Blatman Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 I didn't miss the point, just interpreted it differently. I'll try some more re-interpretation... I am not convinced that fitting a roll cage to a westy or any other open top car is a good idea, they slow you getting out of the car, put your head next to a solid piece of steel and obscure your vision Vision out of a LMP/F1 car is pretty poor compared to a Westfield with a cage. The rules for Formula cars are that the driver must be able to exit unaided in 5 secs or less from undoing the belt. I can easily do that from the confines of my caged Westfield, and I've only tried to get in/out of it 3 times. I'll be faster with practice. The risks of the hard steel can be mitigated, as can the risk of fire in exactly the same way as for a F1 car. So whether the car was designed with safety in mind from the outset, or is modified to improve driver safety, fitting a cage is still the optimum answer if you want to "race" a production based vehicle.
neilb Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 You have made you choice clear and fitted a cage, I was not happy with a standard RAC roll bar as I felt it was too low and purchased a taller one from CAT, safety is, like most things in life, a choice and it’s where you draw the line. Some times I feel that people get on the “if you can’t afford it you shouldn’t be doing it” trip. BTW Harv does the 205 have a cage?
scott beeland Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 Wasn't going to post again but this'll be my last one. It's all about personal choice re safety but having been out in Paul Jones car with a cage and banged myhead on it more than once whilst on the move I'm now happy that for me; fitting a cage would have been a bad thing to do. Added to the fact that the old legs don't always do what my brain tells them with the result being it takes me about 1 minute to get out of a caged car. Rac bar with added height hoop. 6 point harness and BS6658 type a helmet and I feel safe as houses
Blatman Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 Some times I feel that people get on the “if you can’t afford it you shouldn’t be doing it” trip. On that, we agree. When I costed out what sort of RAC bar I wanted, the cage, whilst expensive, was worth making the exta effort to find the money for. And cages also have a side benefit of stiffening the chassis, which was also a consideration in my calculations too. All in all, I could (obviously) justify it. Others may not be able to make the leap, but I agree that they shouldn't be criticised for making different choices. It's all up to the individual, and I will defend anyones right to choose for themsleves, the same as I will defend anyones right to agree or disagree with that choice if that is their wish.
Blatman Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 Wasn't going to post again but this'll be my last one. It's all about personal choice re safety but having been out in Paul Jones car with a cage and banged myhead on it more than once whilst on the move I'm now happy that for me; fitting a cage would have been a bad thing to do. Added to the fact that the old legs don't always do what my brain tells them with the result being it takes me about 1 minute to get out of a caged car. Rac bar with added height hoop. 6 point harness and BS6658 type a helmet and I feel safe as houses With the greatest respect to Paul, his cage design is not good. Compare his to a Caged one, and the differences are obvious. You'd not bang your head on my cage, and mine is on a narrow car, not a wide like Pauls... Now I'm not having a go at Pauls welding skills, and I'm sure it's better for him than the alternatives. But the alternatives may have diffeent approaches that would make a cage a more acceptable proposition for Scott. Have you tried a car with a wide Caged cage on Scott? I think you'd be surprised at how roomy they are when compared to Pauls...
Guest Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 Blatters would you not agree that anyone who can afford to do a reasonable amount of track work, has the nessasary funds to spend on safety? i certainly don't think that doing one track day in a blue moon warrents full on racer setup , but on the other hand , that accident could have easily happened to a once in a while TD goer (though i doubt that many novices go to spa etc) on the issue of cages , if you hit your head on the move in a caged car the cage is not correctly speced for the car its not got the required clearance and is therefore a danger to you.
neilb Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 As someone once said "I will defend your right to be wrong" or "I would like to agree with you but your wrong"
Blatman Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 Blatters would you not agree that anyone who can afford to do a reasonable amount of track work, has the nessasary funds to spend on safety? I think the issue of money needs to be removed from the equation. If someone is doing a lot of track work, then they need to be sensible about the risk elements and spend accordingly. BUT it may be that our keen track dayer spends all his money on getting out there and is happy to do so with an RAC bar and nothing else. Or he's a multi millionaire that still sees and RAC bar as adequte. That is their choice and we should not openly criticise their choice or their reasoning, or bring it down to a question of affordability. Yes, you can of course express your opinion based on your experience and knowledge, but I think the money argument is just going to lead to people missing the point and getting swept up in the question of affordability. As with most things in life, if we want, or preceive a need badly enough, we'll find the money for it...
oioi Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 Blatters would you not agree that anyone who can afford to do a reasonable amount of track work, has the nessasary funds to spend on safety? NO! somebody might spend all theryre money doing trackdays cos thats what they love and they dont give a S*** about buying a cage cos they dont give a fsck about such things cos its not important to them. i bet your the sort of idiot who winges on about the nanny state. youre being a fscking nanny. aaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh im going for a smoke whilst i still can before idiots like you tell me i cant
Blatman Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 I'm sure no-one ever actually reads what I write properly. Or they read it but don't understand it :
Toby Mack Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 Blatters would you not agree that anyone who can afford to do a reasonable amount of track work, has the nessasary funds to spend on safety? that isn't the point though, is it? The point is whether they WANT to spend the money. ie whether they think they EXTRA money is well spent. Plenty of people drive round in open top cars with NO roll-over protection. For that matter, plenty of people race open top cars with no protection (even seat belts) in historic racing. We are all adults and it is THEIR choice! Why should anyone here think they know better?
neilb Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 I think the issue of money needs to be removed from the equation. If someone is doing a lot of track work, then they need to be sensible about the risk elements and spend accordingly. BUT it may be that our keen track dayer spends all his money on getting out there and is happy to do so with an RAC bar and nothing else. Or he's a multi millionaire that still sees and RAC bar as adequte. That is their choice and we should not openly criticise the choice or their reasoning, or bring it down to a question of affordability. Yes, you can of course express your opinion based on your experience and knowledge, but I think theh money argument is just going to lead to people missing the point and getting swept up in the question of affordability. As with most things in life, if we want, or preceive a need badly enough, we'll find the money for it... Don't think that it could be put any better.
neilb Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 that accident could have easily happened to a once in a while TD goer From looking at the accident, I think that the guy has himself to blame clearly not paying attention to the track, the fluid can be seen easily by the camera so he should have seen it and being on slicks taken more care. The car looks to have taken the impact well and don't think that the cage made much difference, were it did make a difference is when he is sat on top it and gets hit by the other car, again what was he thinking.
oioi Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 I'm sure no-one ever actually reads what I write properly. Or they read it but don't understand it : i read what you said and agreed with you. just felt like a bit of a rant had me cig and thought i would share with you an experience met an old boy at croft in a fairly tatty looking e-type convertible. he had just come back from doing a trackday at monza. he didnt have any seatbelts let alone a roll bar. he took me out for a few laps and it was a hoot in some ways the lack of seatbelts made it more exciting as the frisson of danger was increased, which for me can only be a good thing i also have a mate with an original 911 carrera and he never puts his seatbelt on. makes it more exciting and him more alert.
gee_fin Posted October 14, 2005 Posted October 14, 2005 Only a few things to add on this. I wouldn't go near a track in a Westfield without a full cage but that's my personal choice. Which is what it's down to. Some people feel safe in an RAC bar, some in a rollover hoop. I also wouldn't venture out without wrist restraints (one of the most important things to me next to a decent helmet) and after words from a plastic surgeon I would now never venture out without nomex balaclava, socks and gloves (those areas being the hardest to heal after burns). But, at the end of the day, it's down to personal choice, we we still have our liberties and some have different risk factors than others. Graeme.
Recommended Posts