For those who don't think they need a rollbar...

[wagner]

The passenger should have been killed, no HANS, not fire suit, no race seat....

 

It doesn't even look like the driver had a HANS on either, just stupid.

 

That rollbar barely did its job, again they got lucky as hell.

 

I don't care what people tell you, if you're going quick enough to need the gear it should be in the car.

 

I know NHRA has the rule about 08 cars and newer not needed a roll bar, but that is for cars that are UNMODIFIED. Even then there is no way in hell I would run a car quicker than 11.00 or over 120 with out at least a 6 point.

 

There is so much that can go wrong at the track, protect yourself. Even if you don't care at least do it for those who love you...

 

[SpaceGhost]

Holy Shit!

[SHIEF]

Always cracks me up on here about tracks/times/safety rules and the complaints. Don't like it? Take that shit to autocross or the "other" cars and coffee with a shot of gay. This vid is another reason.

[Geeto67]

That event looks like it was run at an airport runway, not an actual track so maybe that's why the lax rules? When I used to run at E-town and westhampton (RIP) they both had a no-passengers rule and were zealous about roll bar and harness certification

 

I've been around drag racing my whole life and I've never seen a rollbar hoop crush like that. hey Wagner, do you think something like that would pass real NHRA tech? I'm thinking it wouldn't.

 

Holee shit!

[wagner]

The only time I've seen a roll bar fail like that is when it wasn't built correctly. It's strange the way it crushed like that around the bend.

 

It might have been made of bad material, or not braced correctly. I'm also willing to bet it didn't have enough roll cage for a 1800 hp car.

 

The big thing is the lack oF neck collar or HANS devices. You want a broken neck or base skull fracture? Because that's how you get one. ..

[Miller]

Take that shit to autocross or the "other" cars and coffee with a shot of gay.

 

http://emojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com/cache/fb/e9/fbe9c2dfe740a8313854d7b0318b8d0b.png

[Mallard]

The only time I've seen a roll bar fail like that is when it wasn't built correctly. It's strange the way it crushed like that around the bend.

 

It might have been made of bad material, or not braced correctly. I'm also willing to bet it didn't have enough roll cage for a 1800 hp car.

 

The big thing is the lack oF neck collar or HANS devices. You want a broken neck or base skull fracture? Because that's how you get one. ..

I don't see any cross-bracing on the hoop, just down tubes on the sides.

 

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[The_buster]

The big thing is the lack oF neck collar or HANS devices. You want a broken neck or base skull fracture? Because that's how you get one. ..

 

Even at the go kart place they have neck protection, and you only get to maybe 45 mph I think k.

[wagner]

I don't see any cross-bracing on the hoop, just down tubes on the sides.

 

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

 

No, it was a "cheap" roll bar.

 

One of our editors is going to be doing a big story on this. He talked with driver, shop who built the car, and the passenger.

 

From what he was told the days of lax rules in legit standing mile racing might be over after this wreck.

[craig71188]

I see people bitch about SCCA rules all the time (I know not applicable for the "event" shown) - but for "real" race events:

Full approved & inspected roll CAGE

Fire suit (2 layer minimum)

Fire system in car

"SA" Spec Helmet

HANS device

Window net

Fuel Cell

 

These guys were incredibly lucky - besides the obvious, they could have had an arm torn off had it flopped out an open window and if the car had caught fire, well...

 

If you want to go fast, you also need to spend money on the safety gear. It's not a case of "IF" something goes wrong, it's a matter of "WHEN" something goes wrong and just how bad it gets.

[Got-Boost?]

No, it was a "cheap" roll bar.

 

One of our editors is going to be doing a big story on this. He talked with driver, shop who built the car, and the passenger.

From what he was told the days of lax rules in legit standing mile racing might be over after this wreck.

 

 

The problem is you have all these new organizations coming up that don't have the big rules and restrictions that places like the Texas Mile, Ohio Mile, etc have been requiring fore YEARS. Even TX was relaxed at first but once people started going faster and faster they have limited it a bunch. ECTA has never, they always required the full stuff just to go over 135mph.

 

The new groups want to put on events with fast STREET cars that anyone can come out and race. Now they are seeing why it's a bad idea. Hopefully no one is seriously hurt in the process...

[Geeto67]

You keep talking about Hans devices and neck collar, and while I agree with you I actually think this is the 1 in a million case where not having one worked in their favor because of that shitty roll bar. Sure whiplash sucks but the way that roof caved, having the extra room to move the helmet (and the padding in the stock seats) may have kept them from a more serious injury when the roof impacted the tops of their helmets.

 

Those dudes need to send the crash engineering team at GM a really good Xmas gift. That car looked like a crumpled beer can but except for the roof there wasn't much intrusion into the passenger cabin.

[2highpsi]

This is a subject I'm personally torn on... for a few reasons.

 

1.) Making a street car a race car.

 

- Is a car with a cage ON THE TRACK safer than a car without a cage ON THE TRACK? Well yeah, assuming you have all the other safety equipment like a helmet and proper harnesses.

 

Now the opposite side of that equation is: A caged car on the street, with occupants who are not wearing helmets and harnesses is indeed MORE DANGEROUS than a car without a cage.

 

So, why on earth would I risk MY PASSENGER'S lives (more than likely my children) on the street over my own life on the track. Especially considering that most of our cars spend 99% of the time on the street and 1% of the time on the track.

 

Which brings me to...

 

2.) Why the fuck are we, as a society, OK with some risks and not others? We are OK with people racing motorcyles, we are OK with people sky diving, we are NOT OK with people racing their own car, at a track without a cage??

 

 

We say we want racing off the streets. If someone is racing on the street it's pretty safe to assume it's a STREET CAR. So guys try to do the right thing and bring it to the track, only to be told to turn their street car into a RACE CAR by caging the shit out of it.

 

 

#3.) All car's are not equal. When I had my Cobra (that ran 11s) it was a scary ass ride. Had I kept that car, it would have got a cage, and I wouldn't have driven it on the street after that. A lot of these newer AWD cars on the other hand, can run 9s effortlessly. Much more stable at speed, much better brakes, bigger tires, 6 airbags, and AWD to make sure you aren't spinning tires down the back half of the track.

 

 

 

Now, it's not that I think safety in REAL racing is bad. If the car lives on the track, it should be built accordingly. But technology has advanced to the point where street cars now are as fast as race cars were when most of these "rules" were written.

 

 

I don't care what people tell you, if you're going quick enough to need the gear it should be in the car.

 

I know NHRA has the rule about 08 cars and newer not needed a roll bar, but that is for cars that are UNMODIFIED. Even then there is no way in hell I would run a car quicker than 11.00 or over 120 with out at least a 6 point.

 

 

I'm going to let you take my car down the strip next track day.

 

If you don't hop out with a changed outlook on the above statement, I would be very surprised.

[aussiek2000]

^^^^I agree with all of the above.

 

 

If a driver decides to run a car that is unsafe, that's on them if they crash and die/get hurt. But to put passengers' lives in danger is just stupid. The passenger should have never been in the car regardless of safety equipment.

[coltboostin]

 

I'm going to let you take my car down the strip next track day.

 

If you don't hop out with a changed outlook on the above statement, I would be very surprised.

 

 

GTR is Cheating.

 

Shit dont count!!

[RC K9]

Gosh darn it. Now I have to get a cage and wear a helmet when I take cruises around the loop and run to wal-mart for bread and beer.

[The_buster]

 

Now the opposite side of that equation is: A caged car on the street, with occupants who are not wearing helmets and harnesses is indeed MORE DANGEROUS than a car without a cage.

 

 

Why is this? I know absolutely nothing about this sort of thing, but I thought the cage was to make the car safer.

[Mallard]

Why is this? I know absolutely nothing about this sort of thing, but I thought the cage was to make the car safer.

When you put a labyrinth of metal tubes through the interior of your car, you greatly increase the odds of fracturing your skull and dying when your head hits these tubes in an accident. There's a reason you're supposed to add padding to the cage and wear a helmet.

 

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Geeto67]

Which brings me to...

 

2.) Why the fuck are we, as a society, OK with some risks and not others? We are OK with people racing motorcycles, we are OK with people sky diving, we are NOT OK with people racing their own car, at a track without a cage??

 

I think the the thing you are struggling with is that not all risks are equal. Sure the outcome, death, may be the same but the risks of motorcycle racing are not the same risks as racing a car on the track without a cage. Risk is the likelihood of the outcome, not the outcome itself - if you think every fall off a bike results in serious injury or death then 1) you would be mistaken, 2) I can see why you would be angry why a "riskier sport" would be held to a different standard. The greatest risk of death in motorcycle racing is collision with a stationary object (that is not the ground), but that is not the greatest risk in car racing.

 

When it comes to "street" cars - well I don't think anyone imagined street cars would ever go as fast as they currently do. I don't think there is a law against street cars having X amount of power without safety gear, just as some states helmets are optional. If you don't think there is a Safety crusader movement, similar to people saying cars like this should have good safety equipment, in other areas like motorcycles then maybe you haven't me the AGATT people (All Gear All The Time). Again there is no law saying your 1000hp street car needs a cage if it is only driven on the street - it's just people bitching about your death wish to operate it that way instead of exercising your self preservation instincts.

 

The moment you enter a car in competition it is a race car. If you want to use it on the street fine, but it's doesn't make it not a race car. Because of the power outputs of modern cars the "street/strip" car is going away. And while crash protection of cars has improved light years since the 1960's the moment you mod the car beyond it's intended parameters, the inherent engineering of the structure no longer applies. Are the current rules antiquated? sure, but they work. The days of a competitive competition ready street car being a daily driver are almost gone.

[2highpsi]

I think the the thing you are struggling with is that not all risks are equal. Sure the outcome, death, may be the same but the risks of motorcycle racing are not the same risks as racing a car on the track without a cage. Risk is the likelihood of the outcome, not the outcome itself - if you think every fall off a bike results in serious injury or death then 1) you would be mistaken,

 

No, I don't think every fall off a bike results in serious injuries or death. I also don't think wrecking a non caged car at a track results in serious injury or death every time either. That's my point.

 

 

 

 

The moment you enter a car in competition it is a race car.

 

Define competition?

 

Under today's NHRA and IHRA rules I can't even make a solo (no one in the other lane) pass at a track rental.

[SHIEF]

I get everything you are saying Jordan. And yes, a cage on the street isn't safe (even with padding).

However, you cannot think those airbags are going to save you in a high speed rollover like a cage would. At least you won't convince me.

[Geeto67]

No, I don't think every fall off a bike results in serious injuries or death. I also don't think wrecking a non caged car at a track results in serious injury or death every time either. That's my point.

 

I don't think people are treating it as such. Still running on a track is private property and the owners of that track don't want to underwrite the risk of having to pay your widow for your death without at least requiring you to take reasonable precautions to prevent it.

 

 

Define competition?

 

Under today's NHRA and IHRA rules I can't even make a solo (no one in the other lane) pass at a track rental.

 

I am going to say a run at a track with a governing body. NHRA, IHRA, NMCA...etc... Doesn't have to be an event with prizes, etc...just under the auspices of a competition governing body's rules.

 

Its unfortunate that you can't run your car at these tracks without significant safety devices installed but remember every safety rule from these governing bodies is written in blood.

 

I remember my father telling me how Mike Sorokin, who drove the surfer's top fuel dragster, died: In those front engined diggers you sat on the top of the axle and mid run the axle broke loose from the mounts. To avoid being ground up by an axle spinning underneath him he stood up in the cockpit. Then the car rolled. One of my father's flying buddies used to be missing a 3 toes on his right foot because a flywheel let loose at 7000 rpm in his '66 chevy II and cut through the floor board, the gas pedal, and part of the subframe. you aren't allowed to build an un-certified chassis in an outdoor motel parking lot or run faster than a certain speed without a scatter-shield and run at an NHRA track because of events like this.

 

The driver of the track requirements these days are the insurance companies and they are not arbitrary. They look at lots and lots of data and figure out how they are going to insure the track and give them a few options for costs/risks. Most select the lowest premium/most strict requirements because tracks cost a lot to operate. It is evolving however. What they do with stock cars now is testament to that. In 1995 I could not run a 12 second pass at an NHRA track in a stock car without safety upgrades, now I could. So they are recognizing improvements in engineering, maybe they just aren't moving as fast as you would like. If you want to speed the plow in this area, you can help collect data and bring it to the NHRA and IHRA so they push back on the insurance companies to recognize the rule without a significant increase in cost.

[2highpsi]

I get everything you are saying Jordan. And yes, a cage on the street isn't safe (even with padding).

However, you cannot think those airbags are going to save you in a high speed rollover like a cage would. At least you won't convince me.

 

 

Like I said above, I DO AGREE that a cage is safer in the event of a rollover. HOWEVER, I think the factory safety stuff is still FAR better than what used to be out there. Combine that with the fact that I rarely ever see GTRs end up in rollover. Even the (many) guys that have went into spins in excess of 200 MPH, the car has stayed on 4 wheels. And I'm not even planning on going 200 MPH, I'm talking about going 140 (in the 1/4 mile)

 

I'm a numbers guy... so it boils down to odds. The odds of me getting into an accident on the street are FAR greater than my odds of rolling on the track.

 

I merely want to be able to make that choice myself.

 

 

Now I am in HUGE favor of safety rules that are meant for keeping everyone else safe. So I am happy to have my car "tech'd in" to assure I'm not putting anyone else in danger by having leaking fluids etc.

[Geeto67]

Like I said above, I DO AGREE that a cage is safer in the event of a rollover. HOWEVER, I think the factory safety stuff is still FAR better than what used to be out there. Combine that with the fact that I rarely ever see GTRs end up in rollover. Even the (many) guys that have went into spins in excess of 200 MPH, the car has stayed on 4 wheels. And I'm not even planning on going 200 MPH, I'm talking about going 140 (in the 1/4 mile)

 

I'm a numbers guy... so it boils down to odds. The odds of me getting into an accident on the street are FAR greater than my odds of rolling on the track.

 

I merely want to be able to make that choice myself.

 

 

Now I am in HUGE favor of safety rules that are meant for keeping everyone else safe. So I am happy to have my car "tech'd in" to assure I'm not putting anyone else in danger by having leaking fluids etc.

 

I think we are 90% in agreement, but remember the insurance evaluators who review the risk and determine how to assign a money value to the risk are also numbers people and they way they see it every car from a dragster to a 1970 nova to a brand new GTR is pretty much the same in a 140mph impact and they have to write requirements to fit that based on passed experience. It isn't about whether you get into an accident - it is whether you are likely to survive or avoid serious injury from that accident when it happens and what are the things required to mitigate that risk. They have to write with a broad brush because there are literally thousands of makes and model cars and it isn't feasible to evaluate every one.

 

you still make that choice - but the choice is whether you drive the car on the street or the track. The cars are just moving too fast now to be "street/strip" anymore. If you want the choice to go to the street or the strip you can always go slower as a third option. I do think it will eventually catch up but it takes time and you may not even have the car by the time it catches up.

 

If it makes you feel better a 1970's pro-stock car like the old "grumpy's toy" Camaro wouldn't pass safety tech to run 10's today. more importantly if it weren't for some of these rules there wouldn't be incentive to develop something as technnologically advanced as the GTR. So it is a bit of an Oroborus.

[2highpsi]

 

you still make that choice - but the choice is whether you drive the car on the street or the track. The cars are just moving too fast now to be "street/strip" anymore.

 

Yep, this is where I am stuck.

 

I get to go to the track maybe 2-4 times a year. So I can't personally justify a track only car. So this car was suppose to be my "solution". Drive it anywhere, anytime, take the kids to school in it, etc. Still be able to go to the track and go "fast".

 

I've found that I'm not going to be able to count on that though. I do have to admit that I've been lucky a couple times where I didn't get booted (and should have according to the rule books). Time just comes at such a premium to me, that I hate to even commit to track days now, knowing that there is a chance I'm only going to be allowed to make one pass.

 

For what it's worth, I've come to terms with the rules being are what they are. I'm probably going to sell my current car next month, and pick one up that is less modified. I still felt like bitching about it though