cooleyjb

PROVE IT

You have NO data to support your "fact" that a cage is more dangerous than not having a cage in an accident on the street. None, zero, zilch, nada.

You say to think and not be led astray by kneejerk reactions but your response that a cage is exactly that. A kneejerk reaction with a bunch of guesstimation supporting it.

John, a number of people on this board take what you say as fact. I read all of your posts because you usually make very well thought out and good points. However when you post something like this all you are doing is making people believe that your opinion is an actual fact.

Until there is such research that looks at the saftey aspects of a cage in street use including the benefits and dangers noone can say that a cage/roll bar is not as safe as no cage for street use. It's a very simple cost benefit analysis that has not data to show what the true costs and true benefits are.

sjanes

Please explain to me how the padded rollcage bar in my car is more dangerous than the unpadded steel targa top frame that Porsche put in my car? BTW, with the race seat being bolted to the floor, my head if farther away from the cage than it was from the targa top frame when I had the stock seat.

RedlineMan

!!

To quote Greg Smith "I've been through the whole roll bar and harness debate more times that I can count. Bottom line is it's my opinion, take it as you wish."

If exposed, irregularly shaped cages were the safe way to go, car designers would not have spent millions of $$$ over the years designing energy absorbing flush-paneled interiors.

Take a 2x4 and whack yourself in the forehead. Then take the 2x4, drive a nail through it, point the nail at your forehead, and repeat. Which hurts worse and does more damage? Irregular shape = magnification of force. Crude example, absurdly simple concept.

RedlineMan

Well...

Seems we've all learned a thing or two in 20 years, eh?

fatbillybob

I don't know. I will say that the OEM's prove their designs which include how they pad and protect us from metal. SFI has a spec for rollbar padding for the helmeted head. It is known in racing that heater pipe type insulation which feels nice and soft does not provide the researched impact requirement to keep us safe. Those are the only two kinds of padding I know of. I Do not know of any specifications for rollbar padding tested for the unhelmeted head. So for all you know the rollbar pad you have is ineffective on the unhelmeted head and the steel bar is closer to your head than the targa top frame. I assume Porsche research their designs so perhaps the targa frame is not an issue. Maybe statistically it is too far away? I think in the absence of cubic dollars to do our own research with our own team of safety specialists we all have to make up our own minds with the available info reliable or suspect. The important think is to keep thinking about it. We owe it to love ones and the future of our sport. If we aren't responsible the powers that be will step in to protect us from ourselves through legislation or economic pressure like increased insurance costs.

RedlineMan

Hey TR;

I can explain, in great detail, the performance differences between the two systems, with information not plucked from my ****, but taken from the research of the world's leading experts. You won't find all the answers in one place. I've spent the last few years gathering it from every source available, and put it together in a coherent understanding of how this stuff works. That's what I do.

If you would like that information, PM me and I'd be more than glad to help!

sjanes

I agree that each person needs to think about what they are doing, but your last post simply called me "lazy". I do believe that a cage in a 996 is more dangerous on the street than the stock car, but my 20 year old car has exposed steel close to my head, no side impact protection and the crumple zone is the same place the driver's seat is. Yes my SFI padding may do nothing for unhelmeted head, but I'm betting that it will do more than the bare steel the factory provided.

Personally, I think the most dangerous thing I did to my car was lower it since my head is about the same height as the bumper of a F150 when I'm driving.

cooleyjb

A-ha

That was my point. You stated it as a fact. Even used the word "fact" in all caps before your statement. Now you are just saying it's your opinion.
Any supporting evidence?
I could just as easily say, maybe it's cheaper to build stamped steel parts that meet the requriements instead of exceeding them by 10 times.

How about this example. Run your head into you SFI padded cage. Run your head into the B pillar of your car with whatever cheap thermoformed plastic covering they have on it. Which hurts worse. Your example is so crude it's poor. Oversimplifying the issue to a point where it is no longer analogous to the issue.


As you said, you've been through the debate more times can count, however you bring NO data to the debate but argue like there is.

cooleyjb

Well Porsche seems to sell the Boxster which has the exposed roll bar inches from the drivers head. Maybe the benefits outweigh the risks.

sjanes

If I had rollbar placement like this, I'd wear a helmet on the street too.

RedlineMan

Yeh, that and keepin the bugs out of yur teeth!

RedlineMan

Cooley;

Instead of taking potshots at me and trying to tear my statements down, why don't you support your own arguments? Tell us how having a cage in a street car with 3-point belts and no helmet is just as safe as bone stock? Let's hear YOUR reasoning.

Otherwise, you dislike of what I'm saying is obvious and has been achieved. So noted already.

gbaker

The intensity of this discussion suggests that someone should do a study. Who do you think we could get to sponsor some underpaid, overworked grad student to build a simulation model?

cooleyjb

I'm not taking potshots at you and that kind of accusation is rather rude. You need to realize that I generally respect your opinions and assimilation of facts as I've already stated. My dislike of what you are saying isn't the point I'm trying to make either. It is the double standard by which you are going about your safety arguements. First you say it's wrong that a new rule is being instituted even though there is no evidence to support the new rule. Then you go on to say that roll bars/cages are bad for the street, however there is no evidence to support this statement.

Do you see where I'm getting with this. You apply one standard to something and then change 180 degrees and apply the same standard you thought was bad to the next debate.

You ask me to support my own arguments when all I am doing is saying there is no data to support or falsify your argument. I can support that all day long. I think you believe that my arugment is that cages are safer. It never was, I was arguing your total lack of supporting data, but I'll play devils advocate for you.

As for my reasoning on why a cage might be safer on the street than without a cage. Well let me say that these are just guesses/opinions. Just like what everyone elses statements incuding yours. Please note that gbaker who works every day in this industry has also said that there has been no study conducted concerning cages in street cars.

The last few fatal wrecks that I've seen pictures posted of have had major intrusions into the drivers compartment. Maybe a properly installed cage with dash bar and good side impact areas would have prevented this intrusion into the drivers compartment.

I've been in 3 accidents on the street, none of which were my fault. Two were accidents where I was rear ended by someone who didn't stop for a light and were traveling roughly 25-30mph. Both times my hands never left the steering wheel and my body wasn't violently thrown about the drivers compartment. The other was when I was traveling 75mph down the interstate and someone decides to make a Uturn across the median from the left lane. I got the car slowed down to maybe 60mph before impact and she was doing zero. My body didn't impact the window, roof, steering wheel etc. It is my opinion that in all 3 of these accidents the roll cage/bar would not have increased the amount/intensity of my injuries.

My opinions for why cars don't have roll bars/cages integrated into the B pillars. Maybe it's not because they are too dangerous, but it's because they are overkill and the cost is prohibitive. Maybe it's simply because of appearance. Maybe since they already meet the standards they don't feel a need to. Maybe because it's too difficult to get your leg over the door bar when wearing a dress. Maybe because SFI padding doesn't go well with fine Cornithian leather. I could go on for days why I think the auto manufacturers don't put cages/bars in a street car.

I've never heard of anyone dying in an accident on the street because they had a roll cage/bar in their car. Have you? I have seen some nasty accidents that might have had different and possibly better outcomes if there had been a cage, both on the street and at DE's.

What about the fact that I'm 5'8" tall and a cage in my car still is further away from my head than the structure of the car is for someone who is 6'3". Now the distances to impact are equal but mine is a bit more stout. What about that possibility?

sjanes

Doesn't RUF put integrated rollcages (although without door bars) in his street cars?