Evolution Dynamics Pikes Peak Build
i dont know why you assume comments like sblvro's are meaning "the cage was good enough, keep doing it the same way".
which is totally wrong. the people defending him are defending the original cage that has been attacked by all you "pros with experience". it was obviously strong enough to have saved both lives. but yes, for the future, im sure a stronger cage will be built and everything learned from this accident will be put towards future cages.
quit assuming we are saying he needs to stick with the first design.
which is totally wrong. the people defending him are defending the original cage that has been attacked by all you "pros with experience". it was obviously strong enough to have saved both lives. but yes, for the future, im sure a stronger cage will be built and everything learned from this accident will be put towards future cages.
quit assuming we are saying he needs to stick with the first design.
Last edited by codgi; Aug 19, 2012 at 01:08 AM.
This is in fact the issue. The pro cage crew are saying that the cage was what saved the occupants from serious injury while the anti-cage crew is saying that it was pure luck that it did that at all.
The "x times out of n test" is used in any proper mathematical analysis to understand the likelihood of a particular outcome. So yes understanding if the cage holds up in 1/5, 3/5 or 5/5 times is very important to separate out luck from proper application of science.
Not saying I have come to any conclusions, since I am not qualified to do so, but wanted to point that out.
The "x times out of n test" is used in any proper mathematical analysis to understand the likelihood of a particular outcome. So yes understanding if the cage holds up in 1/5, 3/5 or 5/5 times is very important to separate out luck from proper application of science.
Not saying I have come to any conclusions, since I am not qualified to do so, but wanted to point that out.
Last edited by codgi; Aug 20, 2012 at 10:39 PM.
Umm, we are not talking about rocket science here. You mean to tell me that an engineer does not know how to spell fuselage? C'mon, that is as basic a word as car or engine or tire. Your comment rings hollow because anyone that is a professional and who has undergone a university education should at least be able to write a basic sentence and spell correctly. I suppose the same could be said for doctors who do not have to take nutrition classes while teachers do. Go figure. How do I know? Because I have been a teacher for 33 years.
As a manager of said engineers, this is not ideal (and I agree on that) and we work on it with them. But at the end of the day that isn't their job as an engineer...their job is to ensure that they apply their knowledge to their field to the best of their ability each day and that is what they should be judged on. So yes they are probably many good engineers out there that can't spell fuselage, but just because they can't doesn't mean they cannot offer a good scientific analysis.
I apologize for the derail and hope the thread will get back on track.
Last edited by codgi; Aug 19, 2012 at 01:12 AM.
There you go again. It was lucky enough to have saved the passenger's life. I would bet the passenger lives 1 out of 5 times if tossed off the same corner at +/- 10mph the same speed. This cage would be a kickbutt cage for track days, DEs and SCCA/NASA events, but it was a huge gamble at Pikes. Reading this thread in it's entirety shows the builders knew this and took a calculated risk at Pikes in the name of speed. That is fine! I am good with that! Just take ownership of the calculated risk!! Reading the PPIHC specs, it begs for Darwin to ****** minimalistic cages. The rules need to change as to not let shady ish like the Darkhorse Camaro to run RWD in snow conditions up top!
Building to the minimum worked when we were playing with FSAE cars in school and the speeds were sub 70mph in autocross setups. Hell, our winning FSAE car's carbon a-arms would deflect 2 degrees of camber and 1 degrees of castor on the front inside tire at 70mph turn in! Fortunately, that competition is about power:weight ratios more than suspension design!
Building to the minimum worked when we were playing with FSAE cars in school and the speeds were sub 70mph in autocross setups. Hell, our winning FSAE car's carbon a-arms would deflect 2 degrees of camber and 1 degrees of castor on the front inside tire at 70mph turn in! Fortunately, that competition is about power:weight ratios more than suspension design!
only stating that the actual cage ran when this horrible ACCIDENT happened saved two lives. you cant argue with that.
why is it so hard for some of yall to understand that most of us are only defending the actual cage built at the time. this has nothing to do with future events. everything can always be improved! doesnt take an engineer to realize that.
why do you say its luck? because you have been through the exact same accident with a similar cage and worse injuries? please, get over it.
this thread has turned into a wiener length contest. "oh well i went to this school and did this and that..blah blah blah and i dont agree with the way things were done on your end"
or, "you spelled this.........wrong which makes everything you have said invalid"
really? this is what the life style of motorsports has come to?
mods, you should close this thread and have evod start something new. or at least clean up most of the pointless posts that are "beating a dead horse"
or, "you spelled this.........wrong which makes everything you have said invalid"
really? this is what the life style of motorsports has come to?
mods, you should close this thread and have evod start something new. or at least clean up most of the pointless posts that are "beating a dead horse"
I think the point what a more experienced or / and educated people try to make in this threads is very simple.
