[400TT]

Jac Mac, safety is really important to me. We do have those bolt-on aluminium chassis extensions on the front of that chassis as well that should absorb some of the impact energy before it gets to the 1/4" aluminium plate used in that front tub section. You've also got to consider the strength on the welds as well. I certainly feel that the RCR designs are as safe as they can be given the restrictons. We've had a few RCR's involved in significant accidents now and all held up very well, kept the occupants safe and were easily repaired.

We all love our Cobra's, but you've also got to consider what is going to happen to that engine and transmission in a major frontal impact.

Albanycobra, I'm guessing you are chasing the RCR GT40 figures. The torsional stiffness is academic in an RCR GT40 as it is multiples more than what is required for registration or for performance reasons. They are stiff as a result of being built for longevity and strength. "Built like a tank" is a common phrase I hear from Fran Hall of RCR USA.

Due to other manufacturers using the NM/deg/M instead of NM/deg etc to significantly pump up their figures, we have decided to simply not publish them. I personally don't believe any figures I'm told unless I can view the chassis report. Past experience tells me the figures seem to get distorted by word of mouth.

I have copies of many, many chassis test reports at the factory. It makes for some very interesting reading as the higher 6000Nm/deg requirement in QLD really catches some manufacturers out. And that's 6000Nm/deg not 6000Nm/deg/M.

Hope that helps.

Does FFR Coupe make 6000Nm? The integrated full roll cage would really help it.