Neville Jones
|
| posted on 7/2/11 at 08:30 PM | |
|
quote:
Originally posted by loggyboy
For the posted who just deleted their comments on FIA cages:
the documents you were talking about are here:
http://www.fia.com/sport/Regulations/sportcoderegs.html
Under J 2011 - article 253
no registration needed.
[Edited on 7/2/11 by loggyboy]
I didn't see what you are talking about, but what you see on that link above is not the full regulation and testing info.
Full regs and testing are in the private section, and needs a login.
You need the homologation regs for full info. Not for public view, and I don't know why?
Cheers,
Nev.
[Edited on 7/2/11 by Neville Jones]
|
|
|
|
|
DRC INDY 7
|
| posted on 7/2/11 at 09:14 PM | |
|
All i will say on the matter of the roll cage is when chris maries had a big crash at oulton park theres was hardley a scratch on the roll cage
As you can see it's a very strong roll cage FIA approved or not
Chris maries would not be racing a mk indy r if it was not up to spec his brother used to race a westfield in the same series but is now useing a mk
indy r zetec
https://www.facebook.com/groups/462610273778799/
Puddle Dodgers Club
|
|
|
interestedparty
|
| posted on 7/2/11 at 09:34 PM | |
|
quote:
Originally posted by hicost blade
My 2p is as follows 
Matt is always correcting other manufacturer’s errors whether it be roll cages, suspension geometry, dampers etc.
He is only saying it how it is, he doesn't like to see people being ripped off and when he challenges these manufactures, they come out with
some B/S about how fantastic their products are (while hiding behind their keyboards) as can be seen in 2 recent threads and god knows how many
others
I have experienced being fed a load of B/S and I got badly stung, Matt & his dad couldn't have done more to help me out
My advice is buy a Westfield and forget the rest, mine cost £5000 S/H finished, a lot less (by the time you have added it all up) than a so called
budget manufacturer who can't be bothered to answer the phone as mentioned above...... or buy mine for £5000 
I personally prefer the non B/S approach to a safety critical device
What I think is that it might be that Matt's stuff is better than MK's, but as he wants people to compare apples to apples, and as it is
well known that higher quality costs more money, it would only be fair for him to say whether his stuff is more expensive than MK's. If it is,
then what do you expect? If it isn't, then that would seem to be something worth mentioning, LOUDLY.
After all, there would be no point in Mercedes saying their stuff is better than Fiat's if it is also more expensive.
As some day it may happen that a victim must be found,
I've got a little list-- I've got a little list
Of society offenders who might well be underground,
And who never would be missed-- who never would be missed!
|
|
|
PAUL FISHER
|
| posted on 7/2/11 at 10:47 PM | |
|
quote:
Originally posted by procomp
And i think that if you do compare apples with apples youll find that the MK's are well and trulley left standing by both Westfields and an
Aries Locost in there regular championship.
At least get the facts straight.
Cheers Matt
If we are comparing apples with apples and sticking to the facts, the facts are the only cars left standing in there regular championships they run
in, are your LA Golds, Ian Kempson in his Indy, won his class in the 750mc KITCAR championship in 2010, and came 2nd overall, the same KITCAR
championship two of your cars run in, your cars only managing a poor 12th and 17th place overall
The facts are here for all to see.
http://www.750mc.co.uk/images/uploaded/Final%20Championship%20Points%20Kits%202010.pdf
I would advise you spend a bit more time in the workshop to make your cars a bit more competitive in the 2011 season, instead of spending and wasting
too much time posting your rubbish on here
|
|
|
omega 24 v6
|
| posted on 7/2/11 at 10:54 PM | |
|
Wow that's a fairly graphic set of photo's.
BUT it looks like the roll cage does not make direct contact to the ground from what you can see there. Perhaps it does but if not then it's
acting only as another bracing member IMHO
To me it's fairly clear how to solve this debate.
If the documentation for the cage being FIA or MSA approved exists then it is " approved "
If not and it has been passed scrutineering then " It complies with the FIA/MSA bluebook rules" but only in the eyes of that particular
scrutineer. IMHO.
Both statements are true but in effect worlds apart in terms of statement. One of them will get you into any race regardless of who is the scrutineer.
The other MAY cause problems if a different scrutineer reads the rule book differently.
If it looks wrong it probably is wrong.
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 7/2/11 at 10:55 PM | |
|
According to those facts the MK indy is in Class B, the LA Gold (Procomp) is in Class C. The LA Gold only competed in 5 races, the MK completed in
everyone (14 races).
Not apples with apples (although i'm now craving a cider with all this talk of apples!)
