Cage Legality

My bad guys, I know I read that definition of NASCAR bars somewhere, I just thought it was in the GCR.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
the cage in the original picture is a design well known in the northeast. The dash bars dont attach to the floor or fire wall Thy go to the factory cross dash brace that the dash board bolts to... Illeagal Period. The "Gussets" are kinda cool though.
Dan"The Illegal Miata"Sheppard
 
Just to revisit the topic... I sent a letter to JT requesting a clarification. Awaiting a reply.

In my "research", the Touring rules specify that a gusset can be made from a tube (GCR 18.3.2).. not so in the IT rules.

------------------
Scott Rhea
It's not what you build...
it's how you build it

Izzy's Custom Cages
 
Originally posted by Speed Raycer:

the other part of me says "it's a tube and all tubes shall meet the min. spec"
Click to expand...

Doesn't it say ...All "required" tubes shall be of minimum size? (or something to that effect..)
 
I've looked hard at the question, wanting to be sensible and use .065 wall tubing for option triangulation elements that are in tension/compression, like we did with the rally cars. The rules prohibit it in IT. They are in there.

All the ranting about washer bottles. THIS is a stupid rule.

K
 
My old IT Golf III ( back in the ITA days ) had gussets made of 3/4 tubing and passed tech in the SE region, I did write the comp board and the reply was gussets are legal, period.
 
Ok... here's my letter and the response from JT...

I'm sure there will be plenty of arguments about how I worded my letter, or an agenda or whatever...

Letter and image I attached:


-----Original Message-----
From: scott(AT)izzyscustomcages.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 11:12 AM
To: Jeremy Thoennes
Subject: Roll Cage "Gusset"

To: Jeremy Thoennes, Club Racing Technical Manager
From: Scott Rhea, Izzy's Custom Cages

Jeremy,

I'm writing for clarification on the IT roll cage rules specifically
regarding Gussets. I'm not writing for information to form a protest,
mearly for my own info so that I can provide the best cages for my
customers.

ITCS 10.A.5 states: Any number of additional reinforcing bars are
permitted within the structure of the cage provided they meet the
minimum
tubing size per GCR Sections 18.1.6.C

18.1.6.C states the minimum tubing sizes required as well as:
"If any of the above bend requirements cannot be met, all components of
the roll cage shall be fabricated from the tubing size(s) listed for the
next heavier category of automobiles."

In the attached image you will see a cage built from 1.5"x.120 wall DOM
in
a Miata. The Miata upsized it's tubing so that the additional bends in
the
downbars as well as the main hoop, could be utilized. I'm questioning
the
legality of the "gusset" pictured( Gusset is defined in the GCR as "A
brace generally formed by attaching, by welding, a PLATE at or near the
junction of two structural beams or tubes...").

#1, The "gusset" pictured is not a "plate" as defined by the GCR and #2,
if tubes are allowed as gussetts, as they are in the Touring Category
which specifically allows them (18.3.2), shouldn't the tube gussett meet
the minimum tubing size required?

Since entering into the roll cage business, I've seen many IT and SM
cages
that utilize the smaller and possibly thinner walled tubing as gussets.
Obviously it is a very strong and safe design and I would like to offer
this feature to my customers, but have not been able to find where it is
within the letter of the rules.

Any clarification you can provide would be much appreciated.

Thank You,
Scott Rhea
#300657

--
Scott Rhea
Izzy's Custom Cages
www.izzyscustomcages.com
314-302-3395

marg-11.jpg


RESPONSE-----------------

Scott,
I think the key word in the definition is generally; a gusset is
generally a plate. In my opinion, the small tube connecting the front
down tube with the main hoop in the picture you provided would fall
under heading of a gusset.

-Jeremy


------------------
Scott Rhea
It's not what you build...
it's how you build it

Izzy's Custom Cages
 
***In my opinion, the small tube connecting the front
down tube with the main hoop in the picture you provided would fall
under heading of a gusset.***

Please note that the response by Jeremy "states In my opinion". I am not whacking at anyone but I would like to state that Jeremy's opinion is just that his opinion....... His opinion is not a hard & fast written rule as per the written rule in the GCR/ITCS.

Have Fun
wink.gif

David
 
David took the words right out of my keyboard. I think that we write letters to Topeka hoping to make a case against future issues but, if push ever comes to shove, it ain't gonna make any difference...

K
 
The point - unfortunately - is that there just isn't any allowance for this approach in the club racing rules enforcement process.

The best option is to protest, have it upheld, and then have the loser appeal it. Even at that, there is no formal "case law" that carries any weight based on the findings of the CoA.

K

EDIT - it is possible to pay to take something directly to the CoA but I've actually never heard of someone doing it and, like most members I suspect, I don't know the process.

[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited February 09, 2005).]
 
I get to use my ol' fogey voice when I mention the SSC Fiat X19 situation at Road Atlanta 25ish years ago.

One entrant put reflective mylar on the roof section they were supposed to remove, and wrote "mirror" on it. Mirrors were free.

That didn't fly, either.

K
 
Scott, GCR 13.9 Rules Interpretation with $250 to Topeka also is not the same as a written GCR/ITCS rule. I have asked JT/or his side kick about this process. Kirk has the process nailed. You might want to check with JT for the correct process outside the suggestion by Joe.

Have Fun
wink.gif

David
 
Not to inflame anybody but in MY opinion if someone protest your little 3/4 tube gussets they should be thrown out of the club under the "weenie protester rule"... Lets work this hard to get a "weenie protester rule" in the GCR for 06!!



[This message has been edited by Fastfred92 (edited February 11, 2005).]
 
<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">I personally believe that the non-required tubes can be made of anything.</font>
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that's not the case.

Let me start by saying there needs to be a wholesale re-write of the rollcage regs, especially in regards to Improved Touring. This whole thing goes right back to the arguments I made about wheel diameters, in that it's a mobile home that got parked and has had siding and additions placed on it for the last 20 years. Yet another example of using far too many words for a very simple regulation. This one needs to be torn down and rebuilt from scratch.

Anyway, while the rollcage rules for many (most?) of the other categories (such as Spec Miata) allow alternate tubes of smaller-than-minimum size, the bottom line is that the ITCS has in it, in section 17.1.4.D.10.5 (page ITCS 19 in the 2005 regs) a sentence that reads:

"Any number of additional reinforcing bars are permitted within the structure of the cage, provided they meet the minimum tubing size per GCR Sections 18.1.6.C."

Section 18.1.6.C (page GCR 144) governs the minimum tubing sizes, based on weight, for SS, IT, and Touring. Thus, by that very innocuous sentence in the ITCS, it is most assuredly illegal to add any tubes into your cage unless it meet the minimum tubing size.

Stupid? Absolutely. Everyone else besides those IT can do it. Note that even SS and Touring can use smaller tubes for non-required elements! But IT? BRACK, not allowed! See 18.3.3.A and 18.2.4.A for comparison. Thus, I can build a cage with the absolute bare minimum tubes and it would be completely legal, but if I added gussets or braces out of 1-1/4" tubing, nomatter how well-designed or -intentioned, I would have an illegal cage.

Intentional rule? Lord knows.

Guess it's time to write another letter. I'm getting used to rejection...
 
Originally posted by GregAmy:
the bottom line is that the ITCS has in it, in section 17.1.4.D.10.5 (page ITCS 19 in the 2005 regs) a sentence that reads:

"Any number of additional reinforcing bars are permitted within the structure of the cage, provided they meet the minimum tubing size per GCR Sections 18.1.6.C."

...
Click to expand...

I stand corrected, but it pretty much makes sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top