Discussion
Ok chaps/chapesses.
Who has had this done and what were your experiences? I could do with knowing who did the job and the approx cost (PM me if you want). Presumably the roof will still drop down at the back and the targa top is unnafected?
Im seriously considering this mod as all the new power is a little frightening
cheers
Graham
Who has had this done and what were your experiences? I could do with knowing who did the job and the approx cost (PM me if you want). Presumably the roof will still drop down at the back and the targa top is unnafected?
Im seriously considering this mod as all the new power is a little frightening
cheers
Graham
Graham,
I have heard many complaints from people that some roll bars are positioned very close to your head above the head rest which for some tall people has been an issue. I would suggest which ever supplier you go to, check out an already installed one to see if it is an issue for you.
I have heard many complaints from people that some roll bars are positioned very close to your head above the head rest which for some tall people has been an issue. I would suggest which ever supplier you go to, check out an already installed one to see if it is an issue for you.
Hi Graham,
I spoke to Ben/Griffter about his at the RR in Thornbury - his is very good but very expensive (IMO). I think he said it was £330-ish for the roll bar but £1,000 including fitting.
At the time, he said they wouldn't supply it for self-fit IIRC
I'll be watching this thread with interest though 'cos I'd like one.
I spoke to Ben/Griffter about his at the RR in Thornbury - his is very good but very expensive (IMO). I think he said it was £330-ish for the roll bar but £1,000 including fitting.
At the time, he said they wouldn't supply it for self-fit IIRC I'll be watching this thread with interest though 'cos I'd like one.
I've got the Tower View Rollbar. This is generally regarded as the only 'off the shelf' bar which is not sold for 'cosmetic purposes only'. It sits just lower than the top of my head, but is better than nothing. It has to sit lower than the top of my head in order to allow the rear section to fold, and to for the bar stay away from the side of my head (which is what leads to the baseball bat analogy). Because it sits low, it obscures rear vision through the rear view mirror. With the rear hood section down I can see very little at all in the rvm.
Cost in 2004 was £360 for the bar, just over £1000 fitted all in. When I contacted Tower View they insisted they would only supply AND fit. They had supplied for DIY fit before that and seem to have supplied for professional fitting elsewhere since then. I opted for four-point harness points which come into their own on track days. I don't tend to use the harnesses on the road.
Other people seem to have had equally substantial rollbars and even full cages designed fabricated as a 'one-off' and fitted for about the same four figure sum I paid.
In short it's a good design, but has compromises. In my opinion the harness option outweighs the disadvantages of obscured rear vision.
Personally in your position I'd look for a bespoke solution for within a £1000 budget. That way you can specify the exact position of the bar, or go for roll hoops or something.
Cost in 2004 was £360 for the bar, just over £1000 fitted all in. When I contacted Tower View they insisted they would only supply AND fit. They had supplied for DIY fit before that and seem to have supplied for professional fitting elsewhere since then. I opted for four-point harness points which come into their own on track days. I don't tend to use the harnesses on the road.
Other people seem to have had equally substantial rollbars and even full cages designed fabricated as a 'one-off' and fitted for about the same four figure sum I paid.
In short it's a good design, but has compromises. In my opinion the harness option outweighs the disadvantages of obscured rear vision.
Personally in your position I'd look for a bespoke solution for within a £1000 budget. That way you can specify the exact position of the bar, or go for roll hoops or something.
I suggest the starting point for this should be the MSA Blue Book. The Griff either needs a full Roll cage or provided you are not too tall a Roll hoop to drawing Q60. To meet the Q60 regs you have to be able to draw a line from the hoop over the drivers head to a “ substantial mass” ie the plenum which is conveniently just a few mm under the bonnet. How tall you are and how high you have the seat is crucial in deciding if you can comply with Q60. If you open the bonnet, sit in the car and have someone take a side on photograph you can then draw a line from the plenum to where the hoop has to be.
The original factory hoop came close but falls short in a few ways.
Q60 requires a diagonal across the hoop, which is missing on the factory one. Mine has a diagonal between the hoop and opposite backstay and also across the hoop but to meet the regs you only need it across the hoop.
The TVR one is I think 38mm tube and it now has to be 42mm
The fixings on the TVR one fall well short of the required standard.
Caged in Westbury (I think they may have moved now) did mine. It is bolt in and realistically takes about an hour to fit.
