GSpeed Roll Cage Kit Development

[bjun]

I'm going to subscribe. I'm interested in a bolt in 4 point with harness bar. Can't seem to find any decent ones.

[bjun]

Any update on this? I am actually interested getting welded since you guys are so close by

[GSpeed]

Originally Posted by bjun

Any update on this? I am actually interested getting welded since you guys are so close by

The paint shop has been backed up, and we've been waiting in line. It's been ready since last week, but we're just waiting on them now. Hopefully it'll get painted late this week, early next week and we'll take some glamour photos.

You're welcome to come by the shop and check things out any time you'd like. We've got some other fabrication projects in process right now.

[bjun]

Awesome!
Cant wait to see the photos!

[zdr93523]

Your diagonal bar / harness bar is not legal for NASA.

See page 46 and 47 of the 2016.1 CCR

15.6.22 Shoulder Harness Bar
"The bar must intersect the required diagonal
bar"

[GSpeed]

Originally Posted by zdr93523

Your diagonal bar / harness bar is not legal for NASA.

See page 46 and 47 of the 2016.1 CCR

15.6.22 Shoulder Harness Bar
"The bar must intersect the required diagonal
bar"

Originally Posted by NASA 15.6.22

The bar must intersect the required diagonal
bar, but need not remain in the same plane as the main hoop (e.g. May bend aft-ward to allow more seat room
behind the driver and /or passenger seat(s); as long as it intersects the required diagonal).

Thanks for pointing that out. We've built cages like this before with no issues, and some of us have issued NASA logbooks for similar styles before. The rule book is somewhat vague exactly what constitutes "intersecting" since a two-piece harness bar that arches behind both seats would be legal. One could argue this style is actually stronger in side load against a "pinching" force in plane with the roll hoop, which is what the rule is meant to preserve.

But since that's all interpretation, we've reached out to a regional NASA official to give a final go/no-go call on this element of the design. We'll update with what we hear.

[mrk1]

Originally Posted by GSpeed

Thanks for pointing that out. We've built cages like this before with no issues, and some of us have issued NASA logbooks for similar styles before. The rule book is somewhat vague exactly what constitutes "intersecting" since a two-piece harness bar that arches behind both seats would be legal. One could argue this style is actually stronger in side load against a "pinching" force in plane with the roll hoop, which is what the rule is meant to preserve.

But since that's all interpretation, we've reached out to a regional NASA official to give a final go/no-go call on this element of the design. We'll update with what we hear.

My #1 gripe with the normal NASA book, NASA Rally allows it and so does everyone else.

[GSpeed]

Update: NASA officials have reviewed the design and accompanying analysis and approved the harness bar. We're all good.

[zdr93523]

Originally Posted by GSpeed

Update: NASA officials have reviewed the design and accompanying analysis and approved the harness bar. We're all good.

Sweet!

[zdr93523]

Originally Posted by GSpeed

Here's another update on the cage build.

The jungle gym of a rear cage:



Here's a shot of the harness bar offset, which allows for maximum seat room.



Door bars:



Although we won't be keeping them, it's possible to keep the factory glass windows installed, either for regulations or preference. We'll be removing ours, and making some brackets to fix the windows in a permanent upright position for transportation and storage.

Thanks for following this build! It's a slow winter for this car, but we're planning on doing some awesome things with this car when it warms up.

Is that the smallest seat you could find? My seat nearly touches the roof!!!!

Seriously though, I'm going to send you a PM regarding a cage for my car.

[GSpeed]

Originally Posted by zdr93523

Is that the smallest seat you could find? My seat nearly touches the roof!!!!

Seriously though, I'm going to send you a PM regarding a cage for my car.

That's a Racetech 4119, I believe. Sitting pretty low in that picture, I think it had been moved a little bit. I know it's not rigidly mounted.

We're going to start selling some slider-oriented seat mounts here in a little bit you might find interesting if you value headroom.

[zdr93523]

Originally Posted by GSpeed

That's a Racetech 4119, I believe. Sitting pretty low in that picture, I think it had been moved a little bit. I know it's not rigidly mounted.

We're going to start selling some slider-oriented seat mounts here in a little bit you might find interesting if you value headroom.

I would absolutely be interested. I have the Large Sparco Ergo and I'm currently thinking I may need to remove the slider with the cage, but I really want to avoid doing that since my wife and I both compete and we're almost a foot apart in height.

[zdr93523]

Originally Posted by GSpeed

Update: NASA officials have reviewed the design and accompanying analysis and approved the harness bar. We're all good.

I am not sure which "NASA officials" reviewed this and I'm not trying to instigate an argument, I just want to help make thing better... so I shared the pictures of your design with our NASA director who also builds a lot, A LOT, of cages and your design is in no way, shape, or form in compliance with the harness bar / diagonal bar intersection rules. In fact, your design is similar to the non-legal roll bar designs and not the legal SCCA and NASA roll cage designs. "Must intersect" is mentioned in the CCR twice for good reason and that is not a wording that is up for interpretation.

If a car with this cage comes to Utah, it will not pass tech. My advice is that this needs to be fixed before your design is finalized vs. rolling the dice with which "official" happens to look at it.

[GSpeed]

Originally Posted by zdr93523

I am not sure which "NASA officials" reviewed this and I'm not trying to instigate an argument, I just want to help make thing better... so I shared the pictures of your design with our NASA director who also builds a lot, A LOT, of cages and your design is in no way, shape, or form in compliance with the harness bar / diagonal bar intersection rules. In fact, your design is similar to the non-legal roll bar designs and not the legal SCCA and NASA roll cage designs. "Must intersect" is mentioned in the CCR twice for good reason and that is not a wording that is up for interpretation.

If a car with this cage comes to Utah, it will not pass tech. My advice is that this needs to be fixed before your design is finalized vs. rolling the dice with which "official" happens to look at it.

Your concerns are justified, and are why we're leaning on the officials we talked to about getting some more rigid documentation for our car. They recommended printing off the emails and keeping them in the logbook, but I want something more official. If you'd like, I can PM you the names of the officials we talked to about our car. If it makes a difference, more officials than just our region approved our design.

But I do agree with you that it means more hassle getting cars through tech, and we will most likely not be doing this design in any production cages. It'll be good enough for this prototype cage, but we certainly don't want to create problems for customers down the road. We can definitely do it differently to meet the letter of the rules, even if we feel our design is suitably safe/strong. No sense borrowing trouble.

Jake