The winner of class C was a car that looks like a fury from a quick web search - full smooth bodywork type car (along with 2nd and 3rd place).
Now can someone explain how the points work, as its left me confused.
PS that looks like one hell of a roll. Glad to hear the driver is ok and eveything held together. May be an idea for all racers / track dayers to get
wrist restraints watching those arms flail around.
[Edited on 7/2/11 by MikeR]
|
|
|
hicost blade
|
| posted on 7/2/11 at 11:01 PM | |
|
quote:
Originally posted by interestedparty
quote:
Originally posted by hicost blade
I personally prefer the non B/S approach to a safety critical device
What I think is that it might be that Matt's stuff is better than MK's, but as he wants people to compare apples to apples, and as it is
well known that higher quality costs more money, it would only be fair for him to say whether his stuff is more expensive than MK's. If it is,
then what do you expect? If it isn't, then that would seem to be something worth mentioning, LOUDLY.
After all, there would be no point in Mercedes saying their stuff is better than Fiat's if it is also more expensive.
As I said, I personally don't think a statement like that really stands when it comes to safety critical devices such as roll cages
For the sake of +/-£200 difference I would prefer one that has been tested properly
|
|
|
PAUL FISHER
|
| posted on 7/2/11 at 11:30 PM | |
|
I am pleased we have got into this debate, as after a bit of research its only highlighting to everyone how poor your own cars have performing,
compared to your competitors, getting your ass kicked in both the 750MC ALLCOMERS and the KITCAR class by the competition, you know what they say,
people in glass houses should not throw stones and all that, and a bit more advise for you, I say your doing yourself more harm than good with your
arrogant attitude on this forum, concentrate on your own business, spend a bit more time getting your own house in order, and less time slating all
your competitors.
[Edited on 19/05/04 by PAUL FISHER]
|
|
|
DRC INDY 7
|
| posted on 7/2/11 at 11:32 PM | |
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeR
According to those facts the MK indy is in Class B, the LA Gold (Procomp) is in Class C. The LA Gold only competed in 5 races, the MK completed in
everyone (14 races).
Not apples with apples (although i'm now craving a cider with all this talk of apples!)
The winner of class C was a car that looks like a fury from a quick web search - full smooth bodywork type car (along with 2nd and 3rd place).
Now can someone explain how the points work, as its left me confused.
PS that looks like one hell of a roll. Glad to hear the driver is ok and eveything held together. May be an idea for all racers / track dayers to get
wrist restraints watching those arms flail around.
[Edited on 7/2/11 by MikeR]
yea he is fine the accident was in 2009 he was back racing in 2010
https://www.facebook.com/groups/462610273778799/
Puddle Dodgers Club
|
|
|
DRC INDY 7
|
| posted on 7/2/11 at 11:38 PM | |
|
What i do not understand is why registerd traders with a lot to loose get involved in tittle tattle arguments about my grass is greener than
yours....................
https://www.facebook.com/groups/462610273778799/
Puddle Dodgers Club
|
|
|
graememk
|
| posted on 7/2/11 at 11:55 PM | |
|
I'M A BIT UPSET ABOUT THIS THRED.
One of the jobs i was going to get sorted this year was getting the indy set up corner weighted ect, and mat a pro comp was to be honest going to get
my cash after i had a read of a few threds last year he seemed like the guy who knows what hes doing.
but now i've had a read of this post he could be the best guy in the world for the job, but your not getting my cash now mate, i dont know what
you charge for the job but i assume £300+, and well look at it this way, your childishness in this post has just lost you 150 beers, but i assume your
customer service is so good you can afford to turn away new customers
i'm self employed, and i have 90% happy customers from this web site and 10% unhappy ones, i cant win them all. things go wrong from time to
time, but if anyone from the 10% ever come back to me i'll still try my best to help them out.
where as i think your attitude to bussiness stinks
|
|
|
Davegtst
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 12:15 AM | |
|
I see the whole cage thing like this. Mk are selling one that they claim is compliant with the regs but afaik can't prove it. Procomp are
selling a cage that IS compliant with the regs and have spent alot of time and money getting it tested. MK's cage is a fair bit cheaper than
procomp's. People are buying MK's cage only to find out it may be no good at all and then have to have it cut off and a compliant one
welded in place. If i was Procomp i would be pissed for the customer that their money had been wasted and getting fed up with putting other
company's work right. If this forum didn't exist and people like Procomp didn't share their views how would people know about these
things until after they had paid out for a very expensive bit of scrap metal.
|
|
|
hicost blade
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 12:20 AM | |
|
quote:
Originally posted by Davegtst
If this forum didn't exist and people like Procomp didn't share their views how would people know about these things until after they had
paid out for a very expensive bit of scrap metal.