The main disadvantage for road use is you will find the bar a bit too close to you your head and more importantly the passengers head which tends to be set a few inches back compared to the driver unless you have moved the battery. This is not such a problem if you are wearing a helmet and held down with a harness. To meet Q60 in my car Caged had to make the hoop sit forward of and higher than the TVR one. Luckily I am not that tall otherwise it would have only been possible with the roof removed.
Really can’t see the point of the various hoops that sit behind you at shoulder level. With all its failings the TVR one is in my view a good compromise for road or road legal sprinting use and certainly better than nothing
In the end the Q60 hoop cost about £750
The original factory hoop came close but falls short in a few ways.
Q60 requires a diagonal across the hoop, which is missing on the factory one. Mine has a diagonal between the hoop and opposite backstay and also across the hoop but to meet the regs you only need it across the hoop.
The TVR one is I think 38mm tube and it now has to be 42mm
The fixings on the TVR one fall well short of the required standard.
Caged in Westbury (I think they may have moved now) did mine. It is bolt in and realistically takes about an hour to fit.
The main disadvantage for road use is you will find the bar a bit too close to you your head and more importantly the passengers head which tends to be set a few inches back compared to the driver unless you have moved the battery. This is not such a problem if you are wearing a helmet and held down with a harness. To meet Q60 in my car Caged had to make the hoop sit forward of and higher than the TVR one. Luckily I am not that tall otherwise it would have only been possible with the roof removed.
Really can’t see the point of the various hoops that sit behind you at shoulder level. With all its failings the TVR one is in my view a good compromise for road or road legal sprinting use and certainly better than nothing
In the end the Q60 hoop cost about £750
steve-v8s said:
Really can’t see the point of the various hoops that sit behind you at shoulder level.
It isn't ideal, I agree. But picture the car upside down with the road forming a straight line between the top of the roll-over bar and the top of the engine. There is enough space to fit a driver; you'll have a sore head but probably be alive. Without the rollover protection the road intersects you at chest level which is basically not survivable.
[quote = Green v8s] It isn't ideal, I agree. But picture the car upside down with the road forming a straight line between the top of the roll-over bar and the top of the engine. There is enough space to fit a driver; you'll have a sore head but probably be alive. Without the rollover protection the road intersects you at chest level which is basically not survivable. [/quote]
Asuming you are not held upright by a harness.
FlipFlopGriff said:
jeffsy said:
the new power is a little frightening
Noticed a twitch when you changed into second yesterday.
FFG
I nearly filled me pants!!
Plus I hadnt stowed that bag that you and Andrea gave me so I had black bits of curly paper flying everywhere for about 30 minutes!! car is a right mess....
...tw@t Griffter said:
...loads.
Thanks Ben - you couldnt bosh me some piccies of your could you as its a roll bar Im thinking of. Iv got some snaps of the full cage but I wouldnt want that. I wont be tracking ASBO but just want a little more piece of mind.
I hadnt considered hoops but they might be an option...anyone know anything about these?
ta
graham
I've said it before....
The inherent weakness (from rot mainly) that we have all seen in the outriggers is just as important. I understand the limitations of the factory rollbar ~ but I would not consider a bar/cage that didnt offer some side protection & support of the outriggers. How many upside down moments are there compared to side impacts?
Dave
The inherent weakness (from rot mainly) that we have all seen in the outriggers is just as important. I understand the limitations of the factory rollbar ~ but I would not consider a bar/cage that didnt offer some side protection & support of the outriggers. How many upside down moments are there compared to side impacts?
Dave
The two differing points of view are interesting:
1) fixing of bar takes precedence over height/location (a la Tower View)
2) heigh/location of bar takes precedence over fixing (a la 'factory' rollbar)
I had no choice - the precat Griff does not have the rear 'rollbar mounts' on the chassis that the 500s have, so it was Tower View or nothing. The rest probably depends how tall you are. At 6'2" I have my seat all the way back, which means it's not much reclined. Yes I agree the rollbar is a bit low - but unfortunately the requirement to retain the roof constrains the total height of the bar - more so for tall people.
I think in a high-speed barrell roll you'd be lucky if any rollbar gave much protection. I suspect (I hope I never find out) that a single roll, possibly with the car resting upside down is more common - in which case I think the Tower View bar will be adequate, if not optimal. I certainly wouldn't want the weight of the car resting on the (rusty?) outriggers, and my seatbelt attached to the same point. If it fails you lose bar and belts.
jeffsy - I'll email some pictures shortly.
