fot
[Top] [All Lists]

cage update

To: fot@Autox.Team.Net
Subject: cage update
From: greg <gtlund@cyberspeedway.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 19:35:12 -0700
Joe and everybody concerned,
       I got some history on this mess and how it started. It seems that 
some competitors were worried about the competitive advantage that was 
perceived  for cars with minimalist cages. The theory is valid that 
there will be less drag on a cage with less tubing exposed. In practice 
I doubt any club racer enjoys a practical advantage by having three feet 
less tubing exposed, especially considering the "dirty aero" nature of 
our cars. We have a great big hole in the middle of the car that is hard 
to get "slippery". Also, before the rules change, anyone was free to 
build a minimalist cage if they felt it was such an advantage. It is 
kind of sour grapes to complain because someone else came up with a 
better mousetrap. Production car racing is all about coming up with a 
better mousetrap that sits right on the edge of the rules.
        I'll get off my soapbox now.

       The wording of the text has not changed. It has said "shall" for 
quite a few years now. What did change was the heading over the picture. 
Joe you are right. It now says "minimum requirements" instead of 
"recommended".
       Also, the old wording did not allow for alternate design or 
removable bracing. The new wording reinstates that.
       The diagonal brace wording is "All main hoops shall incorporate a 
diagonal brace (same diameter and wall thickness as main hoop) to 
prevent lateral distortion of the main hoop. This allows the diagonal to 
not be in the same plane as the main hoop which is the same requirement 
as a GT cage. As I read it the diagonal can go from passenger upper side 
to driver lower side and the lower attachment can be behind the  main 
hoop attachment. Many drivers have to sit under the main hoop.
       Full cockpit width can be determined from the the SCCA definition 
of cockpit which is "The driver/passenger volume within a car in which 
driver control devices, gauges, and seating are provided". Sooo, I would 
mount the seat as close to the tunnel as possible. Then you have to have 
room for the driver so the left side of the cage/cockpit is then 
defined. To be full width you would just need the same distance on the 
right side. It doesn't mean you have to have the cage right up next to 
the interior panels. That would be impossible to define,construct 
accurately or scrutineer.
      If anybody does need to change the main hoop there is a provision 
for splicing the hoop under GCR 18.6 Appendages. Basically you can slip 
a smaller diameter tube iside the main hoop and weld with rosettes. I 
have seen these tested and they work just fine.

Greg Lund

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • cage update, greg <=