leggwork wrote:
[quote]there is a discussion going on over on the CR SIG list about footwell intrusion protection. Somebody was advocating triangulating the forward footwell points in three dimensions similar to how I’ve annotated Lance’s cage pic (front two green bars are new). Don’t know if this would interfere with your clutch foot or not yet.
I don’t see anything in the NASA CCR that would prevent this. BMW CR rules need to be updated to allow it (likely).
cheers,
bruce [/quote]
I don’t see how those additional bars are going to help with foot protection. The intrusion that it seems we are trying to prevent is that of the trans tunnel moving over on the driver right foot towards the gas pedal.
The bars in that picture will do nothing to prevent that. To help with that intrusion you’d need to have a plate on the trans tunnel and then triangulate that back up to the cross member in some way. I just don’t see any useful additional foot protection there.
We are working the design of Simon’s cage right now as the car is going to Mark McMahon’s place on Tuesday. I’m gonna try to have it drawn up but basically it will be very similar to the cage I did in my JS car years ago…a few improvements but otherwise nearly the same. It will have a full X in the main hoop and the cage will be symmetrical from side to side. We will implement the use of clamshell guessets in several areas for added strength.
The biggest thing I keep going back and forth on right now is where to mount the rear down tubes. I’d prefer to attach to the floor in the trunk where the spring perches are at (since that’s where the load comes in) but this makes it difficult to trianulate back at the angel I want. The other option I see is to the strut towers but this is not very good because we are not running coilovers in the rear. Still thinking on this one.
I also do not see any real benefit of a roof diagonal, we’re not generating enough cornering forces I don’t think. It simply ends up being weight up high.