cscc/ctcrc roll cage spec

[midnite racer]

someone help please, ive read the msa bluebook on cages and it states for circuit racing saloon cars under 2000cc all you need is k1 or k2 spec cage, which shows that it is only a rear cage needed, is this right, as i thought the minimum was full cage with a diagonal and single door bars.

with roll cages, how do they check to see if its msa approved, as ive seen an omp full cage without door bars for sale for car.

[MGDavid]

Originally Posted by midnite racer

someone help please, ive read the msa bluebook on cages and it states for circuit racing saloon cars under 2000cc all you need is k1 or k2 spec cage, which shows that it is only a rear cage needed, is this right, as i thought the minimum was full cage with a diagonal and single door bars.

with roll cages, how do they check to see if its msa approved, as ive seen an omp full cage without door bars for sale for car.

As it ever was, the BB is vague and elusive!
On a quick read you appear to be basically correct, although K1.2.3 (and K1.3.4) defines a compulsory diagonal member so actually it needs to be like drg. #K5 or K6.
Like you, I thought a full cage was mandatory for racing, simple rollover bars just for sprints and hillclimbs, although I'm aware of the exceptions for pre-1963 stuff - but cannot find that mentioned!
Doorbars are defined within section K1.3.5 entitled 'Optional reinforcement' so they can't be compulsory, unless another regulation somewhere else over-rides this?

[Copperbottom]

Question is: would you really want to race without a proper full roll cage with door bars??

[midgetman]

Door bars are only mandatory if you have non standard doors. (read "lightweight" doors) Unless Supplementary Regulations specify otherwise, e.g. The regs for the 360 mandate door bars.

There isn't such a thing as MSA approved. My friend makes his own roll bars for his MGZRs, and he has no problem. Out of choice I went for an FIA cage for the 924 so I had a certificate to show scrutineers on the continent, but that was personal choice. There is no certificate needed at National level as long as it visually complies.

Nor in fact is there FIA approved; there is FIA Homologated which means it passes a set test but it's not "approved".

[Al Weyman]

Ctcrc regs state you must have door bars so as far as blue book is concerned that requirements is covered by championship SR,s or special regulations.

[midnite racer]

thanks guys, i wouldnt race without door bars though.

[greenamex2]

If you don't have door bars there are a number of scrutineers that won't let you race.

If you have lightweight doors then there are a number of scrutineers that won't let you race if you don't have double doors bars (in the form of an X or parallel).

So, even if you follow the blue book you can still not pass scrutineering. And no, you can't just point at the blue book and tell them they are wrong...tried that, doesn't get you out!


Irrespective, I wouldn't skimp on the cage. Even if you don't care about your own safety, a proper weld-in multipoint cage will stiffen the cars shell dramatically over a base spec 6 point bolt in/bolt together and be a much better basis for improving the grip and handling.

I really do cringe at some of the cages I see round the paddock.

[midgetman]

Originally Posted by Denis Bassom

If you don't have door bars there are a number of scrutineers that won't let you race.

If you have lightweight doors then there are a number of scrutineers that won't let you race if you don't have double doors bars (in the form of an X or parallel).

So, even if you follow the blue book you can still not pass scrutineering. And no, you can't just point at the blue book and tell them they are wrong...tried that, doesn't get you out!

Dennis, that's absolutely disgusting. The whole point of the MSA is to have centralised, common regulations for motor racing. You can't have renegade "officials" running round inventing their own rules! These people should be named and shamed - and preferably disciplined by the MSA.

[greenamex2]

I have hit this situation probably a half a dozen times over the last 20 years. Sometimes it has been really petty or daft things, other times it has been items where the scrutineer has a point relating to safety, even if it isn't covered by the blue book.

I tend to find it's easier and quicker just to comply than to argue, less chance of missing a race.

[Richard ibrahim]

Originally Posted by Denis Bassom

I have hit this situation probably a half a dozen times over the last 20 years. Sometimes it has been really petty or daft things, other times it has been items where the scrutineer has a point relating to safety, even if it isn't covered by the blue book.

I tend to find it's easier and quicker just to comply than to argue, less chance of missing a race.

I understand your attitude Denis - but up with it you should not put!
At a recent MSA scrutes seminar, I can remember the attendees being shown an overhead slide of a bottle of scotch covered by a large red cross. It was explained that this depicted a basic scrutineering rule - i.e. there is no such thing as the "Spirit of the Regulations"! I would suggest that if a scrutineer starts insisting on something that is clearly not as stated in the Blue Book, he should be reported to the Chief Scrutineer. If the miscreant happens to be the Chief (unlikely!), then you're right, comply if you can, but report the matter later. However, if you can't comply with an incorrect requirement and subsequently are not allowed to race,then I would think there was a case for compensation. Thankfully, I have never heard of such a situation arising, as the vast majority of scrutineers appear take a realistic approach to the job and try to be as helpful as possible to ensure that you can go out and race safely.

[greenamex2]

Originally Posted by Richard ibrahim

I would suggest that if a scrutineer starts insisting on something that is clearly not as stated in the Blue Book, he should be reported to the Chief Scrutineer. If the miscreant happens to be the Chief (unlikely!), then you're right, comply if you can, but report the matter later.

Yep, it was the chief scrutineer. Reported it to the club and MSA officials, they just agreed with scrutineer.

I have been lead to believe, rightly or wrongly, that the scrutineer can kick a car out for ANYTHING that feel is dangerous, whether it is in the blue book or not. Personally I totally agree with this but there has to be some control or come back on the decision.

Guess I am just lazy!

[Al Weyman]

I was once challenged that the screen in my Camaro was not laminated, I had to point out they never ever made one unlaminated since the 60's in the States!

[scrutineer]

Originally Posted by Denis Bassom

I have been lead to believe, rightly or wrongly, that the scrutineer can kick a car out for ANYTHING that feel is dangerous, whether it is in the blue book or not. Personally I totally agree with this but there has to be some control or come back on the decision.
Guess I am just lazy!

A scrutineer cannot throw anyone out of a meeting, it is the CofC's job to do that, this includes noise etc. We can only advise them of our findings they then have to make the final decision.
It is totally wrong that people look for things that are not in the book or worse make there own things up. You should take there name and report them to the MSA or club, its one think offering advice about how to make something safer but if its not in the book they cant just make it up. You are after all the 'customers' so if you have an issue make sure you raise it otherwise nothing will change

[GORDON STREETER]

I remember being told that a jubilee clip on a dry sump pipe was wrong and should be a "proper joint" connector and he wouldn't sign the ticket.
This was several years back when I was leading the championship at the time and obviously wanted to race.
The car had been like it for a couple of years and I pointed this out also saying that there was no pressure in the pipes running from the tank to the engine (or next to sod all) on the return.
I took him to task and asked him to point out this "indiscretion" in the blue book, after half an hour he came back and signed my ticket.
I will say that in all the years that I have been racing I have never had any other problems with UK scrutineers and normally found them helpful (I won't mention abroad meetings)

[R59]

Here we go with a "Holy Thread Revival Batman"....

I've just finished fitting an extra couple of bits of iron to my cage to form a X door bar on the drivers side as I had it in my mind that it was mandatory... Then reading the blue book over and over again, nowhere could I find it.... then I come across this old thread....

Thank you 10-10ths!! The Belmont shall go to the ball!

At least I don't have to add the extra bit of vertical tube having only one bend in the front legs.... I think it'd be awkward to get in and out of the car with another member in the way!

[BertMk2]

Originally Posted by R59

Thank you 10-10ths!! The Belmont shall go to the ball!

Good Which series / championship when and where? It's a fantastic car (although I'm pretty sure every time I've seen it it's shat itself in one way or another )

[Peter Mallett]

I suspect CSCC Special Saloons?

[alfaracer156]

My Lotus Elise does't have door bars and most of the others in the championship don't either. The doors are also pretty light. Mike

[R59]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

I suspect CSCC Special Saloons?

Your suspicion is correct oh master!!

Brands - this coming weekend - Saturday 4th / Sunday 5th.

I dug through the bloo book to find nothing about doorbars etc... and it was the comments raised by Denis that brought it back to me.

Not rollcages, but on scrutineering...

I had similar arguments about "you can't have that" when I carried an ABC powder fire extinguisher in addition to the AFFF one, and I reminded the young apprentice scrutineer that the AFFF was the mandatory minimum requirement which ticks the box. The ABC one was "not there" as far as he was concerned. A senior scrutineer agreed with me that ABC powder was a much better extinguishant for vehicle fires.