Roll Cage while still keeping OEM softtop
02-25-2009, 04:54 AM
#21
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Lower Mainland
Posts: 5,874
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mikegarrison,Feb 24 2009, 06:08 PM
I admit, I have not done anything like a formal engineering analysis of this. I'm just going by how it looks to me. I wasn't willing to trust my life to a forward pull on that beam like that. And removing the roll hoops makes it substantially weaker.
I know the bulkhead is pretty flimsy without the oem roll hoops attached to them. In this case it is welded to the bar. Keep in mind the bulkhead will also be attached to the car.
I'm not saying that it is safe like this... because I really don't know, but I do know that this particular cage was in a crash and nowhere near the eyebolts is there even a little bend or warp so
The original owner of this bar (Andrew) posted his build up on R&C forum and got the same thing. The video of crash is on s2ki somewhere but i'm pretty sure it was hosted on streetfire. search for modified mag s2k crash. Also note that Andrew was in several races and passed tech with this set up so I don't know what to think.
-Chris
02-26-2009, 06:00 AM
#22
Registered User
Well, it's your car. It's you. You can see it in person. It sounds like there is more going on there than I can see in the pictures. I still don't like the looks of it in the pictures, especially compared to just using the intended harness bar instead, but I guess it's not my call to make.
02-26-2009, 06:20 AM
#23
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Lower Mainland
Posts: 5,874
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is I need to keep oem 3pts for street driving or cops will harrass me. As you know the seatbelt reels attach to the back of the bulkhead so unless I can mount them somewhere else i'm sol for that one assuming i'm running no bulkhead and attaching harnesses to the bar. I considered cutting the bulkhead a little to make room for the harness straps to go overtop and attach at the harness bar (because everyone knows thats the best option) but if I did that the bulkhead would looks a lot of rigidity and thats not good for the reels. The good part about leaving bulkhead in there is that I can keep the glovebox and secret compartment. I'm just trying to find the safest way for a car with a rollbar to be driven both on street and track.
02-26-2009, 07:30 AM
#25
Registered User
Originally Posted by Js S2k,Feb 26 2009, 07:48 AM
you can weld/ bolt the seat belts to the roll bar !!! Search for krazik's stripped interior thread as he's done it already!!
It's important to note that the main forward load path for the OEM seat belts is the roll hoop, not that beam. The forward load is take up by the roll hoop (supported by that beam as well as a gusset to the quarterpanel). The load the seatbelt retractor sees is towards the side.
02-26-2009, 10:29 AM
#26
I don't know if this helps, but I have the Cusco 5 pt roll bar and at just over 6 foot I feel like I'm about the tallest you would want to be with this set-up. The harness bar is the first thing that blocks you from reclining, but even without that the two front legs of the roll bar still prevent the seat from sliding back all the way.
02-26-2009, 02:09 PM
#27
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Lower Mainland
Posts: 5,874
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mikegarrison,Feb 26 2009, 11:30 AM
It's important to note that the main forward load path for the OEM seat belts is the roll hoop, not that beam. The forward load is take up by the roll hoop (supported by that beam as well as a gusset to the quarterpanel). The load the seatbelt retractor sees is towards the side.
02-26-2009, 02:35 PM
#28
Originally Posted by zacha79,Feb 23 2009, 09:38 PM
for actual safety, the cusco cage is not really worth much. many people on here, and sometime in the future me, have the harddog rollbar. which as you can see in two pics at the bottom works with the softtop.
http://www.bethania-garage.com/s2000.htm
http://www.bethania-garage.com/s2000.htm
02-26-2009, 02:49 PM
#29
I don't want to start an argument so I'll try to be objective.
I think most people think it is unsafe because:
1. It makes compromises in the number of bends to work with the soft top.
2. The bars are smaller in diameter and may have less wall thickness than many set-ups.
3. They look pretty, cost a lot, and are "JDM," a lot of people have bias against JDM products as they "couldn't possibly be functional."
I'll take off my objective hat, and say that I think most of these arguments are over stated. I have seen the picture you have mentioned, and it does show the structural integrity of these so-called "crushco" bars. They are legal in some Japanese racing classes, so I think they must do something more than just "bling factor."
In my opinion, the bars even on the Cusco roll bar are plenty strong.
I think most people think it is unsafe because:
1. It makes compromises in the number of bends to work with the soft top.
2. The bars are smaller in diameter and may have less wall thickness than many set-ups.
3. They look pretty, cost a lot, and are "JDM," a lot of people have bias against JDM products as they "couldn't possibly be functional."
I'll take off my objective hat, and say that I think most of these arguments are over stated. I have seen the picture you have mentioned, and it does show the structural integrity of these so-called "crushco" bars. They are legal in some Japanese racing classes, so I think they must do something more than just "bling factor."
In my opinion, the bars even on the Cusco roll bar are plenty strong.
02-26-2009, 02:58 PM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sad to see her go :,(
Posts: 6,114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by urBan_dK,Feb 26 2009, 06:49 PM
I don't want to start an argument so I'll try to be objective.
I think most people think it is unsafe because:
1. It makes compromises in the number of bends to work with the soft top.
2. The bars are smaller in diameter and may have less wall thickness than many set-ups.
3. They look pretty, cost a lot, and are "JDM," a lot of people have bias against JDM products as they "couldn't possibly be functional."
I'll take off my objective hat, and say that I think most of these arguments are over stated. I have seen the picture you have mentioned, and it does show the structural integrity of these so-called "crushco" bars. They are legal in some Japanese racing classes, so I think they must do something more than just "bling factor."
In my opinion, the bars even on the Cusco roll bar are plenty strong.
I think most people think it is unsafe because:
1. It makes compromises in the number of bends to work with the soft top.
2. The bars are smaller in diameter and may have less wall thickness than many set-ups.
3. They look pretty, cost a lot, and are "JDM," a lot of people have bias against JDM products as they "couldn't possibly be functional."
I'll take off my objective hat, and say that I think most of these arguments are over stated. I have seen the picture you have mentioned, and it does show the structural integrity of these so-called "crushco" bars. They are legal in some Japanese racing classes, so I think they must do something more than just "bling factor."
In my opinion, the bars even on the Cusco roll bar are plenty strong.
However, since 600rr plans to use them for track purposes, there is absolutely no point him or anyone with the same objective purchasing them as they DO NOT pass tech.
People have shown up to tracks only to be turned away!