Board logo

Is this rollbar brace mount strong enough?
sgraber - 17/2/04 at 07:12 PM

Can anyone see why this rollbar mount wouldn''t be strong enough?

Rollbar front brace
Rollbar front brace

Rollbar front brace 2
Rollbar front brace 2


JoelP - 17/2/04 at 07:23 PM

bollox the bastard comp lost my answer.... ah well...

looks nice steve, however i would try to link the two sides together or triangulate in side the car to prevent them splaying out. Is there any space behind the seats?


sgraber - 17/2/04 at 07:30 PM

I could add a 16ga 1" round tube between the bases of the braces...

That wouldn't get in the way of anything.

Thanks, good point.


TPG - 17/2/04 at 08:16 PM

....Or pull your 1" tube up from your brace flange to the centre of the bar,Or from one side up to the other.Depends on what looks your after.Everything else there looks very well.Are you sure you want to brace it any futher?I wouldn't.


David Jenkins - 17/2/04 at 08:19 PM

You'll have to do something about replacing that welding clamp though - the inspectors will never allow it...


David


stephen_gusterson - 17/2/04 at 08:26 PM

they would if it was covered with rubber or foam



atb

steve


Kitlooney1000 - 17/2/04 at 08:37 PM

i dont think the clamp would stand up too well in a roll either


Alan B - 17/2/04 at 08:39 PM

Steve it would be marginally better if it could be moved inboard with the tube centre line coinciding with the centre of the rect tube below....However, I'll bet this not possible for other reasons...


sgraber - 17/2/04 at 08:49 PM

nooo... I could move it over to the centerline, but I assumed that the additional butress would increase the area of the weld line.

in your suggestion I get this much weld coverage [] , a 1"x2" rectangle. With the butress out one side I get this []= weld coverage. Is it still better you think to center it on the post and not worry 'bout the additional metal of the butress?


Alan B - 17/2/04 at 09:14 PM

Steve, weld length is important but I'd have thought 6" was ample......I'd say a straight loadpath and non-offset joint was more important in this case.....IMO

[Edited on 17/2/04 by Alan B]