Rollcage/spaceframe design and ULTRA 4/MSA regulations

[Dave W]

Side (door) protection are standard requirements for most speed based events, it both protects the occupants from side impact and helps maintain the "survive cell" in any major front/rear incident. Some regs allow them to be bolted so they can be removed when not competing but most require welding. They can normally follow a line just above the occupants legs/hips when seated so they are lower at the front making it easier for the occupants to get in/out of the vehicle.

Tree bars don't come close to meeting those regs.

If you look at most "space frame" designs the side bar is usually used to form the top of the "door" or more accurately the bottom of the opening. Note if you go down that route then there is an MSA requirement for the bar to be so many cm above the top of the seat base to ensure that the occupant is enclosed and protected.

Another regulation a LOT of people forget about concerns the height above the occupant's helmet when seated, always worth double checking your design, especially when building a space frame.

[moose]

Yeah seen the MAS regs I dont have a space frame its still chassis with exo cage bolted to it

The side protection I am planing will be like this...

And like the above bolt through the bulkheads to join the exo cage not sure if this will keep the ultra4 guys happy or not i will have to ask the question

[RedLineMike]

seems straight forward enough to deal with, need to fit window nets, biggest issue i need to clarify is the ruling on seamed tube being fased out by 2016,

Looks like we will have to build something out of cds to keep racing U4E

[Daan]

seems straight forward enough to deal with,

Looks like we will have to build something out of cds to keep racing U4E

I find that a rather interesting statement. Straightforward vs. having to build a new car. I still dont understand why the MSA rules dont work. People have spend absolutely miles of forum threads about having to fit mudguards, the ultra 4 rules seem to require much more involved modifications. I know which rules I would prefer.

daan

[RedLineMike]

side bars & door nets are straightforward to do,

Build a new car isnt as straight forward but its the boost we need to go even faster.........

Suppose i should look at 40's now

[RedLineMike]

Also Dan it's not as much the msa rules not working, I believe the msa had a **** fit & have said they won't insure the event instead

[Lewis]

Slightly off topic, mike is there anywhere on the forum you've discussed your disco2 axles? If not can I ask how you find them? Specifically are they a worthwhile conversion compared to standard coiler LR axles? What are their main strengths and weaknesses? What modifications have you made? Do you expect them to remain reliable with 40" tyres? Would you recommend them to others?

Thanks

[Team Idris]

Strength; rovertracks CV's

Weakness; Mike's RH Boot

[RedLineMike]

not quite steve, that was the last set of axles that cost us a 5th place finish at KOV in 2012, they were sacked off before 2013.....

id recomend the d2 axles to anyone,
I havent bigged them up on here incase i offend any armchair offroaders or serious competitors,

i wouldnt want to say they will be reliable with 40's, hell so far been reliable with 37" stickys but even then i do strip & check them after each outing, so thats a maybe,

the benefits of the d2 axles are
Aftermarket HD cv's are huge in comparision to disco 1 hd cv's,
track is wider allowing a less offset wheel to give better steering geometry

they take a standard LR diff, so if you have D1 axles, the diff goes straight into a D2 axle,

super easy to convert to full hydro steer with a highsteer option, although they have a unit wheelbearing, which can be expensive (£100+) they are super simple to work on, can have both axles stripped with shafts, cv's Hubs & diffs out faster than i could do one axle on a D1,

[Lewis]

That's great info thanks. What axle internals have you upgraded and which brands have you used? Have you had any strength issues with the axle casings?

I take it you have upgraded your diffs in the conventional way with aftermarket r&p, pegging & lockers?

