Roll cage design for review and comments

[TurboShortBus]

Understand the loophole that could be exploited w/ the lack of a limitation.

Fixed that for you.

 

Here is a suggestion that would only require rewriting one sentence, and will not add any length to the existing rulebook. The suggested revision is in bold:

 

7.7 Ballast

Up to 150lbs of ballast is allowed, but no further rearward than the plane of the front of the OEM B-pillar. Each ballast piece may not be taller than three inches or stacked higher than three inches. Ballast must be securely fastened and approved by NASA tech/safety officials.

 

Mark

[KiMifan]

Understand the loophole that could be exploited w/ the lack of a limitation.

Fixed that for you.

 

Here is a suggestion that would only require rewriting one sentence, and will not add any length to the existing rulebook. The suggested revision is in bold:

 

X.X Rollcage

The main hoop of the rollcage may be mounted no further rearward than the plane of the front of the OEM B-pillar.

 

Mark

 

Fixed it for you.

[TurboShortBus]

Fixed it for you.

Ah yes, touche. However, this doesn't accommodate tall drivers who prefer a significant amount of seat layback and would need to move the main hoop back. This might also affect several cars that are currently CMC-legal. The sub-issue here deals with the ballast.

 

I would really like to get back to my original question:

 

Al, Glenn, and other directors: Is there anything about this layout that is contrary to the CMC rules?

Mark

[mitchntx1548534714]

Mark,

 

The way the rules are written, what you want to do is perfectly legal. Build it and don't look back.

 

Cars with much worse infractions have surfaced and had a blind eye turned. You will learn that it is a lot easier to ask for forgiveness as opposed to asking for permission.

 

The term "intent" is flung around here like a bunch of monkeys in a cage. Intent means something along the lines of "a meaning that is unwritten, but understood".

 

But here, it's a synonym for "opinion".

[Glenn]

I think the main hoop should be placed on the green hump or as close to it as possible (pick a side).

I also do not like seeing the lower rear kickers, but lots of CMC cars have been allowed to have them on the grounds of "safety". From my POV, any bar you add makes it safer since no bar added makes the cage weaker. But those bars add way more rigidity to the chassis than safety.

[Glenn]

Cars with much worse infractions have surfaced and had a blind eye turned.

 

Fill me in please.

[mitchntx1548534714]

Cars with much worse infractions have surfaced and had a blind eye turned.

 

Fill me in please.

 

Tony Gs frankenstein was perfectly legal on the left coast.

 

But the "intent" was factory compression ratio. Loophole was exploited and it was OK until an uproar about it was made.

 

And guess what ... the rules were amended to address it.

 

So if this cage thing is an issuem then fix the rules.

 

The rank and file are being held to a standard that none of the leaders can agree on. So what do you leaders suggest we do?

 

Follow the rules as written or the rules as spoken? They are two different things.

[Glenn]

Accually the comp ratio rule was ammended to an issue you had - lack of usable core heads that could be surfased flat and not exceed the limit set at the time.

Tony used parts from multiple legal platforms that resulted in a combination that never was offered from the OEM's.

 

Its not really any different than a LS1 4th gen that runs 28lb OEM fuel injector from a 98 and a LS6 intake offered from the OEM on 2001-2002 4th gens. The combo is legal, but was never offered from the OEM that way.

 

I am on your side about Tony doing something he shouldn't have.

We have also found a few other things done that shouldnt have been.

[mitchntx1548534714]

Well I bought heads till I found a set that would make it legal.

 

In hind sight, I should have saved myself hundreds of dollars and just built it.

 

Mark, you reading this?

[TurboShortBus]

You will learn that it is a lot easier to ask for forgiveness as opposed to asking for permission.

Unfortunately, I'm the jackass who asks for permission first, "just in case" something doesn't fly later on. I could have just slapped this sucker in the car and showed up at a track, but if somebody didn't like it and wouldn't allow the car to participate, I'd be SOL. I'm not really in the position to build 2 cages for the same car.

 

Mark, you reading this?

Oh yes, definitely.

 

Mark

[mitchntx1548534714]

You will learn that it is a lot easier to ask for forgiveness as opposed to asking for permission.

Unfortunately, I'm the jackass who asks for permission first, "just in case" something doesn't fly later on. I could have just slapped this sucker in the car and showed up at a track, but if somebody didn't like it and wouldn't allow the car to participate, I'd be SOL. I'm not really in the position to build 2 cages for the same car.

 

Mark, you reading this?

Oh yes, definitely.

 

Mark

 

Admirable attribute and I have a lot of respect for your integrity. It says a lot about a person.

 

Unfortunately opinions (intent) vary and there will never be a concensus. You will grow old waiting or take up ballroom dancing out of frustration.

[Al F.]

Thanks for the support Mitch

 

Mark: sorry for the delay, it is work in progress. By the way, thanks for asking before welding.

[mitchntx1548534714]

You have directors bickering in this thread and I get called out.

 

Thanks for making my point, Al.

[TurboShortBus]

Admirable attribute and I have a lot of respect for your integrity. It says a lot about a person.

