Roll Cage and the Heater

Other than being argumentative, Bill...is there really a point to this ? You're attempting to parse down to a level of sillyness. Any SOM Court would agree: You must have the heater & fan in place. Yes, maybe there is language in the GCR that a grammarian could have issue with, but issues like the heater core & fan have a known and adjudicated history.

If you are just going to lecture us about how screwed up the Club is, consider it done and leave us in peace. You've already announced that you are no longer a member. You weren't involved in working SCCA events in any official capacity when you were a member (correct me if I'm wrong, please), and your own racing history & experience is very limited (again, correct me if I'm wrong).

Other than hectoring people who are actively involved in racing, either 'working a race specialty' or 'driving a race car' or 'making some contribution to the club', what is your goal here ? Most of us don't need the lecture...save it for Basil on the Prod boards...but you don't have any traction there, either.
 
***...3.e says:

QUOTE
Air conditioning systems may be removed in whole or in part.

That means I can remove the blower and controls, which are part of the AC system.***


Bill, Billl, Bill, please use the GCR glossary to look up the word "system".

System - An assembly of components with an identifiable primary function.

***I think that to meet the letter of the rule on this one, you can remove the heater core to facilitate the installation of your cage, but that you have to mount it somewhere else in the car.****

Bill, is this ^ bait to see who you can hook?

& to the intellectual type lurkers, I am aware that Bill has advanced degrees.
 
I disagree. IF the blower motor was used exclusively by the AC system, then yes, it goes, but in most cases it is used by the heater system, and AC is a secondary function.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Not in Florida, baby! Down here AC is king and heaters are SECONDARY! B) :P
 
I have to agree with Chris on this one. Even here in Atlanta heaters are used for about 2 months out of the year. The rest of the time the AC is the primary system. For that matter I used the AC yesterday due to the car heating up from the direct sun.

With that in mind and since it does not say otherwise, Bill has a valid point as well with the blower being removed with the AC system. <_< Who is to say which is the primary system since the GCR does not? On my car the cage now goes through where the blower motor would be completely interfering with the installation of the same. From the factory the blower blows through the AC heat exchanger into the air handler that contains the heater core. If I remove the AC heat exchanger and the box it is mounted in there would be about 12" of open space between the blower and the air handler. How does that setup make the blower an integral part of the heater system?

Both Rabbit07 and I asked for advice here. I can not speak for Rabbit07 but I for one am not interested in any personality conflicts that exist between, or opinions about, members of this forum.

Also, any degree is only as good as the use it is put to.
 
***If I remove the AC heat exchanger and the box it is mounted in there would be about 12" of open space between the blower and the air handler. How does that setup make the blower an integral part of the heater system?***

Will the heater function as it did when it came from the factory after you remove the heat exchanger box?

Will the heater function as it did when it came from the factory after you remove blower?

The rules very specifically say one may modify the dash to fit the roll cage.

If the rules are intent to allow one to butcher everthing within the car when installing a roll cage why are the rules so fussy about the dash & about the side windows/stuffe being removed?

Tom, just trying to understand your thoughts. :023:
 
I don't think 'primary function' has to do with the amount of time you use the system. The heater core and components are the BASE system with A/C as an add on. Some would consider the heater core INTEGRAL to the system while the A/C stuff hangs on the outside. What cars in the ITCS came with A/C and no heat? What cars cames with heat and no A/C? What do you think is the PRIMARY system? It's obviously the heater system.

To say you can remove the heater core as part of the A/C system is rediculous IMHO.

Build a good cage and try and keep your blower motor etc because when it rains, you will wish you had it.

Read the GCR 3 times, measure twice, cut once. Common sense - it's a lost art.
 
So making metal brackets that will allow me to lower the blower box to clear my cage is the correct and legal thing to do?
 
So making metal brackets that will allow me to lower the blower box to clear my cage is the correct and legal thing to do?
[/b]
Click to expand...
No the correct and legal thing to do is design a cage that meets the written rules nd allows the components to be bolted into there stock location.
 
To be honest I am just trying to make the best of my screw up. To put the blower assembly back in would require destroying several hours of work and add another day to get a group of tubes like Jake has shown to work within the space given. Therefore, given that the GCR specifically states by default that I can perform additional gutting to allow for the installation of safety equipment I will do just that.

No claim was ever made that the heater core was a part of the A/C system and the plan was, and still is, that it shall remain. I quess I should have used the term evaporator instead heat exchanger when referring to the A/C system. When I remove the part of the A/C system that is the evaporator the heater would not work as there is no way for the air from the blower to reach the air handler that contains the heater core. The air simply blows into the footwell.

