DoubleXL240Z
New member
Photos of x bars that got a log book last week too big, wont load?!?!
I would guess that if the rule required three tubes that people would claim there "x" was three tubes instead of two tubes as many now claim.
There are many National Production race cars that have the same good ol "x" in the passenger side for side protection & the "x" without a horizontal bar above the "x" is NOT LEGAL. I pointed the fact out to a shop where there are five National cars & three of the owners shruged it of as they don't care. I suggested they would be pi$$ed like little kids if someone protested them after a Runoffs podium finish. Then they started the little game of calling it a pi$$ant protests.
Have Fun
David
There are many National Production race cars that have the same good ol "x" in the passenger side for side protection & the "x" without a horizontal bar above the "x" is NOT LEGAL. I pointed the fact out to a shop where there are five National cars & three of the owners shruged it of as they don't care. I suggested they would be pi$$ed like little kids if someone protested them after a Runoffs podium finish. Then they started the little game of calling it a pi$$ant protests.
Have Fun
David
DoubleXL240Z
New member
Check out the FIA/ALMS/SCCA yadda yadda yadda appoved cages in the Porsche GT3 cup car...
Standard 3 dimensional(my definition) x bar across both doors. These are run everywhere... yet not
legal in IT??
Standard 3 dimensional(my definition) x bar across both doors. These are run everywhere... yet not
legal in IT??
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Chris, get yourself a little ap called IRfanview. It's a fast little photo viewer/modifier that can resize your pics and do some other typical stuff, and it's free. It's stable, takes little space, and it's easy to use. Perfect for resizing pics for the net. Save Photochop for the times when you want to get intense.
www.irfanview.com
On the X vs horixontal thing, (yea , yea, yea, .... you're going to say I'm being unreasonable, but...), but can anyone show me what is considered/defined "horizontal" in the GCR???
Really, if they are demanding horizontal, then it needs to be defined. I guaran-dam-tee that if 4 people respond, there will be four different opinions. Same for log book issuers.
As it stands, it would be reasonable to say that since they refer to horizontal, and the sister to that term is vertical, that it would be anything less than halfway to vertical. There is no other mention of anything in between in the GCR, so I would say that anything less than 45 degree would be in the acceptable range.
Now, before you tell me I'm full of goose turds, tell me what the accepted angle IS, and how it is measured, and referenced to WHAT. And please cite the GCR passage or passages that led you to that conclusion.
If you can't do that, then you can't possibly tell me I'm wrong.
www.irfanview.com
On the X vs horixontal thing, (yea , yea, yea, .... you're going to say I'm being unreasonable, but...), but can anyone show me what is considered/defined "horizontal" in the GCR???
Really, if they are demanding horizontal, then it needs to be defined. I guaran-dam-tee that if 4 people respond, there will be four different opinions. Same for log book issuers.
As it stands, it would be reasonable to say that since they refer to horizontal, and the sister to that term is vertical, that it would be anything less than halfway to vertical. There is no other mention of anything in between in the GCR, so I would say that anything less than 45 degree would be in the acceptable range.
Now, before you tell me I'm full of goose turds, tell me what the accepted angle IS, and how it is measured, and referenced to WHAT. And please cite the GCR passage or passages that led you to that conclusion.
If you can't do that, then you can't possibly tell me I'm wrong.
***There are many National Production race cars that have the same good ol "x" in the passenger side for side protection & the "x" without a horizontal bar above the "x" is NOT LEGAL.***
Greg, you start riding the same horse as Jake ? You know what they say about measure twice, cut once. The same applies to reading before you go on a rant. PLEASE re-read what I posted. (Here is some HELP for you, I said Production race cars.) Nothing to argue about PLEASE read the Production race car roll cage rules.
For the record IMHJ as I have stated in the past & I will state again the friken closed Production car roll cage rules & the closed IT roll cage rules should be the same. I beleive the three tube "x" is not legal because it's not two tubes.
Posted by an ALL important ITAC member Jake.
***but can anyone show me what is considered/defined "horizontal" in the GCR???***
Jake, do you understand what the word horizontal means within the rules for a Showroom Stock roll cage which is the same roll cage rules we use for our IT cars ? Mr. ITAC member who is FULL OF GOOSE TURDS
please us the same definition & tolerances as you would installing your IT roll cage main hoop horizontal.
Have Fun
David
Greg, you start riding the same horse as Jake ? You know what they say about measure twice, cut once. The same applies to reading before you go on a rant. PLEASE re-read what I posted.
