Roll Cage inspection

so does that mean i cant run any RA events since my cage is circa 1988?

---

First Rally: 2010 First RallyX: 2004 (a bunch)
Driver (0), Co-Driver (7)
Organizer (3), Volunteer (3)
Cars Built (2.5), Engines Blown (2) Cages Built (0) # of rotations (3.5)
Last Updated, Apr 9, 2023

Quote
czwalga
It used to be that RA/CARS would accept NASA logbooks, but i'm not sure anymore with the new additions in the nasa rulebook to include the halo hoop etc.

In the way that you're thinking, RA has never "accepted" NASA logbooks. The RA position is that the log book is just a record of the vehicle's history. Generally neither RA or NRS issues a log book until there is a compliant cage in the vehicle. However, having a log book does not mean that the vehicle is legal to compete today. On that issue, it just means that it once had a then-legal cage. (NRS has the same general philosophy: the log book is a record of the vehicle.)

On the issue of construction rules reciprocity (which is what most people are talking about when they use the words "accept log books" ) , NRS rules explicitly state that vehicles prepared to RA rules will be allowed to compete. RA takes the other stance, making no allowance for NRS legal vehicles.

Plenty of good advice already in this thread. I should add a "How to get a cage built" page to NRS.com, as it's an item that's not directly addressed.

Cheers,
Anders

---

Grassroots rally. It's what I think about.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/13/2012 10:16AM by Anders Green.

Very well stated Anders. SCCA also takes the same position with the logbook as a history of the car.

Alex,
Old cages or even NRS cages that were built or started before 2007 can be logged providing they were current at that time. SCCA had a major cage update in or around 2004 I think. ALL cars must meet that spec and may be accepted as an "Appendix 1" roll cage. If they are deemd not fit for competitin they may be turned away. Incomplete welds, rust issue etc.

NRS is actually toughter on old cages requiring some elements be added for competition that RA doesn't, but only for NRS logged cars. NRS does accept RA logbooks without question, as does CARS. A much friendlier policy.

ah okay, i was just concerned, i know matt ran it in the last couple years, but i wanna to be sure i wasnt going to tow XXXX miles then be turned away.

---

First Rally: 2010 First RallyX: 2004 (a bunch)
Driver (0), Co-Driver (7)
Organizer (3), Volunteer (3)
Cars Built (2.5), Engines Blown (2) Cages Built (0) # of rotations (3.5)
Last Updated, Apr 9, 2023

Quote
phlat65
I am not 100% but I think the X can be in the main hoop or the rear stays for FIA, so it would still be legal build. Nice car BTW. I liked it when Phil rallied it also.

I have the same door bar configuration, X with a sill bar.

According to the FIAs wording an X in the diagonals would be legal for cars first Homologated like 2002 or so, but for inexplicable reasons ALL the wording has been adopted except the part about applicability from this date or that date...
X in the plane of the main hoop SEEMS like it is a great idea...that is until one reflect where forces enter the cage and the pathways force takes getting "resolved".....then it seems a bit short sided as the very confining X only resists forces coming in the same direction the X is pointing....where X in the 2 diagonals feeds loads in the direction most force is likely to be coming from---at lease when driving a car forward.

Access to the rear portion of the passenger compartment is of course totally ruined with X in main hoop.

---

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.

If access to the rear of the car were of major concern then build a 4 door. Safety concerns have more to do with actual impact than your mis-applied theories. You've stated many times on here (when bitching about HANS) that rally cars never wreck head on. So why worry about load forces from head on? Why not worry about side impact where the passenger area is the smallest? The main hoop X has been designed, studied and certified by todays engineers with what ever means they have, not JVL on a napkin.

Now this is serious shit and people need to not put forth theories and opinions that do nothing more than get a cage rejected by a scrutineer, as in this exact case.

Current rules trump any theory or personal preference and while discussion is good, it must be clear that it doesn't count for much in the logbook world when outside of the declared standards.

Quote
heymagic
If access to the rear of the car were of major concern then build a 4 door. Safety concerns have more to do with actual impact than your mis-applied theories. You've stated many times on here (when bitching about HANS) that rally cars never wreck head on. So why worry about load forces from head on? Why not worry about side impact where the passenger area is the smallest? The main hoop X has been designed, studied and certified by todays engineers with what ever means they have, not JVL on a napkin.

Now this is serious shit and people need to not put forth theories and opinions that do nothing more than get a cage rejected by a scrutineer, as in this exact case.