I think not really any more for a cage builder since he wont listen to anybody, because he is an engeneer, that was a reason from a begin with, and nothing happenned with a guys, that is a reason later.
The point what the guys try to make here, is his cage design for this type of event and car for the events, are not as good as a simular or a rally cage designed cage, specially after the accident and based how the car looked liked after etc.
Most importantly this thread should be a very good information for those who like to or want to build a production car for hill climbs for safety. I am not talking about formula cars etc which are engeneered for race from the begin with.
also worth to mention seem welding technic on the rally car structure too since that is a part of a rally car tyoe of build and safety also.
I never said, as he try to implant here, the rally car is a tank or something you will survive anything. That is a plane stupid thing to beilive, and wasnt really mature to do that, never mind a tone. That was his high horse speach about me how unworthy is my opinion in this case, and where is my place in his mind. Lol
When i only try to tell him, for a hillclimb race the rally cage designs are much safer and better then his own creation. Specially after he wont listen to a racer who actually has an experience vs him in this particular race and enviroment. He is not only denying, he actually was down talking the rally cages safety vs his cage. The best of this, he still believes his cage do better then a rally cages, so as many followers for him. Which is nice, but this thread should be about more then loyality. This thread should be a starting points fir future racers and builders for rally type of events.
This thread shouldnt be closed, this thread should be a sticky thread for so many reason....
Rob
I think not really any more for a cage builder since he wont listen to anybody, because he is an engeneer, that was a reason from a begin with, and nothing happenned with a guys, that is a reason later.
The point what the guys try to make here, is his cage design for this type of event and car for the events, are not as good as a simular or a rally cage designed cage, specially after the accident and based how the car looked liked after etc.
Most importantly this thread should be a very good information for those who like to or want to build a production car for hill climbs for safety. I am not talking about formula cars etc which are engeneered for race from the begin with.
also worth to mention seem welding technic on the rally car structure too since that is a part of a rally car tyoe of build and safety also.
I never said, as he try to implant here, the rally car is a tank or something you will survive anything. That is a plane stupid thing to beilive, and wasnt really mature to do that, never mind a tone. That was his high horse speach about me how unworthy is my opinion in this case, and where is my place in his mind. Lol
When i only try to tell him, for a hillclimb race the rally cage designs are much safer and better then his own creation. Specially after he wont listen to a racer who actually has an experience vs him in this particular race and enviroment. He is not only denying, he actually was down talking the rally cages safety vs his cage. The best of this, he still believes his cage do better then a rally cages, so as many followers for him. Which is nice, but this thread should be about more then loyality. This thread should be a starting points fir future racers and builders for rally type of events.
This thread shouldnt be closed, this thread should be a sticky thread for so many reason....
Rob
i think otgers did wrong things around you, and that placed you in the spotlight in a wrong way.
i am sure you are a good driver and sports man. And that is a reason i try to bring my messige to YOU and not really for a builder about safety. As i am guessing Jeremy an Dave etc, too.
I also hope we can race together next year at the hill.
best luck for a rebuild i hope you guys recover fast and learn a lot from this.
Rob
Evolved Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,171
Likes: 1
From: Falls Church, VA
Umm, we are not talking about rocket science here. You mean to tell me that an engineer does not know how to spell fuselage? C'mon, that is as basic a word as car or engine or tire. Your comment rings hollow because anyone that is a professional and who has undergone a university education should at least be able to write a basic sentence and spell correctly. I suppose the same could be said for doctors who do not have to take nutrition classes while teachers do. Go figure. How do I know? Because I have been a teacher for 33 years.
I think everybody that is serious about building a car to be fast, at one time or another, has gone the "minimalist" route for safety. This thread has been an eye opener for me in that regard. I've seen lots of "suggested" cage features that always seemed like overkill. After seeing the damage on this car, I can point out probably 8-10 cage features that I thought you'd never need; they weren't used here and would have helped significantly in this wreck.
The stars aligned on this one and both occupants walked away from this wreck. But with body parts clearly being outside the cage, seats/mounts broken and a helmet nearly crushed, there is lots of room for improvement. All things considered, you couldn't have asked for a better outcome here and it should be seen as a learning experience for everybody here.
The stars aligned on this one and both occupants walked away from this wreck. But with body parts clearly being outside the cage, seats/mounts broken and a helmet nearly crushed, there is lots of room for improvement. All things considered, you couldn't have asked for a better outcome here and it should be seen as a learning experience for everybody here.