[RedLineMike]

currently have ARB's in both axles, 4.11 CWP & pegged, axle casings have been beefed up slightly, biggest thing is the addition of gwyn lewis weld on diff pans & ill be redoing the bolts holding the diffs in & replacing with welded in studs as the diffs keep coming loose when you give them an absolute pounding,

it does have to be said that at KOV last year the issues we had were mostly self inflicted & partial learning curve, stuff like using the wrong type of wheel nuts caused a wheel to come off & destroy the rim & studs in the hub

[Dave W]

Re the CDS vs Seamed I think the MSA have a long term intention to phase out seamed but they've never set a date for it (that I've seen) and it'll probably keep getting pushed back if they ever do. I think I'm right in saying that the FIA have already "banned" seamed.

[Lewis]

Cheers mike, that's interesting reading

[Daan]

I havent bigged them up on here incase i offend any armchair offroaders or serious competitors,

If you believe that,than the modified vehicle build forum would be wasted!

Daan

[jai_landrover]

How many old skool trialers will not be allowed to play anymore.

Its put out there to say its to take the sport to the next level. Or what is should say is to take away the everymans chance of competing away. You cannot buy a £150 bender and build a motor to a high spec. You have to get a cage brought in.or buy the expensive equipment. This puts professional builders/garages/companies the big boys at a great advantage. Same way the Comp safari of AWDC has gone Pro a lone runner home bulder has zero chance of getting anywhere unless you throw serious serious cash.

The truth is they want to make the sport very expensive. Bigger sponsors and bigger events and lots of cash coming in. Huge coverage magazines and to be fair who can blame them?? Thats the truth. If they were genuinly trying to push the sport forward i.e extreme then they would allow Any tyre shape size open centred plus 4 wheel steer etc.

It depends this year Ultra 4 next year MSA or NFU or Boge it and scarper or whoever. Who do you build the car to what spec?

Didn't some vehicles mis the specs for the msa last year? But were still competing?? I know one vehicle certainly had a crushed main hoop at the top bend and had been competitng in events up until I saw it which was I think around a year if not longer.

The MSA will have a good reason to pull out. I just wish I knew exactly why.

[Dave W]

I don't know the reason why the event can't run under an MSA permit but I doubt it's the MSA as such that's the reason. The more likely reasons are that the vehicles simply won't comply with MSA regs and the MSA wouldn't allow an exemption or that the MSA didn't feel the organisers were suitable for the event. At the end of the day it's just a comp safari or point to point as far as i am aware ? We've been running those in the UK for donkey's years without any issues.

If vehicles last year did not comply with MSA regulations but were allowed to compete anyway then that might also explain the withdrawal of a permit. Not much point in having regulations, getting everyone to sign to say they'll abide by them and then finding out that the scrutineers and/or CoC didn't do their job properly.

Technically, anyone competing in this event who holds an MSA license is in breach of MSA regulations and can be excluded from MSA competition. The organising club also cannot be an MSA club because MSA recognised clubs cannot run competitive events that are not sanctioned by the MSA. Any MSA recognised club that promoted the event risks fines and the loss of their MSA status.

[najw]

Just to clarify why the events will not be running under an MSA permit and stop any of the speculation which is beginning. Because the events are part of an international series they would have to be run under full FIA regulations. That is all vehicles and competitors would have to comply fully which is not practical for this discipline.

The events in the UK will be run with IOPD permits to provide the necessary legal protection and independent insurance which provides at least the same level of cover as the MSA for all concerned.

[jai_landrover]

Najw,

Thats a fine answer. I was not speculating as to why. I put at the end I wish I knew and you answered it!

[jai_landrover]

Surley the point of the FIA is to set Regs Internationally to cover all events................ I know they have lots and lots of regs but thats the point of them.

[elbekko]

Its put out there to say its to take the sport to the next level. Or what is should say is to take away the everymans chance of competing away. You cannot buy a £150 bender and build a motor to a high spec. You have to get a cage brought in.or buy the expensive equipment. This puts professional builders/garages/companies the big boys at a great advantage. Same way the Comp safari of AWDC has gone Pro a lone runner home bulder has zero chance of getting anywhere unless you throw serious serious cash.

The truth is they want to make the sport very expensive.

Racing is expensive. It always has been, and it always will be.