Agreed
|
|
|
interestedparty
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 06:26 AM | |
|
quote:
Originally posted by hicost blade
quote:
Originally posted by interestedparty
quote:
Originally posted by hicost blade
I personally prefer the non B/S approach to a safety critical device
What I think is that it might be that Matt's stuff is better than MK's, but as he wants people to compare apples to apples, and as it is
well known that higher quality costs more money, it would only be fair for him to say whether his stuff is more expensive than MK's. If it is,
then what do you expect? If it isn't, then that would seem to be something worth mentioning, LOUDLY.
After all, there would be no point in Mercedes saying their stuff is better than Fiat's if it is also more expensive.
As I said, I personally don't think a statement like that really stands when it comes to safety critical devices such as roll cages
For the sake of +/-£200 difference I would prefer one that has been tested properly
Well, I would like to know what the actual difference in price is, and I think he should tell us. And how do you actually 'test' a roll
cage, or is it a question of following instructions as to how it should be made rather than actually 'testing' it?
quote:
Originally posted by Davegtst
People are buying MK's cage only to find out it may be no good at all and then have to have it cut off and a compliant one welded in place.
If i was Procomp i would be pissed for the customer that their money had been wasted and getting fed up with putting other company's work right.
If this forum didn't exist and people like Procomp didn't share their views how would people know about these things until after they had
paid out for a very expensive bit of scrap metal.
But is that actually the case? Have people actually had to have the MK one cut off? Reason I ask is apparently Danny Keenan is using an MK cage
without any problem.
If that was happening and people were having to have the MK unit cut off and replaced, then they would have a clear and obvious case under the
'not fit for purpose' section of the sale of goods act and could easily sue MK in the County Court. Of course, the other possibilty is
that the MK rollcage isn't actually sold as being suitable for every class of racing. I don't know the answeres to these questions, but
would be interested to hear the answers if anyone has them.
As some day it may happen that a victim must be found,
I've got a little list-- I've got a little list
Of society offenders who might well be underground,
And who never would be missed-- who never would be missed!
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 10:42 AM | |
|
I think there is a simple answer to this.
Can someone contact the MSA and ask their senior technical / scrutineer / mashall to comment on the MK full cage.
If we can get a definitive answer if the cage is ok for circuit racing, then this 'conversation' goes away and either MK are vindicated or
Matt is vindicated. It will also stop any worry about turning up for a race and being not allowed to go on circuit or racing with a cage which some
people think may not be strong enough.
Seems worthwhile to me as until a definitive answer is given, this will just go on and on.
|
|
|
Triton
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 11:02 AM | |
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeR
I think there is a simple answer to this.
Can someone contact the MSA and ask their senior technical / scrutineer / mashall to comment on the MK full cage.
If we can get a definitive answer if the cage is ok for circuit racing, then this 'conversation' goes away and either MK are vindicated or
Matt is vindicated. It will also stop any worry about turning up for a race and being not allowed to go on circuit or racing with a cage which some
people think may not be strong enough.
Seems worthwhile to me as until a definitive answer is given, this will just go on and on.
I was under the impression that cages needed to be certified these days to stop folk using daft stuff like scaffolding (don't laugh it
has been known).
Matt would have had to submit drawings and a full cage to be tested, this costs a fortune in his own time as well as the FIA fees so I can understand
him being miffed if cages that may or may not have been tested are being let through by scrutineers.
I remember a certain blue midi thing being eye balled after it span out at goddards then slapped into the armco after being restarted, the drivers
head was above the roll bar for all to see yet it went through scrutineering somehow..
Roll cages are for your own safety.
My Daughter has taken over production of the damn fine Triton race seats and her contact email is emmatrs@live.co.uk.
www.tritonraceseats.com
www.hairyhedgehog.com
|
|
|
interestedparty
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 11:13 AM | |
|
quote:
Originally posted by Triton
Matt would have had to submit drawings and a full cage to be tested, this costs a fortune in his own time as well as the FIA fees so I can understand
him being miffed if cages that may or may not have been tested are being let through by scrutineers.
IF that is the case- that his cage has been actually tested rather than just constructed to published standards (which isn't the same thing of
course) then his argument would be with the authorities, and not with MK (as it is here).
As some day it may happen that a victim must be found,
I've got a little list-- I've got a little list
Of society offenders who might well be underground,
And who never would be missed-- who never would be missed!
|
|
|
MikeCapon
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 11:26 AM | |
|
marc n's post on this thread may fill in a few of the blanks for
you.
|
|
|
Neville Jones
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 11:28 AM | |
|
What OD and wall thickness is the tube on MK cages?
