Roll Cage

[ddewhurst]

Will someone please help this poor helpless nerd. :o I just brought my Miata home from the fab shop last evening with this really nice roll cage & today I receive the 2008 GCR & start re-aquanting myself with the rules & wham-o, I can't find a spec for a roll cage for either an IT race car or a Spec Miata race car. :blink: Are roll cages no longer required in IT & Spec Miata SCCA road race cars? I might be some what of a rules nerd & maybe I just missed the location of these rules. :unsure:

I know a new year is comming, BUT this is a little far out don't ya think.

Happy Next year ;)
David

[Gregg]

It's not in the ITCS or SMCS.. Take a look at 9.4--Roll Cages for GT and Production Based Cars

[x-ring]

If you get a logbook in the next couple of days, the '07 book applies to that car forever. If you wait until next Tuesday, the '08 book applies.

[ddewhurst]

Thanks Greg, I read the Roll Cages for GT and Production Based Cars but didn't pay close enough attention. After your comment I re-read & now have the full picture.

Thanks Again ;)
David

[Speed Raycer]

David,

Post pics of the downbars/dash area... I'd be interested in seeing what you & your builder came up with!

Are the paper GCR's shipping???? Haven't received mine yet. Sucks having to go back to the computer and look stuff up. The wife really hates handprints all over the mouse!

[pgipson]

If you get a logbook in the next couple of days, the '07 book applies to that car forever. If you wait until next Tuesday, the '08 book applies. [/b]

Is that accurate? I know that the 08 GCR supersedes the 07, but for National classes the 08 rules become effective the Monday after the runoffs (ref below)


1.2.2. Revision of the GCR
A. The SCCA may revise, in its sole discretion, the GCR or issue Supplements to it, at any time through “FasTrack,” “Racing Bulletins,”
or “Tech Bulletins”, or on the official SCCA website. All supplements will have a published stated date.
B. Rules changes for National classes shall become effective the Monday after the Runoffs rather than January 1 of the following year so that competitors will have the opportunity to test rules changes in competition before January 1st.[/b]

Since SM is a national class a car getting a logbook issued now would have to comply with the 08 rules?

(I hope this doesn't mean I've joined the Rules Nerd club).

[ddewhurst]

Scott, the roll cage installed is made of a halo with down tubes so that one may have a roll cage that fits tightly to the "A" pillar & roof. A negative issue with side hoops spec is that one SHALL have only two bends per side hoop without going to heaver wall tubing. The down hoop travels through the dash without tourching any chassis member or moving/relocating any OEM stuff.

How is the little person? :023:

Happy Next Year ;)
David

EDIT: The answer is yes Paul yer a member but keep imn mind THEY take away your membership for little or nothing. I screw up so offten that THEY wouldn't give me my card back. See author of this thread. :035:

[joeg]

I got my paper GCR in the mail yesterday.

Purdy new roll cage illustrations.

[JoshS]

Scott, the roll cage installed is made of a halo with down tubes so that one may have a roll cage that fits tightly to the "A" pillar & roof. A negative issue with side hoops spec is that one SHALL have only two bends per side hoop without going to heaver wall tubing.[/b]

The new, common cage rules have removed the "number of bends" requirements. I noticed this in the drafts and checked, and this is by design.

[ddewhurst]

****The new, common cage rules have removed the "number of bends" requirements. I noticed this in the drafts and checked, and this is by design.****

Say what Josh, please see page 2008 GCR-156. Same, Same................ ;)

[Speed Raycer]

GCR pg 93 sec. 9.4

Cars registered before 1/1/08 MAY continue to compete with their previous roll cage as specified in Appendix G (2007 cage rules which DD pointed to)

I don't really think they had to do away with limiting the # of bends. 2 is sufficiant, 3 is fine, 4 would rarely be needed unless you really screwed up and 5 would be scary.... but hey, now we're unlimited! Cusco cages are on their way to being legal!!!! :bash_1_:

http://www.xcceleration.com/images/viva/rollcages/cusco7ptcageSTi.jpg

[JoshS]

****The new, common cage rules have removed the "number of bends" requirements. I noticed this in the drafts and checked, and this is by design.****

Say what Josh, please see page 2008 GCR-156. Same, Same................ ;)
[/b]
That's appendix G, it's a copy of the '07 rules. The '08 rules are in 9.4, page GCR-93. The '07 rules are there because cars registered prior to 1/1/08 can use the '07 rules.

So we're both right.

[ddewhurst]

***Say what Josh, please see page 2008 GCR-156. Same, Same................ ;) ***


Josh, sorry to question you reading capabilites.

***and this is by design.***

Was this ^ said with tongue in cheek? I hope so.


Someone should question the capabilities of the people writting the SCCA seat head rest rules & the SCCA roll cage rules. As I read back through the roll cage rules previous to 1/1/2008 there have been maximum bend requirements when using the minimum sized tubing including the two main hoop rearward braces which WAS NO BENDS. Also withinthe past year I called out to a CRB member that the main hoop diagonal which is attached to anything other than the upper drivers main hoop corner & the passengers lower main hoop corner is providing less protection for the driver. Also mentioned to the same CRB member was the fact that ataching the main hoop diagonal to the passengers upper main hoop corner to the chassis/frame at the lower position on the drivers side of the car is a waste of energy as far as protecting the driver is concerned.