(Here is some HELP for you, I said Production race cars.) Nothing to argue about PLEASE read the Production race car roll cage rules.For the record IMHJ as I have stated in the past & I will state again the friken closed Production car roll cage rules & the closed IT roll cage rules should be the same. I beleive the three tube "x" is not legal because it's not two tubes.
Posted by an ALL important ITAC member Jake.
***but can anyone show me what is considered/defined "horizontal" in the GCR???***
Jake, do you understand what the word horizontal means within the rules for a Showroom Stock roll cage which is the same roll cage rules we use for our IT cars ? Mr. ITAC member who is FULL OF GOOSE TURDS
please us the same definition & tolerances as you would installing your IT roll cage main hoop horizontal.Have Fun
David
lateapex911
Super Moderator
LOL!!
I KNEW I should have started a pool as to who the first responder would be...I'd have won.
Seriously David, skip the "All important" sarcastic stuff, can you answer the the question, and tell me how you will judge what is, and what it not horizontal in these cases? And, while you're at it, tell me how John Techhead in California will make that judgement, and how Bob Techknowman in Boston will make the same judgement.
For those who are missing the point, it aint clear, it aint defined, and if it aint neither of those, it aint going to be easily defined as legal or illegal.
Now, as you point out, the Prod side protection rules require two "horizontal" bars, OR one horizontal bar, and a diagonal bar bisecting the opening under the horizontal bar.
So, we can actually have some pretty interesting configurations in Prod, even with that wording.
Now, I know is a stretch, but using blue sky thinking, there could be a case made for the X bar to be legal under the two horizontal bar scenario. As there is no definition or tolerance for what is or is not horizontal, and because they don't require contiguous/continuous tubing, it could be argued that those are two horizontal bars. yea, it's a stretch, but with no tolerances listed, I can see it being made.
IT rules are of course, less defining, so the same arguement could be made.
(And yes, I agree that I find the whole cage ruleset to be a bit of clusterf*ck, and that there are probably better designs that are being mandated out due to it)
I KNEW I should have started a pool as to who the first responder would be...I'd have won.
Seriously David, skip the "All important" sarcastic stuff, can you answer the the question, and tell me how you will judge what is, and what it not horizontal in these cases? And, while you're at it, tell me how John Techhead in California will make that judgement, and how Bob Techknowman in Boston will make the same judgement.
For those who are missing the point, it aint clear, it aint defined, and if it aint neither of those, it aint going to be easily defined as legal or illegal.
Now, as you point out, the Prod side protection rules require two "horizontal" bars, OR one horizontal bar, and a diagonal bar bisecting the opening under the horizontal bar.
So, we can actually have some pretty interesting configurations in Prod, even with that wording.
Now, I know is a stretch, but using blue sky thinking, there could be a case made for the X bar to be legal under the two horizontal bar scenario. As there is no definition or tolerance for what is or is not horizontal, and because they don't require contiguous/continuous tubing, it could be argued that those are two horizontal bars. yea, it's a stretch, but with no tolerances listed, I can see it being made.
IT rules are of course, less defining, so the same arguement could be made.
(And yes, I agree that I find the whole cage ruleset to be a bit of clusterf*ck, and that there are probably better designs that are being mandated out due to it)
Jake, please use the same definition of horizontal & the same tolerance you would use when you install your IT main hoop horizontal. If you think that others will have an issue with the word horizontal please write a letter requesting a rule change.
Try using my first name when your addressing me even when your being sarcastic & I'll skip the sarcastic stuff towards you.
Have Fun
David
Try using my first name when your addressing me even when your being sarcastic & I'll skip the sarcastic stuff towards you.
Have Fun
David
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Jake, please use the same definition of horizontal & the same tolerance you would use when you install your IT main hoop horizontal. If you think that others will have an issue with the word horizontal please write a letter requesting a rule change.
Try using my first name when your addressing me even when your being sarcastic & I'll skip the sarcastic stuff towards you.
Have Fun
David
[/b]
But David, the SS rule merely says "horizontal"....there is no definition, no tolerance, no nothing further to limit the builder. In the main hoop horizontal, it's most peoples choice to have the bar be roughly parallel to the floor and/or roof, or perpendicular to the driver, who is generally plumb when viewed longitudinaly.
Yet, time after time I see door bars at all angles in cars that have logbooks....clearly tech is not applying the same standards in those cars, as the relative angle to the earth is significantly different. I've seen two horizontal door bars that look like this: l>l . The ">" is the top and bottom horizontal. Odd, I know. My point is that the rule you have thought of as clear in your mind, is probably the same rule that someone else thinks is clear in their mind, but their version is different. That's fine, if the club is cool with the variants, but we can't go saying "X" is clearly illegal when the tech guys say it is legal without having better definitions.
