Bro_Gill

Well-Known Member
Posts
13,979
Reaction
9,279
is that kit designed for the stock arrangement, i.e. fuel cell where the stock fuel tank would be?
 

biggjim

Well-Known Member
Posts
280
Reaction
272
Jim, 1 nozzles is not appropriate. Back in the 1980s, a very good racer was killed in a fire when he was trapped in his car. A promoter decided that every car that was going to race his series needed to have a fire extinguishing system to race his series. Even back then, every supplier was telling racers 2 nozzles, 1 in the passenger area for passenger time to get out and one at the fuel supply to reduce flames from the fuel system. I can't see how anyone today would say 1 nozzle will be enough. Where do they recommend to put it? The engine? The fuel cell? The passenger compartment? The rear brakes/driveline area? From a guy who wants to know.

I never stated it was appropriate. This was a UTV specific auto suppression system. I would have assumed they did their homework. That system is designed to mount onto the rearward tube right above the exhaust area and the nozzle comes with hardware to mount onto the next bar down.
 

biggjim

Well-Known Member
Posts
280
Reaction
272
Honest question... if you dump fuel on electronics or a battery will it start a fire? If so Why not put them in a protective box.

Im not interested in finding out. At the very least I am sure its not good for the electronics. UTV arent from scratch race cars, so where the electronics are placed on our cars is very near where it was placed on a stock XP1k4.
 

retroblazer

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,626
Reaction
716
l have been following this thread since it started, First, although there are some well meaning folks that commented earlier, I would suggest that attacking your crew's actions, and things rot from the top comments are not helpful. Your thread reminds us of the risk of racing, and expectations for safety equipment. I was paranoid when I was asked by Jim White, who was driving the Hawaiian funny car in 1990, to use one of my helmet mounted fans. Besides the obvious fire risk, was the concern of having a blower explosion that would knock out the driver. So I experimented with various thermocouples and fuses. It turns out that they are commonly used in things like hairdryers. The main issue was to find one that would trigger at the lowest temp with the fastest reaction time. As I recall, the one I mounted on JIm's helmet would release at 125F., so to get one suitable for an engine compartment in a desert racer is a tall order. No harm in having a thermocouple, but don't count on it.
With respect to using fire suppression in an open engine bay, there is nothing to contain the gas. Personally, I would focus on the driver's compartment.
 
Last edited:

dhjeepgeek

Well-Known Member
Posts
532
Reaction
320
We tested the original system in the car with no panels on it to see the spray patturn an volume. We desided to skip the engine and concentrate on the driving compartment. Let the engine take care of itself and worry about human life first. Now the argument would be if it was suppressed out back before it go into the driving compartment then you may not need it in the driving compartment. I attached the youtube link to the test we did.
 

5racer

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,578
Reaction
171
We tested the original system in the car with no panels on it to see the spray patturn an volume. We desided to skip the engine and concentrate on the driving compartment. Let the engine take care of itself and worry about human life first. Now the argument would be if it was suppressed out back before it go into the driving compartment then you may not need it in the driving compartment. I attached the youtube link to the test we did.


probably make that bud taste better no doubt
 

Tony Riggs

Active Member
Posts
44
Reaction
14
Some of the old timers here like to bully the guys that don't have high post counts. Almost as if he deserved to have his automatic fire suppression fail due to having a pit crew that needs more training
Thanks fathead. Ya, I'm not sure why these clowns can't stay on topic...."FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM" not 'pit crew proficiency'.
 

Tony Riggs

Active Member
Posts
44
Reaction
14
At this point I am going to chime in on this comment. As you can see from the cockpit back there is alot going on. If the filler was 2' forward (next to the "C" pillar) and fuel was spilled you have electric fans possibly running, you have batteries mounted, and you have all of the vehicles fuse blocks, and electronics mounted. Our fear (were the builder of this car) was that if fuel was spilled it would certainly start a fire on top of the electronics as well as now it would be 2' closer to the drivers cockpit as well as possibly splashing onto the driver. The passenger side of the car is a no go as well as you have the turbo and exhaust on that side, straight onto the driver side rear is the exhaust and again the hot engine. SO at this point all thats left from a safety standpoint was in the driver panel. That was a possibility, however it made filling very cumbersome. Thus we landed on where his filler is located. We spent a lot of time laying out this platform and trying to make it the most functional and safe car out there. Of the 10 or 15 cars we have built in the last 5 years there have only been one catch fire from fueling that I can think of.

