How to get a cage logbooked?

tipo158 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Doivi Clarkinen Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > phlat65 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > OK, so I took a deep breath, and all is
> good.
> >
> > > As far as changing over to a Taco style
> gusset,
> > > what is going to be the acceptable
> method? can I
> > > make some triangles and fill in the area
> using the
> > > tube gusset as the "wrap around", or do
> I need to
> > > overkill it and overlay a Taco?
> >
> > I should think welding in some triangles and
> both
> > sides to complete the taco, while not being
> the
> > normal way to do it and not looking as nice,
> would
> > accomplish the same thing as a taco. Your
> welding
> > looks good so it should look fine. But I
> suppose
> > Gene should way in on this for a more
> official
> > ruling.
>
> Strict reading of Article 253 would not allow
> triangles. It defines a gusset as taco style
> ("bent sheet metal with a U shape".
>

I was talking about plating over the tubes he had in there with triangular shaped pieces to fill in the holes on each side, effectively making it a "taco" gusset. I think you misunderstood. I would never in a million years advise a flat plate gusset. I've been trying to edumacate people on the superiority of wrap around or "taco" gussets for 20 years now.

DirkaDirkaJack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ok, a bit of a hijack:
>
> i have been thinking about updating some parts of
> the cage on my GTX. if i add stuff to the cage, do
> i need to do anything like get the car re-log
> booked? its not like there are pictures of the
> cage in the log book as it is.
>
> i am assuming as long as your cage meets the min.
> for RA/NASA (which it currently doesn't because
> Dave hates spider webs but no one seems to care)
> it doesn't matter if you add more stuff to it?
>
>


Jack, what more do you think that cage needs? It it is currently legal and has a logbook.

Doivi Clarkinen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> tipo158 Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > Strict reading of Article 253 would not allow
> > triangles. It defines a gusset as taco style
> > ("bent sheet metal with a U shape".
>
> I was talking about plating over the tubes he had
> in there with triangular shaped pieces to fill in
> the holes on each side, effectively making it a
> "taco" gusset.

My point is that it would not be formed by bent sheet metal with a U shape. If I correctly understand what you are suggesting, it would be a tube with parallel, triangular flanges.

The shapes are the same, but they are formed in different ways and the rule says something about how it is formed. That is why I said "strict reading".

alan

Yes, it is not technically a legal gusset and nonea youse mugs should get any ideas about doing it this way on new builds.

However, I concur with Gene that plating will be an OK fix for this particular case.

---

Self-righteous douche canoe

Wait, now im lost. I was just advised to make a plate gusset for the lower tube of my A pillar support bar....

---

Welcome to the cult of JVL drink the koolaid or be banned.

hoche Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, it is not technically a legal gusset and
> nonea youse mugs should get any ideas about doing
> it this way on new builds.
>
> However, I concur with Gene that plating will be
> an OK fix for this particular case.

As I understand it, the car has not had a logbook inspection yet. If I were doing the log book inspection, I could not sign off on it being compliant with Art. 253.

tipo158 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> hoche Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yes, it is not technically a legal gusset
> and
> > nonea youse mugs should get any ideas about
> doing
> > it this way on new builds.
> >
> > However, I concur with Gene that plating will
> be
> > an OK fix for this particular case.
>
> As I understand it, the car has not had a logbook
> inspection yet. If I were doing the log book
> inspection, I could not sign off on it being
> compliant with Art. 253.
>
>
>
>

I'll be doing the inspection most likely and it will be signed off. The whole point of this exercise is safety. Will the cage be safe ? Can we overlook some small things or procedures? When in doubt call myself or Hurst. Don't make people change something that seems alright or workable just because it doesn't pass the letter of the law. Easier to ask before making a lot of work just because. There are times to make a hard stand and times to make allowances.

Gene McCullough
RA Western tech supervisor

tipo158 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> hoche Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yes, it is not technically a legal gusset
> and
> > nonea youse mugs should get any ideas about
> doing
> > it this way on new builds.
> >
> > However, I concur with Gene that plating will
> be
> > an OK fix for this particular case.
>
> As I understand it, the car has not had a logbook
> inspection yet. If I were doing the log book
> inspection, I could not sign off on it being
> compliant with Art. 253.
>
>
>
>

And further more the vast majority of US cages are not 253 compliant. We do not require cages be compliant with 253 for NRS or RA 100%. We make allowances for DOM tubing.

heymagic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> tipo158 Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > hoche Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > > Yes, it is not technically a legal gusset and
> > > nonea youse mugs should get any ideas about doing
> > > it this way on new builds.
> > >
> > > However, I concur with Gene that plating will be
> > > an OK fix for this particular case.
> >
> > As I understand it, the car has not had a logbook
> > inspection yet. If I were doing the log book
> > inspection, I could not sign off on it being
> > compliant with Art. 253.
>
> And further more the vast majority of US cages are
> not 253 compliant. We do not require cages be
> compliant with 253 for NRS or RA 100%. We make
> allowances for DOM tubing.

Aside from the DOM material allowance, a car with a RA logbook issued in 2007 or later should have an Art. 253 cage.

Tube gussets are still OK in NRS rules.

I was saying to Dave Clark how funny this whole "Taco" style gusset thing has been.
In the 21 years since I first welded some into my widdle ol wally 96 and was looked at as a complete GOON and then under the un-brilliant (lack of) Leadership of some retired golf club manufacturer in the last days of SCCA which mandated the wall thickness be "same as tube wall thickness" to now in my book tnearly paper thin tacos being REQUIRED things have come beyond a full circle.

I look back and think: as usual I was 20 years AHEAD of virtually everybody in USA, and yet the majority, all those with almost no experience, said, YOU'RE NUTS!!"


Teeeeee heee hee......

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.