Jake, have you ever viewed an IT or SS car that had a REQUIRED horizontal tube in the main hoop that was not horizontal to a normal persons vision ? A pinch of common sense used with the rules works pretty well. 
Side note:
During reading with reference to the horizontal tube in the main hoop I noticed that the Production rules no longer recomend the horizontal tube in the main hoop.
Tech folks:
A quick comment about tech folks & in this case an SCCA full time salaried tech person. FACT, when he inspected two same model cars at th 2006 Runoffs one cars suspension pick up point was not to the OEM dimension by 1 1/2 inch & the driver was told he was illegal & would loose his Q times for that Q session. The other driver who was not to OEM dimension by 1/2 inch was told he was legal. Missing pinch of common sense.
Have Fun
David
Side note:
During reading with reference to the horizontal tube in the main hoop I noticed that the Production rules no longer recomend the horizontal tube in the main hoop.
Tech folks:
A quick comment about tech folks & in this case an SCCA full time salaried tech person. FACT, when he inspected two same model cars at th 2006 Runoffs one cars suspension pick up point was not to the OEM dimension by 1 1/2 inch & the driver was told he was illegal & would loose his Q times for that Q session. The other driver who was not to OEM dimension by 1/2 inch was told he was legal. Missing pinch of common sense.
Have Fun
David
shwah
New member
OK, this is silly. Horizontal means horizontal, not angled some % between horizontal and vertical. Horizontal is 0 degrees different than level.
I don't have a problem with Xs within the rule because the tubes are not required to be continuous. I have 2 horizontal bars on the driver side tied together with vertical bars out in the door, and 2 horizontal bars on the passenger side with a single diagonal, so I don't really have a dog in this fight.
I don't have a problem with Xs within the rule because the tubes are not required to be continuous. I have 2 horizontal bars on the driver side tied together with vertical bars out in the door, and 2 horizontal bars on the passenger side with a single diagonal, so I don't really have a dog in this fight.
Relative to what; the ground? The rocker panel? Perpendicular to the direction of gravity?
Any tolerances on that? What happens when you change the rake of the car; do you have to move the horizontal door bar? If you say "that's stupid" then you imply there's tolerances to that zero degrees (90 degrees to gravity); what are those tolerances, plus and minus? Do those tolerances apply to static ride height only? Should tech inspectors carry around bubble levels and make sure the "horizontal" door bars are within this specific tolerance?
Shall I go on?
See what happens when you try to parse the rules to their idiotic conclusions?
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Actaully Chris, you do have a dog in this.......if we use your standard of measurement. It might be silly, but your resaponse illustrates the problem EXACTLY.
0 degrees? I will bet you my car against yours that you will be deemed illegal if you want 0 degrees to be the standard, and that's an easy bet for me to win, as statistically 99% of the cars I measure with my digital level will fail. Is that the intent??
I don't think so.
shwah
New member
I said it was silly, not stupid. There is a HUGE difference between a measuring tolerance and being closer to horizontal than vertical, and calling that horizontal. I don't care enough about this argument about nothing (IMO) to get sucked into it.
Go get em guys
. A clarification will probably make some folks feel better.***3 bar X in my door did not help with that.***
Carver, if it didn't help make the chassis more ridged which is HELP it must be that you wanted more weight in your car.
Continue the Fun
David
ps: As I'm enjoying the posts & responses I'm thinking to myself I already sent in a letter request after the new 2007 door bar/side protection rule came out. Topeka response, the usual bla, bla, bla..........
Continue on please
Carver, if it didn't help make the chassis more ridged which is HELP it must be that you wanted more weight in your car.
Continue the Fun
David
ps: As I'm enjoying the posts & responses I'm thinking to myself I already sent in a letter request after the new 2007 door bar/side protection rule came out. Topeka response, the usual bla, bla, bla..........
Continue on please
DoubleXL240Z
New member
[attachmentid=662Would you consider this legal???
I'd say no; theres a big enough gap to drive a mini through there...
Why not just say horizontal within 10 degrees of ground plane?
One of the things I don't like about the SCCA, is that everything seems to be a clean slate idea for every class/rule... x bars have been used for at least 40 years in racing.. why is something good enough for pro series not good enough for IT?
I don't really care how the rules shake out, but I'm sick and tired of having to rebuild my cage every couple years. (at least 3 times since I've been racing this one car)
Overall, insurance and safety parnoia back up by little evidence from SCCA activity seems to be driving a lot of unnecessary change.