Now I am a firm believer in using the redheads for filling. I personally think dumpcans without them should go away. 90% of the fires I have witnessed have been filling with a dump can and no drybreak.

I am bummed to hear that the safecraft stuff is failing. I have been pushing for sometime for us to outfit our shop car with the manual as well as the automatic system. As far as the comments on where the nozzles are mounted, the safecraft system has 1 nozzle and Im pretty certain its mount on this car where safecraft recommends

One more thing..... I learned how important it was to properly clean, keep clean, and maintain your red heads. I had one hang open on me in baja 2 years ago and it could have been extremely bad...no fire thank goodness but there certainly could have been.

Wow, a guy who can actually stay on topic? Thanks big jim. As you know the dual filler neck was an idea to give us another option for fueling in the event of no dry break around. It was never meant to be used in our pit but the guys who were helping in the pit just wanted to get me out of there as fast as possible so didn't want to take the time to put a dry break head on that can, I cant blame them.

The next car will not have a regular fill neck, after this incident it's just not worth it.
 

Tony Riggs

Active Member
Posts
44
Reaction
14
We tested the original system in the car with no panels on it to see the spray patturn an volume. We desided to skip the engine and concentrate on the driving compartment. Let the engine take care of itself and worry about human life first. Now the argument would be if it was suppressed out back before it go into the driving compartment then you may not need it in the driving compartment. I attached the youtube link to the test we did.

That's a great video, really shows the system working well. I'm tempted to activate the new system after it's installed in the car just to verify all is working well and what the actual spray coverage looks like. Maybe after the first race and after a complete tear down so the car is in a similar state as the one in this video.
 

Bro_Gill

Well-Known Member
Posts
13,979
Reaction
9,279
Looking at that system, it still looks like a charged storage system, just not using Nitrogen for the pressure agent if the pics are of the actual system. And I would still recommend using a manual system over the auto system, or at the least, having both in the car if you are that worried about setting off the system while unable to do so your self. Having only the auto system is not optimal, IMO, simply due to what occurs during desert racing and knowing how the auto systems work.
 
Posts
16,402
Reaction
3,524
What's the odds of the auto system experiencing a premature failure or other problem vs the chances of both passengers being unconscious and unable to activate a manual system?

Anecdotally, it seems more fires happen in pits than the field. Nothing against pitters, just more opportunities for ignition of vapors. I assume.
 

Tony Riggs

Active Member
Posts
44
Reaction
14
Looking at that system, it still looks like a charged storage system, just not using Nitrogen for the pressure agent if the pics are of the actual system. And I would still recommend using a manual system over the auto system, or at the least, having both in the car if you are that worried about setting off the system while unable to do so your self. Having only the auto system is not optimal, IMO, simply due to what occurs during desert racing and knowing how the auto systems work.
These systems are manual only. The only option is a physical cable to activate the system or an electric button to push and activate. Either way it has to be done by hand, no auto feature.
 

Tony Riggs

Active Member
Posts
44
Reaction
14
What's the odds of the auto system experiencing a premature failure or other problem vs the chances of both passengers being unconscious and unable to activate a manual system?

Anecdotally, it seems more fires happen in pits than the field. Nothing against pitters, just more opportunities for ignition of vapors. I assume.
Not sure of the odds but it appears that some of the better brands do not even offer auto systems, probably because of just what you mentioned. I like the ideal of an auto system just not sure if it will end up being the safest in terms of reliability.

For sure more fires happen in the pits.....
 

dan200

#BSF200
Posts
15,923
Reaction
7,811
The next car will not have a regular fill neck, after this incident it's just not worth it.
Without being entirely off topic- I deal with a lot of teams and sell plenty of fueling stuff. Years ago it was basic and now its become more complex and costs more to fuel. A big expenditure is the dry break or "red head" at almost $300 per dump can. I am told its because its an aviation part. Aviation=Expensive

Now if you're using a pressure pro or some kind of gravity tower a $280 piece is not horrible cost in the grand scheme of things but, if your sending guys to splash 25 gallons with dump cans at some remote pit your adding over 500 dollars in equipment costs to do that fuel stop. To save ya money CB industries has come out with a coupler system so you can quickly move one red head from one dump can to another without tools. Now ya dont have to buy a red head for every can.

The kit for the first can is like $100 and then its $75 ish for each expansion kit. Its a pretty decent savings. We stock them at SDHQ and I keep some in the SDHQ Race Support trailer.

FWIW. Using a dry break and a J-Pipe with dump cans is the best thing you can do especially if the fuel inlet on the car is in a "maybe a little risky" location.
 
Top