Safety regulations exist for a reason, and will always be evolving. If you build a cage with your £150 bender and £50 worth of plumbing tube, roll it at 60mph, and kill yourself, it's the organisers that take the blame. If you want the event to be possible, you have to pay the price to play.

[jai_landrover]

There is a massive snobbery against seemed tubing in this sport. Its old we get that! its heavy we get that, its tough tho! Built to spec its been proved for years. Vs the new CDS that been supplied to various places of late I'd stick firmly to Seemed. Its been proven hell I've been in a rollover not quite 60Mph but hey must be somewhere up there. IF built to spec its Perfectly safe.

Don't get me wrong I'm the first to moan if someone builds a a home build and joins mid bend and does not follow any regs. (The reason you Never buy a second hand cage is it not). I've even been known to almost Pleed to people making homemade cages to follow regs. some members on here and other forums can confirm that.

Take for example the AWDC. It was truly MAssive and I mean massive!! As a kid I remember trials at Bovington trials and comps were HUGE!! competitors lined the sections. I just don't see that now at any comps from pretty much any organiser as a sport its just not as popular as it once was. MAybe elitism is the only way to go forward?

I'm not picking on AWDC others also. Its just I have some experience with the membership numbers competing years gone by some 20 odd years and now its nowhere near the number.

Not many cater for "Daves homebuild" market anymore and it will get less and less as time goes on. I guess the ALRC will always have a monopoly on the "old" seemed motors competing. I am not surprised that alot of the bigger clubs are pushing the everyman out. I'm surprised that that are effectifly banning them from competing by regs and cost.

[jai_landrover]

Material specs are just that if little johnnys climbing frame steel meets specs quoted in the blue book then it meets requirements. Material spec is there for a reason. It matters little what the intended purpose of the material was.

The problem comes when someone wants to cut corners and pass it off as a good cage built to spec. Not sure about you elbekko but myself I look at the vehicle and the owners "idea"s before getting in and passengering/driving because you life or those that passenger you are in the hands of that weld or that hoop.

Racing is expensive. It always has been, and it always will be.

Safety regulations exist for a reason, and will always be evolving. If you build a cage with your £150 bender and £50 worth of plumbing tube, roll it at 60mph, and kill yourself, it's the organisers that take the blame. If you want the event to be possible, you have to pay the price to play.

[jai_landrover]

It good to know the reason behind the MSA pulling out. Its a shame the FIA have not got something in place for the Ultra series.

[Daan]

Just to clarify why the events will not be running under an MSA permit and stop any of the speculation which is beginning. Because the events are part of an international series they would have to be run under full FIA regulations. That is all vehicles and competitors would have to comply fully which is not practical for this discipline.

The events in the UK will be run with IOPD permits to provide the necessary legal protection and independent insurance which provides at least the same level of cover as the MSA for all concerned.

Ok, thanks for clearing this up for us.

Daan

[Dave W]

As I understand it the main problem with seamed (blue band) is not just about the method used to create the pipe but more to do with it's consistency and the material/carbon content. I've seen the issue myself with blue band both when bending it and in use. The material specification for Blue Band means it has to have a specified average carbon content along a length of 100 metres. The problem with that from a roll cage POV is that it's not consistent along it's length so some parts can be too brittle and some parts too soft.

I've seen a blue band cage bend when the vehicle was literally just rested against a tree because it just so happened that the piece they'd used for the front hoop had a very low tensile strength at that point, the right hand side of the front hoop was MUCH softer than the left hand side (as proved via some very basic tests with a hammer after the hoop was removed).

CDS isn't any more difficult to bend than blue band, the bender needed is a bit more expensive but not THAT much and if CDS was made mandatory I'm sure most clubs would end up with a bender or two available for people to use.

It's a similar reason for the change to AF/R helmets, it wasn't due to the fire resistance part but was due to a change that meant those without FR had the test sample rate reduced dramatically so AF/R helmet shells were far more consistent as a safety specification.