I plan to use the blower associated with my cool helmet to supply air to the air handler (contains the heater core and several damper flaps) so I can still defog my windshield when needed. It turns out the weight of each is a wash but the cooler full of ice definitely is not.

With all due respect since the early '80's many Jap cars came with A/C as standand and you could not buy the car without it. My new '84 Prelude was one of them. In that case who is to say which is the primary system. Now, in my RX-7 I could remove the heater core and the AC would still function. However, if I remove the evaporator the air suppling the heater core blows into the foot well. Which is the primary function in this case? Interesting and worth the discussion over a beer or two for sure. :birra:
 
The real issue is that there is not a single car I can think of that cannot have a basic,safe cage installed with the full interior still in the car. The only reason people go further is for a competitive avantage of stiffing the chassis. When some body goes well beyond intent and written rules it does not make a bit of difference to me that the labor is wasted. If i see it I hang paper on it. If your not capable of engineering a cage inside the liberal rules we have for then in the book them maybe you should consider paying a professional to do the job. Don't act like it was somebig ass mistake and then expect the rules to be changed for you benefit. And please the AC argument won't fly in the court of public opinion let alone the COA.
 
It never ceases to amaze me how quickly some feel the need to get up on their soap box and make feeble comments about either what they think, what someone else's intent is or criticizing people for making statements they did not make. Let me clarify a couple of points brought to my attention.

I am not going well beyond any written rules (quite the opposite) and intent is extremely subjective and wide open to interpretation. The rule that allows me to do what I am going to do has already been given and explained but apparently it may be beyond the comprehension of some on this forum. In addition, until the GCR gives a definitive explanation of intent I can not be concerned with it.

As a degreed electrical engineer with a minor in mechanical engineering and having designed, fabricated and sold industrial machinery all of my adult life I might be capable of the task at hand. However, due to an overcrowded business and social calendar I do not have the time or desire to redo my "somebig ass mistake" as it has been referred to by others and can not be concerned with it. Plus, a good portion of the work I’ve seen done by “professionals” sucks in general.

And finally, I can not find where I asked for any rule to be changed so the court of public opinion and the “COA” I could not care less about. As has happened so many times in the past on this forum an interesting exercise in intellectual discussion on a given topic is ruined those of narrow minds.
 
It cracks me up how following the rules as intended can be considered closed minded.....If you have to rub on the rule book so hard that you use the words SAFETY or DRIVER COMFORT to cover your ass it is likely not a good read on your part. Expecting others to look the other way because "it ws a mistake" is also complete BS. Sorry Tom this has nothing to do with you personally but it has eveything to do with not having this become the normal reading rules.
 
This indeed may be the case and I am guilty of not looking back to see if any comments may have applied to others. It just felt too close for my comfort level and in hindsight I too may have been too quick to rear up and strike. It's somethng I need to keep in control more often.

I hope everyone has a great weekend and I'll check back in after a week of getting hammered and chasing skirts down in Daytona and the Keys during Bike Week with eight of my bros. :023:

Just don't tell my wife about the chasing skirts part. ;)
 
Tom -- When I built my cage, I had the same dillema--and chose to move the bar because relocating the fan looked more difficult than putting the bar in a different place. If I were to do it again, I would modify (move) the fan so that I could attach the roll cage tube to the front frame horn.
This is clearly a gray area of the rules--intentionally so I believe. I've always been of the philosophy that it is better to 'modify' than 'remove' when in doubt.
And yes, I agree with the rest of the group that the defroster is a serious competitive advantage when it rains--making it well worth the effort to relocate the fan. Or for Rabit to modify the heater box however necessary to accomadate the cage and keep the defroster functional.


Tak
#29 ITA Rx-7
SFR SCCA
 
Being thet this thread can't die a normal fashion I'll lay out my last post.

IMHJ, what many people forget is that: IF THERE IS NO RULE THAT SAYS YOU CAN MODIFY OR REMOVE SOMETHING THEN YOU CAN'T MODIFY OR REMOVE SOMETHING. This reading between the lines that so many people do is getting real OLD.

Maybe we need some protests so that everyone is on the legal line.

EDIT: Yes I am aware of two sentences in two seperat paragraphs that many of you use to butcher anything you want when installing your roll cage. IMHJ those two sentences don't allow free butchering of the interior of the car.
 
my $0.02, the under dash crossbar is not a "required" part of the cage, so you can't use the broad rule about hacking up the interior to install required safety items.
cheers,
bruce
 
my $0.02, the under dash crossbar is not a "required" part of the cage, so you can't use the broad rule about hacking up the interior to install required safety items.
cheers,
bruce
[/b]
Click to expand...
ohhhhh good read!!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top