I think these rules are more than fair. I would rather see them enforced now than after someone is seriously injured in a rollover.

And as spooky says there's plenty of fast down the straight slow in the corners cars that don't get under the 1:11.99 lap time. Are they any safer?

I'm probably going to annoy a few people but I Ithink the roll bar rules should be across the board.

Kit manufacturers should be taking the rollbar fitment and design far more seriously than they do. When building mine I made several modds to the chassis to beef up roll over protection. The seatbelt bracket in the boot that one leg attatches too got a shear plate welded across it to strengthen the whole thing. There was no provision on the chassis to mount the third leg so I welded a mount onto the chassis under the boot floor.

A cosmetic rollbar is about as much use as a chocolate fire guard. Realistically how much extra effort would it have been to make it a proper structural bar?

Cheers

Aussie Mike, I agree with you..across the board seems the most sensible IMO... having said that...this may affect numbers significantly if they adopted our opinion... . then that may affect the "commercial" aspect of the event...

I know...before someone flogs me I know knowone makes any money... but if a none compliant car can blow me off down the straight yet I have quicker lap times does that mean my car needs to be safer...... ?

That's the part that worries me....

SpookyPT

SpookyPT and Aussie Mike, I totally agree with you.

I'm running two hoops although not with the third leg on each for cosmetic reasons only. I have also beefed up the chassis for the roll bars and have gussets for longitudinal loads, if that makes sense, to address the issue of not having third legs on the hoops. Safety is very important.

There are a minority of people running the lap times that require these mods. I've said earlier that it appeared to me that most people do not drive at 10 10ths so most people won't be affected. I just wouldn't like to see these changes being imposed on everyone as I think the fun factor would start to disappear which may affect participation.

I think one of the main issues is the amount of notice. 12 months notice would have been nice. The other issue is scrutineering. I expect some members would be nervous about getting down there and not passing.

I was wondering if it would be possible to get vehicles scrutineered up here before we leave. Surely the committee can find a suitable body up here to scrutineer vehicles. Might be the next logical step.

Mike, some manufacturers take roll over protection seriously.

http://www.clubcobra.com/photopost/d...m/IMG_4515.jpg

Several good points....

Mike makes an important point...that is that manufacturers should include the mounts to ensure proper safe fitment.

What would really stop this type of event would be a serious accident.

Especially if after this debate some-one gets seriously hurt or... god forbid...killed.

Take it from some-one with first hand experience ...anything you can do to keep the human body intact and safe during these risky pastimes is time and money well spent.

Craig, yes, notice is a BIG issue.. After last years Nats would have been seemingly more appropriate! How will anyone who runs times like that make mods like that in 3 months....?

However, Nassty is right too, why should he change his car to meet a lap time requirement when it is neither a CAMS or Venue Requirement. Then as Les said, safety in the end is paramount and no short comings should be tolerated!

I think that a car running times mid 1.12's (experienced driver) is no less safe than a car running mid 1/25's with a first timer. Times should not be the pre-qualifier for installation of safety items.. It just makes no sense to me anyway!!

From my experience just as many slower drivers come off the track as do the faster ones. It's hard to say whether the severity is the same, although last year we saw some high-speed off-track excusions from some slower vehicles. If we incorporate tougher safety standards for faster vehicles, what would happen if a slower vehicle was involved in a serious accident.

I know the solution, just upgrade to a Daytona with full cage. No problems with roll cage spoiling it's beautiful lines, it's all hidden away inside. I know Harrison Daytona's are supplied standard with a half rollcage and optional full rollcage.

Another thing that should be raised, are GT40's any safer than Cobras. Most GT40's don't have any roll-over protection at all. And there isn't a lot of strength in the roof/doors. Mind you there isn't a lot of GT40's at the nationals.

Craig, are you at liberty to say which manufacturer that picture came from? :)

Sambo,

thats a Harrison chassis and body.


Mick

Yep certainly is.

Worth the money
 

HI Spooky,
The trailer is no "queen" I must say it has paid itself off already.

I would say we have done 4000ks with the car on the back already.

Don't worry I will polisher up to give you a run.:D

Phil

Hey young Phil...are you still on the same thread ??

Anyway,

I know the new rules don't effect everyone, but with regard to the roll bar requirements.
I have a bit of a problem with these.

I very much appreciate the organizers wanting to make sure that the drivers are safe, and I applaud their efforts....
However,
Iwould find it hard to justify the expense of changing my roll bar set up, which I believe to be sound, but perhaps not complying with these new requirements.

The other problem I have is the roll bar height.

My seats are a little thicker than the standard fibreglass bucket seat, and this results in my helmet being at least level with the top of my hoops, maybe even slightly higher.

The solution would be I suppose, to enter in the "Street tyres" category, which will keep me out of the faster group, and thus avoid the new rule changes.