 

Unfortunately opinions (intent) vary and there will never be a concensus. You will grow old waiting or take up ballroom dancing out of frustration.

Thanks for the kind words, Mitch. It hasn't been my intent to come across as an ass with this thread; just to get some clarification before I turn (more) money into fire and smoke.

 

To occupy my time, I have been focusing on building seat tracks that are stronger and more adjustable than the stock ones. They are going to be pretty badass, that's for sure.

 

Mark

[Glenn]

Admirable attribute and I have a lot of respect for your integrity. It says a lot about a person.

 

Unfortunately opinions (intent) vary and there will never be a concensus. You will grow old waiting or take up ballroom dancing out of frustration.

Thanks for the kind words, Mitch. It hasn't been my intent to come across as an ass with this thread; just to get some clarification before I turn (more) money into fire and smoke.

 

To occupy my time, I have been focusing on building seat tracks that are stronger and more adjustable than the stock ones. They are going to be pretty badass, that's for sure.

 

Mark

 

Go ahead and start a new thread, I dare you!

[TurboShortBus]

Go ahead and start a new thread, I dare you!

I'm warning you...I'm just stupid enough to do it! lol

 

Mark

[Glenn]

Please do. Its been sort of slow around here lately.

[TurboShortBus]

Please do. Its been sort of slow around here lately.

Well, there are a couple of things in the rules that I've been wondering about that aren't cage related, although they may or may not affect my particular setup. I could fire away, if desired. Nothing mean spirited or anything like that, though.

 

Mark

[mitchntx1548534714]

Please do. Its been sort of slow around here lately.

Well, there are a couple of things in the rules that I've been wondering about that aren't cage related, although they may or may not affect my particular setup. I could fire away, if desired. Nothing mean spirited or anything like that, though.

 

Mark

 

Rule of thumb ...

 

If you have to cut or grind it out, it's probably illegal to do.

If the OEM dudes didn't offer it, it's probably illegal.

If it falls into a gray area, it definitely illegal.

 

If you are a director, none of the above applies.

[AllZWay]

Please do. Its been sort of slow around here lately.

Well, there are a couple of things in the rules that I've been wondering about that aren't cage related, although they may or may not affect my particular setup. I could fire away, if desired. Nothing mean spirited or anything like that, though.

 

Mark

 

Rule of thumb ...

 

If you have to cut or grind it out, it's probably illegal to do.

If the OEM dudes didn't offer it, it's probably illegal.

If it falls into a gray area, it definitely illegal.

 

If you are a director, none of the above applies.

 

zing....

[TurboShortBus]

Please do. Its been sort of slow around here lately.

I took your suggestion and started a new thread. That should speed things up for a little while...

 

Mark

[Al F.]

Mark

Much like on this forum, your questions started a lot of discussion amongst the directors. Unfortunately that means it takes a while to reach a conclusion, but the benefit is a common understanding and therefore enforcement throughout the regions. Anyway, we're done, so here is what we've concluded:

 

1) CMC by design specifies very little about cage design. The whole point is to make it such that folks dont have to spend extreme amounts of money doing things like going through the firewall, seam welding etc. to keep costs low. Your cage design as described is certainly more complex (read: expensive) than required, but it is our conclusion that it does not conflict with any CMC rules. So, as far as CMC cage rules are concerned, go fire up the welder.

 

2) Most of our discussion ended up being around driver placement. As you said, your cage enables driver placement much farther rearward, but that doesnt mean the driver will actually be any farther rearward. We realize that in order to move the driver back one needs to take three rules into account: shifter, wheel, and pedal rules. Currently these three are pretty relaxed and indeed can be combined to locate the driver very far aft. These will be revisited for 2011 to limit how far rearward the driver can be.

 

3) Ballast is currently tied to the main hoop location, so a cage like this could provide an advantage in that it allows placing substantial weight farther rearward than a car without such a cage can do. For that reason the ballast rule will also be revisited for 2011 to ensure this combination doesnt provide an advantage to ballast placement.

 

Thanks for the patience Mark and everyone that was curious as to how this would turn out.

Edited April 11, 2010 by Guest

[mitchntx1548534714]

Mr. Fernandez,

 

Your feedback and communication about the process, discussion and plan is a welcome breath of fresh air.

 

Knowing that issues expressed are actually being discussed lowers frustration and disillusionment (is that a real word?).

 

But beyond this specific issue, it allows everyone to see how the process works.

 

Well done!

[jeffburch]

As someone who is soon going to have the cage fabbed in the car, should I wait a bit to get this done? Are the cage rules for CMC going to be modified any time soon? Just checking...

 

No rules creep perceived in this area.

Git-r-done.

jb

 

Just when you think you'd heard it all.

[TurboShortBus]

Al,

 

Thank you for your replies. I have been kicking this cage design around for several months, so waiting for a couple weeks of discussion isn't going to affect my schedule! I'd rather have the cage be compliant and to my liking the first time around, rather than "asking for forgiveness" and taking the chance of having to fire up the sawzall and start over.

 

Thanks again,

Mark