Finally at last year's Growl there was a yellow Griff with a very substanital cross-braced twin hoop design. I thought it looked awesome - if it did somewhat restrict the use of the area behind the seats for stowage.
1) fixing of bar takes precedence over height/location (a la Tower View)
2) heigh/location of bar takes precedence over fixing (a la 'factory' rollbar)
I had no choice - the precat Griff does not have the rear 'rollbar mounts' on the chassis that the 500s have, so it was Tower View or nothing. The rest probably depends how tall you are. At 6'2" I have my seat all the way back, which means it's not much reclined. Yes I agree the rollbar is a bit low - but unfortunately the requirement to retain the roof constrains the total height of the bar - more so for tall people.
I think in a high-speed barrell roll you'd be lucky if any rollbar gave much protection. I suspect (I hope I never find out) that a single roll, possibly with the car resting upside down is more common - in which case I think the Tower View bar will be adequate, if not optimal. I certainly wouldn't want the weight of the car resting on the (rusty?) outriggers, and my seatbelt attached to the same point. If it fails you lose bar and belts.
jeffsy - I'll email some pictures shortly.
Finally at last year's Growl there was a yellow Griff with a very substanital cross-braced twin hoop design. I thought it looked awesome - if it did somewhat restrict the use of the area behind the seats for stowage.
see this thread www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=28193&f=13&h=0&p=1
for how the RollCentre bar looks in my chim and how much it cost back in 2003
for how the RollCentre bar looks in my chim and how much it cost back in 2003
spend said:
Griffter said:
I certainly wouldn't want the weight of the car resting on the (rusty?) outriggers
Have you not noticed how many cars are raised on two post lifts? Food for thought....
Dave
Yes! And it terrifies me! I always jack and rest mine on the rectangular chassis longitudinal members.
But the rollbar mount to the seatbelt anchor is such that with the car resting upside down on the bar, the joint and bolt would be in shear. No triangulation to assist, unlike when the car is lifted on the outriggers.
Griffter said:
Yes! And it terrifies me! I always jack and rest mine on the rectangular chassis longitudinal members.
Agree completely, always happier with a 4 poster
Griffter said:
But the rollbar mount to the seatbelt anchor is such that with the car resting upside down on the bar, the joint and bolt would be in shear. No triangulation to assist, unlike when the car is lifted on the outriggers.
If it does sheer you do have a lot of fibreglass to restrain it, unless it is the actual bolt that sheers ~ which will be the same for most installions surely.
I dont understand what you are saying about triangulation ~ in my simple view of things steel tube is strong in tension. Upside down the triangulation of the chassis to the outriggers is put into tension as it is when you sit in the car (ie designed to be loaded that way). When raised on a lift the said triangulation is put into compression. I may be wrong but with my limited experience of material science I've always thought compression is the worst kind of loading for tubular steel (as when raising on a lift).
Dave
spend said:
I dont understand what you are saying about triangulation ~ in my simple view of things steel tube is strong in tension. Upside down the triangulation of the chassis to the outriggers is put into tension as it is when you sit in the car (ie designed to be loaded that way). When raised on a lift the said triangulation is put into compression. I may be wrong but with my limited experience of material science I've always thought compression is the worst kind of loading for tubular steel (as when raising on a lift).
Dave
I see what you mean. I meant the rollbar to seatbelt mount joint is a simple single bolted joint between two plates - no triangulation. I wasn't thinking beyond the joint to the outriggers. If the car turns over you have to hope that that the rollbar stays attached to the chassis, which is where my concern with the factory bar lies - ie with one single horizontal bolt. The Tower View bar clamps around the outrigger diagonal using four bolts for the clamp, which itself spreads the load along a considerable length of the diagonal. It also clamps around the tubes above the diff using two bolts per clamp securing the rear stays.
Ben, its difficult to compare the different scenarios ~ I simply think the bigger the box shape the better! Due to the narrower width of the TV bar the uprights will be subject to far more twisting moments. The factory bar is about as large a box as you can get ~ made in a stronger section and with jointing re-inforced I think its design is quite smart. It is inherently suitable to the request of the OP in my opinion. I also go back to the fact that it does offer additional side protection and extra support for the outriggers.
Dave
Dave
Gassing Station | Griffith | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff