53 replies to this topic

[dattoman]

Affirmative,... wanky

Howard has an alloy cage
But it was put in 20 odd years ago when it was a period mod and thats what was available

Steel for me

[MRLXSS]

I think its more cop-bait that wanky... Thats the main reason i wouldn't run one in a street car.

But painted black and hidden is more acceptable.

[Statler]

Some people think it's a wank. But i think some people are wankers....so it kinda levels out!

I prefer to think of them as cheap insurance.

I had a 1/2 alloy cage in this....

Clearly the accident wasn't our fault, but i believe the cage was the only thing that stopped ^ from becoming a whole lot worse! The impact moved the nosecone around on the bolts about 3-5mm! It was only a 60kph shunt! Without the cage, the parcel shelf would have bent a lot more than it did.
I originally installed the cage because of the sunroof. Bloody glad i did!

So....i've seen the benefits of having a 1/2 cage in a car.

I never hesitated in installing a 1/2 cage in the next car.



Is it a wank???.....i dont think so!

[ls2lxhatch]

If the cage is not ANDRA or CAMS approved then what is its purpose?

[myss427]

I was told by tech standards 20 years ago to have a cage or they would not register it. Now they will not if you have a cage, things change! All I could get back then was a BOND alloy cage, still there.

Edited by myss427, 16 April 2010 - 11:21 AM.

[StephenSLR]

its a bit wanky to have one in a street car and especially because its alloy and not steel.

What difference would the material make as to whether or not it's wanky?

I's always go the alloy regardless to keep the weight down.

s

[Heath]

^ Because of strength mate. They don't even certify alloy cages any more.

Each to their own, I don't think it's a wanky thing, but I guess I might be a bit of a wanker. Regardless it's much better than a non-functional bonnet scoop hehehe

[ls2lxhatch]

The only reason an alloy cage could be considered "wanky" is because it is no longer considered suitable as a safety device by ANDRA or CAMS.

Painting it black will not change that.

[GML-31]

do yourself a favour Nathan and get it powder coated satin black, wont scratch as easy.

[rodomo]

Looks like my cage wont be wankey after all, I have no need for an ANDRA or CAMS approved cage.

Anything would be better than nothing as Col has pointed out.

[StephenSLR]

^ Because of strength mate. They don't even certify alloy cages any more.

So in a roll-over are they just cosmetic?

I don't understand the concept totally, having them in the rear do they protect those in the back seat moreso or is the half cage enough to keep the front pillars from crumpling?

s

Edited by StephenSLR, 16 April 2010 - 06:01 PM.

[Heath]

StephenSLR, the idea is that your head is pretty close to the B pillars, so if you strengthen up the B pillar area, then you can roll the car and the front of the car isn't going to dip down so low that your head is exposed. Just like in convertibles will rollbars (doesn't matter if they have a windscreen or not as that just shatters, same as in a sedan), always behind the occupant's heads, preferably quite close

My racecar will have a half cage that doesn't mount to the parcel shelf.

And AD_75, you don't need a 'serious engine combo' to benefit from modifications to improve chassis rigidity, but points like that seem to get lost on a forum where everyone is just into straight line racing.

[Steve TPF]

I may need a roll cage in the hatch - but not for "wank" factor. There's rust in the roof that will at some stage need to be cut out. This will make the car unroadworthy, but if I remove the rear sets and fit a roll cage I'm hoping it could get approved. Without the rear seats and with no parcel shelf it should be possible to fit a decent, functional roll cage.

Viroads guidlines say a cage is permissable as long as it doesn't endanger the occupants. With no rear seats the only danger areas are the front bars if I fit a six-point - permissable if I follow guidelines and pad the bars.

Anyone fitted a cage for this or similar reason?

[Steve TPF]

I was under the impression that any cutting to the roof made the car unroadworthy, properly done or not. Supposedly that's the reason why many hail-damaged cars are write-offs. If I don't need a roll cage, fine and dandy, but I'm thinking I will.

[StephenSLR]

Supposedly that's the reason why many hail-damaged cars are write-offs.

You can fix hail damaged cars and car sale companies sell them at discount without problems, it only damages the metal skin.

A write off is basically an insurance company classification, if it costs more to fix the car than what the car is worth they 'write it off' and pay you what you have the car insured for. Of course structural damage is considered to cost more to fix than what the car is worth.

Cars can be 'written off' by insurance companies yet still be structurally sound and roadworthy.

Lets say you insure a $500 bomb, someone comes along and 'keys' the car, it will cost more than $500 to respray the scratches - write off!

s

Edited by StephenSLR, 17 April 2010 - 02:43 PM.

[Steve TPF]

Yes I'm familiar with the concept of an "economic write-off", but I'd heard somewhere that no roof repairs were permitted for structual reasons. Evindently I was misinformed, so there's no problem - except getting some training in fabrication to repair the roof.

[dattoman]

Don't go telling people with aftermarket sunroofs that !!!

No... you can repair anything...
Removing the windscreen on a modern car upsets the structure more than fitting a sunroof
Since the screen is a structural part of the car nowdays