Scott, the rules writers for the SCCA show their lack of knowledge allowing roll cages with unlimited bends within the roll cage members. The POS roll cage you showed should be shoved where the sun don't shine. The only thing that roll age accomplishes is that the interior don't get cut up. I understand you picture is not an approved SCCA roll cage, at least not previous to 1/1/2008. BUT when the SCCA role cage rule writters write flexable rules they sure don't piss off any members off.

[lateapex911]

Someone should question the capabilities of the people writting the SCCA seat head rest rules & the SCCA roll cage rules. ............... BUT when the SCCA role cage rule writters write flexable rules they sure don't piss off any members off. [/b]

I beg to differ, as it appears I can see at least one who is (pissed off)...

;)

[Greg Amy]

http://www.xcceleration.com/images/viva/rollcages/cusco7ptcageSTi.jpg[/b]
This is very nearly identical to the front leg design on Jay Wright's SSB Mazda MX-3 car, the very same cage that collapsed upon him putting the car its lid at the '93 (?) Runoffs...You know, the wreck that cause him to be a paraplegic...?

This kinda shit scares me.

[ddewhurst]

***I beg to differ, as it appears I can see at least one who is (pissed off)...***

Jake, I'm not at all concerned about the merry go round roll cage rules in that they have zero effect on me. I would NEVER use the SCCA dumbed down roll cage rules. I am more amused that WE have people who don't have a clue writting rules for WE the SCCA members while when WE the members who have a clue need to kiss ass forever to get ANYONE to listen relative to outright strength of a roll cage. Sense should prevail if any of the SCCA rule writers ever looked at a bridge structure. Jake, if you ran your business like the SCCA is run you would have been out of business a looooong time ago. :D

I can see it now, a Fastrack statement saying the the SCCA rule writers have dumbed down the roll cage so that the cage will be part of the crumple zone so that the SCCA don't have a Eharnhart. :(

Now that I have consumed a small Pizza with a couple Lite beers while watching a very good first half of a football game let's continue this conversation. :birra:

Jake, if you want to have a sensible discussion, lets take a real simple rule with one of the SCCA brilliant rule changes & see where the discussion ends up. Lets discuss the head rest rule. Its been shortened & dumbed down to the lowest level of stupidity that a rule could be IMHJ. :D

9.3.40 Seats

Second paragraph:

"A system of head rest to prevent whiplash and rebound, and also to prevent the drivers head from striking the underside of the main hoop shall be installed on all vehicles. (The brilliant addition to the rule follows.) Racing seats with integral headrests satisfy this requirement."

How the hell will a racing seat with integral headrests with the intergal headrests mounted 6 inches behind the trailing edge of the main hoop keep the drivers head from striking the underside of the main hoop? A brilliant addition to the rule by some not so bright SCCA rule writters. You have at least one National car in your Divison that has exactly this this arrangement. :D

Jake, your response please............. :D

Back to the football game. Sounds like the Giants may just stuff it to the untouchable team & then we'll need to continue listening about the 1972 fish team.

[JoshS]

***and this is by design.***

Was this ^ said with tongue in cheek? I hope so.
[/b]
Nope, serious.

When the new cage rules went out for member comment last year, I noticed that the number-of-bends statements were missing. I wrote a letter pointing out the omission, which I assumed were left out accidentally during the rewrite. I heard back from Jeremy, who told me that it was not an oversight, they were left out intentionally. I left it at that, since I am no expert.

[seckerich]

I called with the same concerns as well as the deletion of the square inch rule. My suggestion for plates was added back and the bend rule stayed the same. Not good. Someone builds to the outer edges of this rule and dies and we all will not be racing anymore.

[lateapex911]

***I beg to differ, as it appears I can see at least one who is (pissed off)...***



Jake, your response please............. :D

Back to the football game. Sounds like the Giants may just stuff it to the untouchable team & then we'll need to continue listening about the 1972 fish team. [/b]

My response? The fish have been silenced...........

[cjb25hs]

I contacted scca as well in regards to the rules and they informed me that for IT we follow the showroom stock rules not Gt and Production. So if you are looking at a new cage you are safe with a Kirk or Autopower bolt in as long as it has the double door bars both sides.

[ddewhurst]

***My response? The fish have been silenced...........***

Jake, you trying to slip out the back door? :018:

Come on, play nice & me asking for a response from you was that I requested a sensible response to my question to you about the head rest rule. Some things are HOT, but as cool as your handle the response. While you don't respond I'll need to presume that you'll lose points for potentially talking against the house. :) :D :biggrinsanta:

[rsportvolvo]

Any thoughts on the required tubing sizes in Section 9.4.F.2? The 2007 GCR stated the Improved Touring cars were to use the ITCS listed weight minus 180 lbm for required tubing size. Is this still valid? Or is the omission of this statement my answer?