Current rules trump any theory or personal preference and while discussion is good, it must be clear that it doesn't count for much in the logbook world when outside of the declared standards.

Gene, keep your shirt on..
Again, I have almost with certainly been injured burned seriously, broken more shit by huge factors than anybody here and all in motorsport. I don't take safety lightly...
But I also have run these ideas past a man who had a day job as "Senior Stress Analyst Engineer" whose keyboard was connected to a huge Cray Super-computer.

And AGAIN I suggest that you look at the WORDS IN THE FUCKING THING.
"Those FIA guys' you are waving around THEY said "this is FINE<----------see?--) for cars FIRST HOMOLOGATED on xx/xx/xxxx

I am NOT TALKING CAGE DESIGN, Gene, I am talking about the logical inconsistency of exactly what you are doing---picking and choosing little elements---and totally ignoring other parts....

Not cage design. The selectivity of how people read and think.


And Gene, "VECTORS is", top quote my Senior Stress Analyst Engineer
"first week Engineering 101"
You just need eyes and an open mind to imagine forces and flow the path they take--and how they are resolved (or in laymam's terms--dispersed)
Even as thick headeed as I am, I did work seriously--often togther with real live engineers, on tube based structures for a serious long decade, and even I can understand simple force vectors and resolution in 10 years.

---

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.

I didn't see this mentioned anywhere and might get missed in the next iteration of the OP's cage, but the "V" in the roof doesn't meet up with the short tubes that go from the windshield bar to the half-lateral. Seeing this picture of it done right reminded me:



Probably not a huge deal or illegal but sub-optimal.

Quote
john vanlandingham
it seems a bit short sided as the very confining X only resists forces coming in the same direction the X is pointing....where X in the 2 diagonals feeds loads in the direction most force is likely to be coming from---at lease when driving a car forward.

Help me out, here...in what direction does an X "point"? And isn't triangulation used everywhere as a strengthening shape? Seems like an X in a squarish main hoop would be amazingly strong in preventing the hoop from colapsing in any direction in the plane of the hoop.

Tim.

Quote
TronDD
Help me out, here...in what direction does an X "point"? And isn't triangulation used everywhere as a strengthening shape? Seems like an X in a squarish main hoop would be amazingly strong in preventing the hoop from colapsing in any direction in the plane of the hoop.

Yep, that's my understanding, but I think the point brought up was that often times a car is moving forward when it crashes, so having well thought out ways to pass those stresses rearwards is also good.

I guess I don't see why these first timer one-off cage builders are trying to reinvent the rally cage. Can't they generally copy the design seen in the more recent FIA approved cages and be done with it? Though consider adding a sill bar and the required gussets since the one-off cages won't come with FIA certs. Also, usually these cages have an option for a harness bar that's closer, but for some reason are not usually pictured in these renderings.

Here's one from a VW Lupo...probably closer in size to a rabbit than the newer golfs?



Dave

Quote
DaveK
I think the point brought up was that often times a car is moving forward when it crashes, so having well thought out ways to pass those stresses rearwards is also good.

Ah, I see. The X in the hoop doesn't do anything for you in that case. Gotcha.

Tim.

Absoulutely doesn't matter one iota in this case John, what you think or interpret is totally insignificant. No one cares if you like the rule or not, it ain't about you my friend. This is all about getting a car log booed to meet the established rule set. That's my job and it isn't made easy my guessing, opinionating and drag race cage builders. Go tell the Canadians how to organize an event or something.

Thanks everyone for the help. I did give these guys books and pictures to follow fyi. But besides that I have a meeting this week with them to decide the future of the car. If it was up to me, tear our the cage and start again. Looking at it last night, it looked like it wouldn't be a to big pain in the ass to tear out, with all the weird fittings and no windshield. I'll keep you updated on what happens.

Here's a suggestion, if you/shop aren't sure about the placement of a cage element, mock it up in green masking tape, take a picture and post it for review. Easier to remove than metal. Obviously you can't use this trick with the main hoop or half-laterals, but once those are in almost everything else can be mocked up with masking tape.

I've seen other people do this and thought it was pretty clever.

Excellent thought Tony,

Rally cages aren't a big mystery and the basic formula is quite simple and must be followed. Originality is not welcomed so much on this. Copying FIA homologated designs like some of the Subes is not allowed if bar placement or tubing size or thickness conflicts with the basic FIA 253 rules for generic cages.

Alex,
I'll be happy to go over things with your builder if you want.

Gene
3605801377