The trouble with this is, that I can ussure you, I would be a bloody sight safer on Toyo Proxes, and doing 1.10 , than I will be on street tyres and doing 1.15.

Not sure what to do.

I'm sure there will be a solution.

Wazza, I guess in the event of rolling a Cobra, the idea is that the rollbar takes the impact and not your helmet - hence the 50mm clearance.

Personally I reckon if you've managed to flip your car there are plenty of other issues at hand... eg, armco barriers, fire, etc.

I have only been looking at this from a racer point of view, (I'm not yet a racer but definitely will be) but...

If you had a great street/show car and only used it as street/show car, how could you justify the expense of these new changes.
I'm sure there are people that would only take it to the circuit once or twice to "see how it goes".... I would fall into this category, but then again I would be drag racing so will probably have to have a cage anyway.

Hi All,
Its about time this thread gathered momentum,
I believe it a topic that needs to be judged by the cobra community.
Even though Im looking down the barrel of some modifications myself,
I am not opposed to some new safety measures being implemented,
its just the details that may need some fine tuning..
The Harness inclusion is a good idea,
something that is well overdue for my car anyway.
And is an item that can be fitted to most cars without detracting from the look or function of the car,except not legal for street use which I cant understand either...

The rollbar issue definatly opens a can of worms,
especially with the older generations of kits where cosmetic rollbars were the standard,and mods wont be easy or cheap..
Maybe a set of guidelines could be worked out for each type of kit,
Harrison Front mounts deemed ok when used with rear stay,
Drb mounts would definatly need work but guidelines formulated .
Etc,
for each type of kit would take guesswork out of turning up at scruiteneering on the friday at least..
The 50 mm height is probably a little lenient ,
as some rollbar regulations are a line drawn from top of bar to front guard or upper suspension mount being a no go zone for the helmet..
As somone else mentioned,
Think laterally and lower the seat ,
not raise the bar....

Theres always Street Class,
the T/As are nice and hard now....

Peter...

I have often wondered how many events could get insurance get a sign off from the lawyers drawing up the events contract without a defined standard of minimum safety equipment for each class of the cars. In the USA everybody is caught up in the (sue crazy world) in some way or the other. I hope it is not as bad on your side of the big pond. The (hold harmless sign offs) are just another piece of paper if stuff hits the fan in many cases.
The standard safety equipment is a good thing and all are damn glad you have it if ever needed but some items can seem expensive until needed anyway. I support the general intent of these requirements and time will define the rules to a reasonable list so folks can then decide what class they want to play in from that point forward.

One drama I can see with the short notice for the QLDers is that they have a full calendar year of racing, not much downtime to make modifications.

Any serious changes normally occur over the xmas break when they have a long enough break from racing.

So even though it seems like they have just under 4 months to make the modifications, by the time you look at their race schedule between now and the nationals, there really isn't a lot of time to make these changes.

And the only QLDers that are really affected by these changes are the ones that race all the time.

Another thing I was thinking about was the GT40s. I'm assuming any GT40s faster than 11.99 would need a roll cage. Now that's no simple feat to retro-fit. And by design I would think it would be virtually impossible to get the bar 50mm above the drivers helmet.

Your right Craig! I know Paul G is his GT wants to put in a roll bar but as yet doesn't have one. He and the car are VERY quick! What do they do there???

I think a bit of a guidleine rethink is required..

I thought the reasons WAZZA's helmet only sat higher above the roll bar was due to the unusually large size of his swollen MELLON. His car would look funny with a hoop that big to give the 50mm clearance! (I'm waiting for a nibble :-))


SpookyPT T T T T

I certainly applaud the requirement of race harnesses. A properly fitted harness will help in any type of track incident. And I'm really glad the Nationals committee are making that change.

A roll bar as fitted to a Cobra will only ever help in a roll over, it doesn't offer any side or frontal protection.

We have a few Cobras up here that have roll bars fitted that mount to the chassis in all 3 positions. They are made of thick enough material to comply. The cars already have race harnesses and some have race seats. But they fall down on not having 50mm clearance above the helmet. And they all go faster than the cut-off 11.99 time. These vehicles are regulary raced(monthly) by very experienced drivers.

I would really hate to see some of the fast drivers forced back onto their old street tyres just to be able to race at the Nationals. I reckon that would be even more dangerous. Especially with things like the old 15" T/A tyres that some have, certainly more of a chance of rolling one of those off the rims compared to their 16, 17 & 18" race tyres and that is a recipe for a bad accident and a good chance of a roll over.

The QLD Club has had a really strong response this year again for the Nationals and it takes a lot of work and dedication to get big numbers to make the trip to the nationals. I certainly fear these extra requirements might take the wind out of the sails somewhat, lets hope not.

It's not so much my noggin, but it's because I am unusually large in the crotch area, and it forces me up out of the seat a lot more than "normal' chaps.......by the way......are you bringing your lovely girlfriend along to the Nats this year ????