I'm builidng an ITB Volvo 240 and the ITCS listed curb weight is 2780 lbm. Minus the 180 lbm for driver puts the car curb weight at 2600 lbm. I'm getting ready to begin roll cage construction and I want to make sure I understand the new rules. Using the incorrect main tubing size would be a rather large mistake.

As for the rear roll cage down tube bends not being straight... That is typical in V8 Supercar and is currently the case in the SPEED World-Challenge TC Tindol Mazda 6's. If the design is a 2nd main hoop (first seen on the 1991 BMW E30 M3 Touring cars) and includes the bracing traditional of this design, then the strength is more than adequate and preferable to the straight down tubes of traditional SCCA roll cages. This setup is definately the way to go on flexy flyer chassis' like the BMW E30 & E36 (I own M3's of both). Albeit at an increase in weight even using smaller tubing for the optional reinforcements. For those unfamiliar with this setup please see the following links:

BMW E36 Super Touring car
http://e30m3performance.com/tech_articles/...36_mclaren1.htm (http://e30m3performance.com/tech_articles/cage_symposium/e36_mclaren/e36_mclaren1.htm)

Team Kiwi Racing wrecked Holden Commodore
http://www.tkrfan.com/tkrbathurstcar/index.html

Personally the roll cage regulations should be pretty much standard across the board for production based cars. I particularly don't care for the firewall rule as tubing ahead of the firewall will better protect the driver's feet. Some argue that the cage stiffens the uni-body more as a performance advantage, but what new production car doesn't have a stiffer uni-body to better protect the occupants? Case and point: The E90 BMW 3-series shell is stiffer than the E30 M3 Motorsport caged shell. Safer too.

[Speed Raycer]

If you've got anything bigger than a miata, just go with 1.75x.095. We're only talking about 30 lbs differnce in 100 feet over 1.5x.095.

LOL, I like the whole upgrade by 1/4" and you can run .080 wall... apparently SCCA rulemakers haven't tried to find .... and pay for.... .080 tubing

[Marcus Miller]

I'd rather go up on wall thickness than lose the 1/4 inch space; I'm a big guy driving a small car. :)
:birra:

[Z3_GoCar]

I'd rather go up on wall thickness than lose the 1/4 inch space; I'm a big guy driving a small car. :)
:birra:
[/b]

And they took away our option for 1.5x0.120 for <2600lb production car cage&#39;s althought it&#39;s still allowed for formula/sports racers. My car&#39;s not much larger than a Miata and if I didn&#39;t already have a log book it&#39;s cage would be illegal. I guess they assume that all the <2600lb cars have room in them like a f-body/Mustang.

James

Edit: looked at it again and realized they shifted the weights up 200 lbs which explains the removal of the 180 lb from the spec weight, still I agree with Marcus as I&#39;m not exactly petite myself.

[mtownneon]

Here&#39;s the cage rule I&#39;m trying to wrap my head around:


In American Sedan, Improved Touring, Showroom
Stock, Spec Miata, and Touring the door window glass, window operating mechanism, inner door trim panel, armrest, map pockets, and inside door latch/lock operating mechanism may be removed and the inner door structural panel may be modified, but not removed only if the door bars extend into the door cavity.[/b]

So am I or aren&#39;t I allowed to remove the inner structure of the door panels to make room for NASCAR style door bars?

Dave

[dickita15]

Yes Dave, if your door bars intrude into the front doors you can modify the door panels as much as you want as long as you do not completely remove them. Make sure you do not remove the factory anti intrusion bar that is attached to the outside skin of the door.

[ddewhurst]

Dave, adding to what Dick stated a NASCAR bar may within the SCCA be one (1) tube bent & traveling deeper into the door than the metal door panel. Please always use the SCCA GCR Glossary.

[DBurke]

Isn&#39;t/wasn&#39;t there wording in the GCR to the effect of required tubes that terminate at a mounting plate must be welded a complete 360 degrees. I can&#39;t seem to locate it, I&#39;ve been reading the General Sporting regs and I&#39;ve got nothing.

[ddewhurst]

Please see GCR-98, Rule 9.4.G.4. Basically "all joints of the roll cage be welded". A tubular roll cage joint is the total distance around at the joint which is 360*.

[mtownneon]

Yes Dave, if your door bars intrude into the front doors you can modify the door panels as much as you want as long as you do not completely remove them. Make sure you do not remove the factory anti intrusion bar that is attached to the outside skin of the door.
[/b]

Thanks for the advice. The question was more of retorical one as the way it is worded it contradicts itself. That&#39;s what I love about the GCR, it&#39;s as clear as mud, or a southern short track&#39;s rule book.

Dave

[cjb25hs]

Please see GCR-98, Rule 9.4.G.4. Basically "all joints of the roll cage be welded". A tubular roll cage joint is the total distance around at the joint which is 360*.
[/b]

You are correct if you are using a weld in cage, but bolt in cages are still legal for IT, Touring and Showroom Stock. That rules actually reads "It is recommended that all joints of the roll cage be welded."