TheSamba.com :: View topic

Sun May 10, 2009 8:41 am

riNR wrote: I think I'd lose the cross bracing behind the front seat / right behind your head. Either that or run a straight bar behind the seats joining the two sides.

Removing "X" bars remove diagonal rigidity and will allow cage to collapse on the diagonal , just as front windshield did in original accident....

If its a issue with interference with head, it can be padded and using helmet would be advised....

Dale

Sun May 10, 2009 12:35 pm

With the new cage I wouldn't even consider off roading it without wearing a helmet.
I can't tell you how many times I got my bell rung (wearing helmet) in my Funco. Sitting in the buggy you would swear there is no way our head can reach the bar. Needless to say it does in the middle of a race.

Sun May 10, 2009 4:29 pm

I bet if he sat in it with a helmet on that the helmet would always be in contact with the cage. If that's the case then it would drive you nuts. What if you x brace it but bent the tubes to the bend to horizontal in behind your shoulders instead. I just think it looks obstructive the way it is right now.

Mon May 11, 2009 12:58 pm

riNR wrote: I bet if he sat in it with a helmet on that the helmet would always be in contact with the cage. If that's the case then it would drive you nuts. What if you x brace it but bent the tubes to the bend to horizontal in behind your shoulders instead. I just think it looks obstructive the way it is right now.

Bending the tubes really defeats the purpose of "X" bracing. They will just continue to bend in the event of a roll over.

Mon May 11, 2009 2:47 pm

I can't see that altering them would completely defeat their purpose. It would still provide torsional strength to the cockpit of the cage. He has also used thicker wall tube. I can see it is definitely stronger as is but seems a little impracticle to me. He could also X brace the back window area to add strength too.

Mon May 11, 2009 3:08 pm

riNR wrote: I bet if he sat in it with a helmet on that the helmet would always be in contact with the cage. If that's the case then it would drive you nuts. What if you x brace it but bent the tubes to the bend to horizontal in behind your shoulders instead. I just think it looks obstructive the way it is right now.

Actually if you will notice he has highback seats and they do extend up enough to contact a helmet if he was wearing one.... Quite frankly as most of us sit in a seat even wearing helmet (as in my race car with highbacks) I have never noticed high backs contacting helmet.... I really think its a non issue...

Dale

Mon May 11, 2009 7:12 pm

riNR wrote: I can't see that altering them would completely defeat their purpose. It would still provide torsional strength to the cockpit of the cage. He has also used thicker wall tube. I can see it is definitely stronger as is but seems a little impracticle to me. He could also X brace the back window area to add strength too.
don't forget this is a 4 seater. there's a lot more space from the front pillars to the rear pillars then in a 2 seater. x-bracing the back area doesn't offer much protection to the front seats and would be in the way of the rear passengers. after considering everyone's opinions and designs i feel the x-bracing with the pillars behind the front seats and the x-bracing in the roof area offers the best protection with out adding a xtra post to the a-pillar. the front seats are racetrim suspension seats with high backs. in a normal sitting position my head is 41/2-5 inches away from the x-bracing. leaning my head all the way back against the seat puts me at 3-31/2.

Mon May 11, 2009 7:17 pm

I gotta go with Dale on this riNR. The X is far enough behind the heads of the front seat occupants. This was an initial concern of mine, but many of the offroad race cars I tech have the X closer to the driver's head than this.

All things considered, This has been an incredibly rapidly done project and is turning out very well, especially seeing that it is a "design by committee". I agree the floor could be a little better designed, but I don't see it as critical. The rear braces are not going to be highly functional structurally speaking due to where they land on the upper rear rail where it's unsupported. But that's not a big problem considering the braces which come down to the main top frame rail forward of there providing the bulk of the support in the area.

Now you need to start lining up all of your buddy's cars there for similar rebuilds of their rails Plumberbill.

Mon May 11, 2009 7:57 pm

Oh I just thought it was closer than that to his noggen. Hey, frame looks great! Wanna come and take care of mine for me now?

Thu May 14, 2009 8:07 pm

some more progress

new trailing arms

Fri May 15, 2009 10:38 pm

made a little change to the shock mounts

mocked up the headlights not sure if i like where there at......any suggestions

Thu May 21, 2009 3:45 am

finished and ready to ride this weekend

Thu May 21, 2009 6:36 am

looks great. have a great weekend and there is no reason to test the cage. hey, for reference, can you get a picture of you or somebody seating in the drivers seat to show how much head room.

Thu May 21, 2009 10:00 am

That head room view would be good for others.

Regarding the lights on the A pillar...
I find that if the lights are too close to your line of sight, the ground surface in front of the car loses shadows and looks dead flat, regardless of the bumps right in front of you. That was a problem with this setup:

Lights mounted below you are better in that they still provide some shadows in your view. For long range lights it's OK to have them on the roof, as long as you shield the glare from your hood, etc.

Sat Oct 31, 2009 4:42 pm

Dustymojave, That buggy looks alot like mine

Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:29 pm

So how did the shake down run go? The car looks good. I have seen cars at the race track that dont have as many bars. But I know why you did it. Good job on the rebuild and glad to see you came out of it as best as you could and still able to keep on doing what is loved.

Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:36 am

neverlift wrote: So how did the shake down run go? The car looks good. I have seen cars at the race track that dont have as many bars. But I know why you did it. Good job on the rebuild and glad to see you came out of it as best as you could and still able to keep on doing what is loved.

I don’t think plumberbill visits here that often. Since the rebuild it’s been on it lid once with minimal damage. I think he did more damage to odyknuck’s shock tower. :D

Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:19 pm

HILLAHOLIC wrote: neverlift wrote: So how did the shake down run go? The car looks good. I have seen cars at the race track that dont have as many bars. But I know why you did it. Good job on the rebuild and glad to see you came out of it as best as you could and still able to keep on doing what is loved.

I don’t think plumberbill visits here that often. Since the rebuild it’s been on it lid once with minimal damage. I think he did more damage to odyknuck’s shock tower. :D

thats awesome i think you would have been fine on the rebuild with just the B pillar addition and the cross bracing you can tell like someone said the length plus the leverage is why it folded like that

but overkill is a handy thing too im still learning about these things but you gave me some thing to look at before i go too deep in the woods with mine

thanks