Gallagher

Glenn Wallace

01-04-2009, 12:05 AM

Their website mentions side impact protection, I know testing doesn't cover this all that well. (ie to 90 deg)

Side impact protection

Our Motion-Max tether (DEKRA Certified 19mm Webbing) system incorporates VST (vertical stabilizing tether) geometry which offers unsurpassed side impact protection while maintaining the free motion of your head. Working in conjunction with this design are our unique harness flares which are designed to work with mandatory 3” safety harnesses. Our harness flares reduce the chances of belt slip in rough conditions and angular impact.

This sounds like slightly >= HANS to me.

Is there any way we can find sled test results for it?

Mad Mike

01-04-2009, 11:42 AM

Their website mentions side impact protection, I know testing doesn't cover this all that well. (ie to 90 deg)

This sounds like slightly >= HANS to me.

Is there any way we can find sled test results for it?

Lots of HNR data has been compiled here - http://www.am-rennsport.com/HNR.html

And some pics from another defNder early adopter ... http://www.am-rennsport.com/N-device/

Xman

01-09-2009, 10:16 PM

I got mine yesterday. They were sold out but had one or two with "paint defects" so they knocked $50 off for me. The paint is a bit rough and kind of orange peeled, but fine by me. I still have to do the final fitment in the seat but it seems comfortable and able to be taken off completely while inside the car. The sliding tethers AND side impact tethers coupled with the reasonable cost are what made me decide on this.