Other than the odd bends at the dash, the cage shouldn't get past a scrutineer, even if it was 1 3/4" and 2.5mm wall.
It's the bends in the front tube and longitudinal top tubes which should fail it at scrutineering. The MSA and FIA make it quite clear as to how
much a tube is allowed to be bent. Where's the roof diagonal? Now compulsory for both FIA and MSA. I'd suspect that if that cage actually
went upside down and hit the ground, the end result would look somewhat different, as would the driver.
I can understand Matt's issue with these cages being allowed to race, when he has gone to the trouble and expense of having a custom cage
approved.
The thing is, I, or anyone else, can make and fit a cage to a car and race it and get past the scrutineers, as long as it looks like the diagrams in
the Blue Book, and is made from 1 3/4" x2.5mm tube or bigger.
Matt needed special testing and approval of his design because it uses smaller and lighter tubes, hence the need for it to be checked.
My son is currently doing FEA work for a company going through the process of having two lightweight cages approved. Just for the info of those who
want to know, the cost of the FIA test at MIRA is £700/cage, and the MSA costs are near to £300 each.
You've got to sell a number of cages to get that back! Even spreading the costs at £100/cage, that's near to twenty cages to recover just
that cost. Then there's the tooling and design costs.
That guy in the pics of the roll is a very lucky man indeed. He has his entire upper torso and arms outside the car in one shot. He needs to tighten
his harness a lot more by the look of things.
Cheers,
Nev.
|
|
|
loggyboy
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 12:07 PM | |
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neville Jones
It's the bends in the front tube and longitudinal top tubes which should fail it at scrutineering. The MSA and FIA make it quite clear as to how
much a tube is allowed to be bent. Where's the roof diagonal?
Front bars or lateral bars - correct they should not have more than a single bend where they allign with a 'window' line.
The front leg of a front rollbar or a lateral rollbar must be straight, or if it is not possible, must follow the windscreen pillars and have only
one bend with its lower vertical part.
As for the top tubes, ive mentioned this before but they can be bent.
Diagram 53 of 2011 blue book clearly states:
And im not sure where your getting your info on the compusary roof diagonal from, I cant find any mention of this in the blue book, and the diagram
above states 'optional'.
[Edited on 8/2/11 by loggyboy]
|
|
|
interestedparty
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 12:20 PM | |
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neville Jones
My son is currently doing FEA work for a company going through the process of having two lightweight cages approved. Just for the info of those who
want to know, the cost of the FIA test at MIRA is £700/cage, and the MSA costs are near to £300 each.
You've got to sell a number of cages to get that back! Even spreading the costs at £100/cage, that's near to twenty cages to recover just
that cost. Then there's the tooling and design costs.
To be fair, that's the costs for TWO cages, and non-book ones at that, plus the tooling and design costs would be there anyway.
Also, sometimes one has to pay extra just to put yourself in the position of being able to sell other items and services connected with the being able
to market the item in question. I understand that one of the firms in this thread is targetted specifically at racing cars, whereas the other is
targetted at road cars.
As some day it may happen that a victim must be found,
I've got a little list-- I've got a little list
Of society offenders who might well be underground,
And who never would be missed-- who never would be missed!
|
|
|
loggyboy
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 12:22 PM | |
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeCapon
marc n's post on this thread may fill in a few of the blanks for
you.
Still worth noting Matts comments if the cage is ROPS approved, the provided test images are great, but who did the testing and what approvals did
they achieve?
|
|
|
omega 24 v6
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 12:39 PM | |
|
Simple reply from MK is all that is required here.
Many of you now obviously see it as an MK versus procomp thread which has lets face it turned into a childish my car can beat your car thread.
It's certainly NOT what the original post was all about at all ( which was communication )
So come on MK communicate with us .
Is the cage approved? with documentation.
Or is it Compliant?
If it looks wrong it probably is wrong.
|
|
|
loggyboy
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 12:57 PM | |
|
quote:
Originally posted by omega 24 v6
So come on MK communicate with us .
Is the cage approved? with documentation.
Or is it Compliant?
I/anyone can answer the 2nd part of that question. When it has a double/tripple bend in the front bar - NO!
|
|
|
MikeCapon
|
| posted on 8/2/11 at 12:57 PM | |
|
Wot he said.^^^^^^^
If they are bothered about heir name being dragged through the mud and if their cage is legal now would seem a jolly good time to
reply.............
Edited for typo and to say I meant wot omega said.
[Edited on 8/2/11 by MikeCapon]
|
|
|
