Sparco Harness bar and harnesses.
harnesses are actually not DOT approved because of the latch mechanism. usually camlocks and latch link buckles. Who knows what parameters DOT decides to judge these things. They initially had issues approving stainless steel brake lines.
Schroth actually makes a DOT approved 4 point beacuse they use a standard seatbelt buckle that normally comes with factory cars.
The glaring issues with using harnesses for street driving is the lack of mobility in the car to check blind spots, etc...
I'm not going to touch the debate between harness bar, roll bar or roll cage. But I will comment on the comparison between Sparco's and DMC's harness bar. The design difference is valid.
The harness bar's real structural function is to hold the shoulder straps under an extreme forward strain (head on impact). Sparco's design relies solely on the stock seatbelt's OE bolt for this function. DMC's design places the bar, butt up against the b-pillar itself and wraps the bracket to meet the OE bolt for a considerable increase in strength.
As far as the construction of the bars I can personally atest to the robustness of DMC's. It is well up to the task of holding the upper body in the event of a high speed impact. I think in the other post, some people fail to take into account that the lapbelt is responsible for the majority of the securing.
Take a closer look at the first picture and you can see how the design exploits the whole b-pillar better than SParco's use of the seatbelt bolt.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...ht=harness+bar
Schroth actually makes a DOT approved 4 point beacuse they use a standard seatbelt buckle that normally comes with factory cars.
The glaring issues with using harnesses for street driving is the lack of mobility in the car to check blind spots, etc...
I'm not going to touch the debate between harness bar, roll bar or roll cage. But I will comment on the comparison between Sparco's and DMC's harness bar. The design difference is valid.
The harness bar's real structural function is to hold the shoulder straps under an extreme forward strain (head on impact). Sparco's design relies solely on the stock seatbelt's OE bolt for this function. DMC's design places the bar, butt up against the b-pillar itself and wraps the bracket to meet the OE bolt for a considerable increase in strength.
As far as the construction of the bars I can personally atest to the robustness of DMC's. It is well up to the task of holding the upper body in the event of a high speed impact. I think in the other post, some people fail to take into account that the lapbelt is responsible for the majority of the securing.
Take a closer look at the first picture and you can see how the design exploits the whole b-pillar better than SParco's use of the seatbelt bolt.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...ht=harness+bar
If someone was involved in an impact that exerts loads high enough to shear the harness bar bolts, they'd probably be dead. While the DMC bar is a better design, the sparco bar shouldn't be considered weak.
marksae - +1 on that one. both bars are strong im sure but their mouting points/hardware used to mount them would be my concern. also i read somewhere that the seats are designed to fold back so you're sort of lying down in the event of a rollover and the roof starts caving in. im not sure how reliable this information is but it sounds logical.
also heres another thread on the subject:https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...highlight=safe
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ModifiedMR
Evo How Tos / Installations
4
Jul 18, 2008 12:52 PM




