Results 1 to 20 of 23

Thread: seat mounting rules

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    189

    Default

    I would argue the need. If the cage is fit tight to the unibody, you can plate the inner rocker panel and the tunnel. Run tubes between the rocker and tunnel, in front and behind the seat. Then build your seat mounts off of that. I have looked at lots of wrecked cars and have never seen any large movement in the drivers floor pan. Some small tears on a Shine customer car that hit NHMS oval wall and then got rearended. That was a massive hit and the seat did not move, even though there was a little tear in the floor underneath. Beran Peters also front end crashed his AS car at Mid O so hard it ripped the trans tunnel. I do not believe the seat moved on that one either. For safety sake I think we should be able to do anything we want including 360 welding to the unibody. It would also make cars live longer by stressing the unibody less. But I think the seat rule, if changed, will just open up a can off worms and add little true safety. Just my opinion.
    Chris

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zchris View Post
    I would argue the need. If the cage is fit tight to the unibody, you can plate the inner rocker panel and the tunnel. Run tubes between the rocker and tunnel, in front and behind the seat. Then build your seat mounts off of that. I have looked at lots of wrecked cars and have never seen any large movement in the drivers floor pan. Some small tears on a Shine customer car that hit NHMS oval wall and then got rearended. That was a massive hit and the seat did not move, even though there was a little tear in the floor underneath. Beran Peters also front end crashed his AS car at Mid O so hard it ripped the trans tunnel. I do not believe the seat moved on that one either. For safety sake I think we should be able to do anything we want including 360 welding to the unibody. It would also make cars live longer by stressing the unibody less. But I think the seat rule, if changed, will just open up a can off worms and add little true safety. Just my opinion.
    Chris
    I's second that... I also think the cage rules are foolish. We have an endlessly growing number of safety rules, yet we don't want to stiffen the chassis by allowing the cage to touch it. That's nuts.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Alachua, Florida
    Posts
    261

    Default

    We always mounted the seats to the cage. If you got hit on the drivers side and the cage did move the seat moved with it. We ran two bars off the door bars and one down from the bar behind the seat but not back to the tunnel. Three mounting points were enough.
    Steve Elicati
    ITA 1994 Mazda Miata
    Central Florida Region

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Decatur , GA, USA
    Posts
    183

    Default

    I have to agree with the naysayers. I think this is a solution to a non-existent problem. Mounting the seat off the rear hoop and side bars should be adequate. And even if you decided to attach the mount to the floor or tunnel, who would ever complain? I've never heard of such a protest, and anyone who would do so is revealing himself as a jackass. And I would hope that anyone reviewing such a protest would turn it down - it's a "strained or tortured interpretation" to call a seat mount a cage attaching point.

    BTW, I once bought a car that had just such seat mount. Had won a bunch of races and never was protested. (I subsequently changed the mount, but only because I had to mount a bigger seat.)
    Tom Lyttle
    Decatur, GA
    IT7 Mazda - 2006, 2008 SARRC Champion
    ITS Nissan 200SX - finally running correctly
    FP Ford Capri - waiting for a comp adjustment
    GT3 Dodge Daytona - what was I thinking?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    Maybe it's not about protests - these cars should never make it through their first annual tech.
    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Concord, NH 03301
    Posts
    700

    Default

    Good luck. Not that its a bad idea but after hearing the CRB/ITAC say they could not see how to incorporate jack points w/o fears of it being abused I would say you're wasting your time.

    Just my opinion - worth what you paid for it.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,499

    Default

    I am 100% in favor of this idea! For safety reasons (my perception no real data) I do think it would be safer and I am actually going to be changing my seat mount this year... As I have grown older I actually have started to think about safety... I have had bad thoughts about the way my car is currently set up. I am going to come up with some way some how to mount my seat and Belts exclusivly to the roll cage. The age and strength of my car is not nearly as strong as the cage and If my seat moves in compairison to the car I want my belts to move with it! Currently my rear belts are attached to the rear rollbar but my lap belt and sub belt are mounted to the floor along with the seat. Definatly not safe in my opinion. My fear the worst and envision a rollover and the rollcage "pops" through the floor. Then what... I literaly get squeezed into the seat or I flop around! So in conclusion this is a real thing that is on the top of my mind and I am 100% in favor of more strength and a more secure mounting for a drivers seat!

    Stephen

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Decatur , GA, USA
    Posts
    183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt View Post
    Maybe it's not about protests - these cars should never make it through their first annual tech.
    Sez who? Alright, I'll concede that a very literal reading of the cage rule could interpret the welding of a single 1" square tube to the floor as a ninth attachment point. But I would question the judgement of any tech inspector who would fail a car for such a seat mount. You are required to provide a secure mounting for your seat and a tube frame mounted to the cage and floor is about as secure as you can get.

    I understand slippery slopes, so if some one tried to slip in a real extra attachment point(s), a tech inspector should say no. But to paraphrase Freud - sometimes a seat mount is just a seat mount.
    Tom Lyttle
    Decatur, GA
    IT7 Mazda - 2006, 2008 SARRC Champion
    ITS Nissan 200SX - finally running correctly
    FP Ford Capri - waiting for a comp adjustment
    GT3 Dodge Daytona - what was I thinking?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TomL View Post
    Sez who? Alright, I'll concede that a very literal reading of the cage rule could interpret the welding of a single 1" square tube to the floor as a ninth attachment point. But I would question the judgement of any tech inspector who would fail a car for such a seat mount. You are required to provide a secure mounting for your seat and a tube frame mounted to the cage and floor is about as secure as you can get.

    I understand slippery slopes, so if some one tried to slip in a real extra attachment point(s), a tech inspector should say no. But to paraphrase Freud - sometimes a seat mount is just a seat mount.
    Which puts an unfair responsibility on a tech inspector to determine something he is not chartered or prepared to do. A 9th mount is a 9th mount is a 9th mount.
    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    564

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zchris View Post
    I I have looked at lots of wrecked cars and have never seen any large movement in the drivers floor pan.
    The floor pan can and will move in a wreck. Below is a Spec 7 that I share a shop who took a hard hit a month ago. It is alledged he was purposefully taken out by another driver, but that's another story and can be found on another forum. Fortunately it was the passenger side but notice how much the floor pan moved up? If that would have been the drivers side his head would have been forced into the roof. Any HNR would be of no help when your head is ejected upwards.

    I think the pictures below are a good argument for seat mounts that are integrated into the cage. I know I'll be doing a new seat mount on my car, but don't have to contend with IT rules anymore. FWIW, the cage in the car below held up fine.

    It's also a good time to make sure your belts are mounted correctly. His sub belt was not, it was too far forward and ruined his new Sparco seat. Read the manufacturers installation instructions. Sub belt mounting for Schroth is here on page 16 - http://www.hmsmotorsport.com/docs/Co...structions.pdf







    Mark B. - Dallas, TX
    #76 RX-7 2nd Gen
    SCCA EP
    Former ITS, ITE, NASA PT

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •