Menu toggle

Beaky's Bar

ORIGINAL: xenon

love the colour of the turbo in that first pic.

It's actually Peter's (PJS917) trackday/sprint/hillclimb prepared S2.

It is in really great condition and now has all of the 'right' bits on it brake & suspension wise.

I'm sure Pete will be along shortly to tell you all about it!
 
Have to say I really like the design of this roll bar, it fits its intended requirements great. Like Pete the sprint regs down here require all the interior to be in place which means a 44 would have to have the rear seat fitted, however they do encourage race seats, roll protection and fire protection and IMHO you need something like this as a minimum with bucket seats fitted.

I look forward to seeing some fantastically prepared cars this year, every time I have seen your car John it looks far to nice, perhaps now she will get a bit more track rash [:D] so I don't feel my S2 looks like a shed.
 
ORIGINAL: Neil Haughey
.... every time I have seen your car John it looks far to nice......

You are very kind Neil. Beaky is actually a "he" (I don't know why) and has a good number of authentic chips, bumps and dents - I'm sure it is just the polish which is confusing you. [;)]


 
John.
Im not sure if you realise. BUT on the 968 cars the seatbelt anchorage point is not welded to the seat runner but bolted on.
The small bracket is available from any OPC or breakers yard, as im sure are the later seat runners....
I found this out when i had my S2 after the 968...
Would this part also be able to support a harness clip? Does anybody have any piccies?
 
Ben.
Im sure if you were to fit a harness eyelet to the outside / cill side of the seat, then yes it could be done. BUT i dont think there would be enough room on the transmission tunnel side...
Ill see if i can take a few pics of my set up tomorrow...
PS ive used the Brey Krause stainless clips...
 
Surely the bar makes no difference to the fitting of a harness (aside the shoulder straps). If I understand correctly it bolts to the bottom of the B Pillar using the bottom seat belt mount, triangulates back to the outer rear seat belt mounts and the top utilises the upper B Pillar seat belt point. In other words it attaches using the already available mounts.

A harness fitst straight in with the exception of the inner lap strap mount and the angle of the shoulder straps, plus the crotch strap if you are using one, and none of these are added with this bar.
 
Almost - the bar actually fits to the rear lower seat belt mounts, with a spreader plate, rather than the lower front seat belt mounts. But otherwise correct.
 
To retain the original seatbelts but still fit 5 point harnesses I utilised 2 of the 968 L shape seat belt mounts on both sides of the seat. The 5 point Harness belt, and the standard belts are all bolted to the L brackets. I think the L brackets are about ÂŁ4.00 from an OPC. To fit the crotch strap I had a bar made up that bolts to the front seat mounts. The crotch belt wraps around this. It saves any holes in the body work and can all be put back to standard if needed.

It is a tight fit on the trasmision tunnel but it does fit.

Because this all uses the original mounting points it is very strong and flies through scrutineering without issue.

Ben the only pic I have that shows the mount was taken before I fited the lap belts. I will be taking my seat out at the weekend and will take pictures then.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y55/carmunicate/DSC02896.jpg
 
May I just throw this open to discussion regarding the validity of a bolt in bar like this vs nothing vs a full cage in view of a rollover?
I'm tempted to do the same sort of thing just to 'feel' a bit more secure but wonder if it would offer much in the terrible event of a flip?
 
It certainly should offer more than nothing at all.

As said previously, there is next to no space between your head, with a helmet on, and the head lining so you are going to feel it if there is any deformation at all. Because to hoop is triangulated and links the B & C pillars there must be some added rigidity and an increase in the ability to spread the load.

I took the view that it was a good idea as (as discussed before) if you have a harness, compared to a diagonal belt, you have no opportunity to move your torso. If the roof crushes at all the first thing that will try to stop it is you neck.

It was for this reason I considered a harness bar, with no additional roll protection, to be more dangerous than using conventional belts. I like the additional information the car gives you when you are strapped in solid so to use a harness I wanted greater roll protection.

Unless someone does flip a car with one of these in we will never know how good it is, or otherwise, but it makes me happy.
 
Ah, you are opening a hornets nest, this bar was never meant to be a full cage it was designed to offer a greater level of security in the event of a roll/accident. It started with me toying with the idea of a harness bar, then elaborating on that design. Two criteria it has too meet were :-

1/ It must be fully removable without damaging the car should I ever wish to return the car to standard, the best way of doing this is to use the existing seat belt mounts (the strongest part of the car)

2/ The class of hillclimb/sprint championships I compete in require the interior to remain standard so the bar had to fit around the rear seats. It also had to pass MSA scrutineering.

I took my ideas to a roll bar manufacturer who with modifications made the bar to FIA standards using FIA regulation tubing. There is no doubt in my mind that in the event of a roll it is far better than nothing, is it better than a full weld in cage? Probably not but it was not designed to be a full weld in cage. Many people from the rally and race fraternity have seen this bar and all have been very impressed by it. It has also gone through simulation by some of the best Aerospace engineers and the conclusions were all excellent.

It also has the by-product of adding extra rigidity in the middle of the car acting as a strut brace.

The main advantage of it though is it gives me piece of mind and that may be worth 1/10th second up Harewood Hill[:D][:D][:D][:D]
 
A further point - it is very similar to the Heigo hoop, although the Heigo hoop doesn't have the links onto the B pillar (so this is better [;)])

Heigo do an add on to their hoop to include a front section forming a cage so the core structure does have merit.
 
Ben the only pic I have that shows the mount was taken before I fited the lap belts. I will be taking my seat out at the weekend and will take pictures then.
Thanks Pete, appreciate that, can't really see the L-shape bracket you are reffering to in the pic, just looks like the belt retainer is attached directly to the horizontal rail?
 
+ The triangulation like John has gone for is well into the passenger space and as close to the driver as possible which is ideal because it is bracing an open area of the car.

Bit dubious I have to say about how much this stiffens the car though, one can calculate how much a chassis twists (or measure if you have a rig like F1 and KW use) by multiplying cornering forces against the figures manufacturers sometimes publish. The actual flex is extremely small, I bet even in the 944 which IMHO/E has a weak roof/floor I bet it is still a very small change. There was a thread on PH about this a while back questioning why OEMs are so obsessed with amazingly stiff chassis, the point being it is to do with damper control not lifting wheels as many believe.

One way to find for sure, fit it to the car and see if you hear any creaking and squeking sounds when cornering hard. If it really does brace the car the deformation will surely cause cuts into the carpet where the spreader plates sit on the carpet. If the carpet is unmarked then you know the answer.
 
ORIGINAL: bennyboy

John.
Im not sure if you realise. BUT on the 968 cars the seatbelt anchorage point is not welded to the seat runner but bolted on.
The small bracket is available from any OPC or breakers yard, as im sure are the later seat runners....
I found this out when i had my S2 after the 968...
Would this part also be able to support a harness clip? Does anybody have any piccies?

Ben. Ive just searched through the PET system + cant find this bracket. It must have onlt been fitted to the 968 "sport + Club Sport " seats. I tried to take some pics today, but they didnt turn out very well, theres no room to take any good informative pics...Im sure Pete will manage to get some this weekend...
 
Neil
I realise you might be sceptical about the stiffening issue. But trust me,, it does make a difference...
Ive been out in Petes car before the bar was fitted + after fitment + can defo say its an improvement..."We" do a lot of R+D "up norf" you know...
Maybee not as much as a fully welded in cage, BUT its NOT pretending to be that...
Like Pete has said. It [ the bar] has been made for a specific purpose..
In fact even a Brey Krause harness bar can help to stiffen up the cars frame...
How do i know. Ive got one fitted to my car....[;)][:D],, But soon to be replaced by a rear half cage....To make it stiffer...[:D][:D]
 
ORIGINAL: Neil Haughey
.....If it really does brace the car the deformation will surely cause cuts into the carpet where the spreader plates sit on the carpet. If the carpet is unmarked then you know the answer.

Not sure that would be the case as the spreader plate is bolted down on top of the carpet so should move, or not, as one.

Cars certainly flex. It is most noticeable if you put your fingers across a trim joint and accelerate hard. You can sometimes feel the joint moving under your finger. Our Freelander was incredibly floppy in that respect.
 
I'd be interested in what Aerospace testing has been done? My question is based on me wanting something in my car as opposed to nothing. I'm sure it would help in some situations but as has been mentioned ad nauseum, there is very little headroom in our cars and I would feel that in many rollover situations the impact would crush or deform the A pillars / Windscreen and even by having a 'Hoop' behind you, I am not sure that I fancy the consequences. However, I do like the look of this device and am sure it would help in some way.
Having said that, I can't recall anyone rolling one of our cars in my living memory and I would suppose for that to happen you might need to be doing some proper bash and barge racing. Or at least that would greatly increase the chances for upending the car. So I'm really torn as what to do with my car. I really don't want to put in a whole cage, but one has to be honest in assessing the risks. One also has to consider the 'what ifs' and the consequences that might entail. Sorry to put a damper on this but I think we have to consider all possible outcomes in a pursuit with these risks.

Not much mention of Hans devices around here either. That's my next purchase.
 
It's quite an emotive issue this one (as our numerous discussions have revealed over the months) and I'm not sure where I lie in all of it [&:] which is why this is the first time I've taken part

I certainly feel that I would like the security of a harness to keep me more securely in my bucket seat should the worst happen, though my standard seat belts did a sterling effort when I had my crash last year. The trouble is how to secure the harness properly without installing a full cage or hoop. Personally I do not want a cage or hoop in a car that I'm going to use on the road and feel that a cage should be left to the race cars only.

The panels on my own car crumpled nicely with a pretty big impact on the LH side and I do think that some sort of cage, hoop or harness bar would have transmitted the force to the RH side of the car as well and possibly caused more damage and more expense [:eek:] I freely admit I know very little about impacts and forces compared with some of our posters and as safety is such an important issue I'm glad we're having this discussion as there is plenty to learn (though I hope never to need it again :ROFLMAO:)
 

Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members

Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the Club, who shall have no liability in respect of them or the accuracy of the content. The Club assumes no responsibility for any effects arising from errors or omissions.

Porsche Club Great Britain gives no warranties, guarantees or assurances and makes no representations or recommendations regarding any goods or services advertised on this site. It is the responsibility of visitors to satisfy themselves that goods and/or services supplied by any advertiser are bona fide and in no instance can the Porsche Club Great Britain be held responsible.

When responding to advertisements please ensure that you satisfy yourself of any applicable call charges on numbers not prefixed by usual "landline" STD Codes. Information can be obtained from the operator or the white pages. Before giving out ANY information regarding cars, or any other items for sale, please satisfy yourself that any potential purchaser is bona fide.

Directors of the Board of Porsche Club GB, Club Office Staff, Register Secretaries and Regional Organisers are often requested by Club members to provide information on matters connected with their cars and other matters referred to in the Club Rules. Such information, advice and assistance provided by such persons is given in good faith and is based on the personal experience and knowledge of the individual concerned.

Neither Porsche Club GB, nor any of the aforementioned, shall be under any liability in respect of any such information, advice or assistance given to members. Members are advised to consult qualified specialists for information, advice and assistance on matters connected with their cars at all times.

Back
Top