Door windows
- Thread starter danshonda
- Start date
jumbojimbo
New member
You are allowed to replace the interior panel with a metal skin. with a metal skin would the door close? If not, then I'd say you 'have' to gut the door. Even if you could hit the metal frame a couple of times with a BFH and close the door, hitting with a BFH is not allowed by any rule. Your only option is to gut the door.
On the other hand, if you gut the doors will it be possible for someone to determine if the bars would have intruded into the door and 'required' gutting?
Last edited:
GCR 9.4.D. Side Protection, in part (GCR 116 in Sept 2013 PDF):
I can assure you that if someone were to protest your car for removing door internal mechanisms, when your definition of 'extending into the door cavity' is that it touches the metal plate you used to replace the door card, that I would, as a National Scrutineer and Steward, find you non-compliant to the regs. But that's just my opinion.
But also keep in mind that in the end, you're having to fab up a rollcage, and you're already wanting to gut the doors to remove all that crap, and a rollcage with tubes extended away from the driver are far, far safer than one close to the driver, I simply cannot imagine why you would not do it correctly instead of trying to skirt the regs. And if you do try to skirt the regs and you're found non-compliant, not only would you have to deal with that whole appeal process (and likely be found non-compliant anyway, since you're not providing any new information on the appeal) you're going to have to re-do your whole design (and/or re-install all the door components).
And/or, if you already have a rollcage built and it does not incorporate protruding tubes, it's a very simple matter of fabbing up a single tube protruding into the door cavity right at hip height to satify the reg's requirements for gutting the doors.
- GA
On edit: I understand what Jimbo is trying to say here, but I suggest a wink-wink-nudge-nudge-here's-how-you-get-around-it is doing our membership a disservice, especially when it comes to safety items...items about which we have zero sense of humor and/or flexibility...
GCR Appendix F, Technical Glossary, in part (p169):
Define "extend into the door cavity". Define "intrude". Hell, define "door cavity".
I can assure you that if someone were to protest your car for removing door internal mechanisms, when your definition of 'extending into the door cavity' is that it touches the metal plate you used to replace the door card, that I would, as a National Scrutineer and Steward, find you non-compliant to the regs. But that's just my opinion.
But also keep in mind that in the end, you're having to fab up a rollcage, and you're already wanting to gut the doors to remove all that crap, and a rollcage with tubes extended away from the driver are far, far safer than one close to the driver, I simply cannot imagine why you would not do it correctly instead of trying to skirt the regs. And if you do try to skirt the regs and you're found non-compliant, not only would you have to deal with that whole appeal process (and likely be found non-compliant anyway, since you're not providing any new information on the appeal) you're going to have to re-do your whole design (and/or re-install all the door components).
And/or, if you already have a rollcage built and it does not incorporate protruding tubes, it's a very simple matter of fabbing up a single tube protruding into the door cavity right at hip height to satify the reg's requirements for gutting the doors.
- GA
On edit: I understand what Jimbo is trying to say here, but I suggest a wink-wink-nudge-nudge-here's-how-you-get-around-it is doing our membership a disservice, especially when it comes to safety items...items about which we have zero sense of humor and/or flexibility...
jumbojimbo
New member
Ah, I assumed it was an existing cage where the cage hitting the door was an irritation/hassle. I was also picturing passenger side. Yeah, if you are building a cage, do it right.