The Chicago Tribune is shaking a rattle at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Its investigation has found 31 cases of infant seats exceeding injury limits or disconnecting from their bases during federal vehicle frontal impact crash tests. The NHTSA slams countless cars into barriers each year, like the 2008 Dodge Caravan in the gallery below. In addition to the sensor-laden crash dummies, some of the vehicles are also fitted with infant or child seats. According to the Tribune, the unreported child seat failures in those tests – crashes conducted only to test vehicle safety, not the safety of the child seats – has uncovered a serious flaw in infant/child seat testing.

In the United States today, infant seats are only tested on a sled. Before being sold, the seats must demonstrate the ability to survive a "simulated" head-on crash at 30 mph. On the other hand, the NHTSA crashes actual vehicles into a barrier at 35 mph (although it is only 5 mph faster, the impact is significantly greater). Sled tests are effective in some studies, but they fail to test the variables found among different vehicle interiors and the unique seat designs that change from manufacturer to manufacturer.

Responding to the Tribune report, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in a written statement Friday that he ordered a "complete top to bottom review of child safety seat regulations." He will also make changes to make the crash-test results "more available" to consumers. Government crash test regulations have held automakers to the fire, and the result has been much safer vehicles for adults. Now it's time to bring infant/child seat manufacturers to the same flame and improve small occupant safety, as well.


[Source: Freep, image by NHTSA]

Professional drifting series, Formula D, is trying to quickly win over fans and competitors in order to become one of the top forms of motorsport in the United States. As folks have learned in the markets this past year, though, rapid growth does not come without some giant bumps in the road. It looks like Formula D has now slid into a wall with a few of its teams. Confusion surrounding the series rule book has come to a head in discussions at Drifting.com. The rules state that any change to a vehicle's OEM suspension design must be approved by Formula D. Of course, a visual inspection of every car lined up for a run at a Formula D event proves that no one is utilizing 100% OEM suspension components. Aftermarket coilovers, adjustable control arms and urethane bushings are all-too-,common modifications seen throughout the pits. Therefore, there must be a list available to competitors outlining the approved components for all competing vehicles. No such list is available, however. That means teams have no method of verifying that other competitors are following the rules, other than the fact an entry passed Formula D's own tech inspection. Current discussion is making a case for the use of vehicle technical sheets as found in series such as SCCA Speed World Challenge to list all allowable modifications for approved competition vehicles.

One particular team lies behind the call for rule revisions, while other concerned competitors back up their request for clarification. The vocal team is the group behind the Super Autobacs Nissan Skyline, which was recently deemed ineligible for competition by Formula D. The series organizers claim the Skyline features illegal front suspension modifications by using the OEM parts off a Nissan Laurel. However, the RWD Scion tC campaigning in the series is eligible despite also using suspension parts from another Toyota vehicle that shares the same chassis. The rules become particularly unclear when other vehicles are allowed to run with obviously altered suspension setups. 350Zs have altered the mounting points of their rear axles and Chevrolet Corvettes have converted from leaf springs to coilovers. Hopefully, Formula D can learn from this tussle and develop a fair and documented method of approving vehicle,s rather than leaving everyone in the dark. Thanks for the tip MrCoolGuy!

[Source: Drifting.com]

While rollover resistance is improving, current vehicle roof strength regulations date back nearly 35 years. With that in mind, Congress will be taking a careful look at federal regulators as they work on upgrading the standards early next month before they unveil a final regulation at the end of July. Current standards require a vehicle under 6,000 pounds to withstand a force of 1.5 times the vehicle weight without crushing and striking the head of a belted average-size adult male. In August 2005, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposed toughening that standard to 2.5 times the vehicle weight (and adding it should cover all vehicles under 10,000 pounds). Safety advocates, however, have argued that the standard should be 3 to 3.5 times the vehicle weight.

According to the NHTSA, increasing the crush resistance to 3 times the vehicle weight would cost automakers at least $1.1 billion more that it would to meet the 2.5 standard. Automakers have shown resistance to the proposals too. They have asked for more time to comply with the toughened rules, and that some vehicles (such as the Jeep Wrangler) be exempt. They have also pointed out that increased roof strength means added weight -- counterproductive in their continued efforts to meet stringent fuel economy standards.

[Source: The Detroit News, Photo from Volvo]

The new rule at the Indy Racing League (IRL) says the minimum weight for cars will now include the driver. That's good news for Ed Carpenter. At 165 pounds, he's the heaviest driver in the series (if anyone can call that "heavy"). On the other hand, it appears to penalize Danica Patrick -- the petite driver, the lightest in the series, can barely tip the scale over 100 pounds. The IRL insists the new rule isn't targeting Danica. Nevertheless, she's not very happy.

The weight difference is more significant than many think. In fact, it has been estimated that a 65-pound weight difference could mean as much as a 1-mph advantage during a race. To even the field, the new rule will divide the drivers into three categories. The heavy group get weight cut, while the lightest group will get ballast added - to the vehicle's chassis, not the driver's derrière. We don't want to affect Danica's swimsuit modeling career, do we?

[Source: Inside Line, Photo by Darrell Ingham/Getty]

The World Motor Sport Council of the FIA, the international racing authority that governs Formula One, among other series, has rolled out a series of restrictions on the development of F1 cars starting with the coming 2008 season.

The restrictions include a complete freeze on engine development for the next ten years. In a speech delivered last week in Monaco at the Motor Sport Business Forum, FIA President Max Mosley (pictured at right) justified the decision by pointing out that the engines developed by F1's six engine suppliers – Ferrari, Mercedes, BMW, Honda, Toyota and Renault – are already evenly matched and incredibly advanced: "There is no need to develop an F1 engine any further." (Heck, let's go back to foot-powered Flinstones-mobiles then.)

The far-reaching restrictions also covered the use of wind-tunnels for the first time in the formula. The new regulations state that each team can only use one wind-tunnel, can only operate it for 15 runs per 8-hour day, no more than five days per week. Further limitations were set on how the wind-tunnel may be used, and to prevent teams from simply switching their personnel over to even more expensive Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulators, the FIA intends to put a cap on that, too.

Ross Brawn, former technical director at Ferrari and new team principal at Honda, recently pointed out that restrictions like these don't achieve their intended goal of reducing costs, they just force teams to find newer, more expensive ways to gain a performance edge. We'd have to agree with Brawn: you can't contain a competitive spirit, and F1's chock-full of 'em.

[Source: Autosport]