18 replies to this topic

[tsrwright]

See following of Brands Hatch 14 April 1952 with at least three cars (Norman Gray leading and the Lewis-Evans') with vestigial unbraced roll-over bars.

It would be interesting to see other early examples and to know when this really caught on.

Edited by tsrwright, 28 December 2012 - 12:43.

[tsrwright]

Here's another of S Lewis-Evans

[Barry Boor]

I would suggest that if any of those cars were to roll, those hoops would be as good as useless.

[Tomas Karlsson]

In the Swedish 500cc car rules that were introduced in 1948, it was mandatory to have roll-over hoops (and many drivers also had seat-belts). It was probably because they were intended to race on short speedway ovals from the beginning. The Swedish rules were used, together with the British, when international F3 was introduced in '49, but the roll-hoop rule wasn't passed on.
All imported cars (the first Cooper in May -48) got a roll-hoop and of course all the Effyhs had it already mounted in the factory. But they were braced.
The Swedish hoops saved several drivers in some rather nasty accidents. The two fatal F3-accidents that occured in Scandinavia during those years, had nothing to do with failing hoops. In fact, one of those two drivers had probably been saved by the hoop, if he had used a seatbelt.

Edited by Tomas Karlsson, 28 December 2012 - 16:51.

[Michael Ferner]

As always, America had been far ahead of Europe. I would have to look up the particulars, but one Sprint Car at least in California ran a braced roll-over bar way back in the mid-thirties.

[timbo]

Those roll-over hoops look positively advanced compared to most from the 1950's, 60's and even 70's.
I would say that a lot of now historic cars only had adequate roll-over protection when they were restored for historic racing, and the owner intended to have a long and healthy life for both himself and his car.
You can only learn from experiences of the past, and if the driver were to walk away today from a shunt where they were to carry him away from in the past, its worth the modification.

I must add that having seen the likes of Peter Giddings drive his Maserati 250F at pace at Phillip Island Historics without rollover protection of any kind, it did look oh so correct.

[tsrwright]

As always, America had been far ahead of Europe. I would have to look up the particulars, but one Sprint Car at least in California ran a braced roll-over bar way back in the mid-thirties.

Not so far ahead as I have quite a few shots of British speedway midgets pre WW2 with these light looking hoops.

They would makes sense on the speedway and maybe 500 racing in GB was a pioneer as I gather the action was pretty frantic at times and there were numerous instances of them turning over.

[tsrwright]

Those roll-over hoops look positively advanced compared to most from the 1950's, 60's and even 70's.

I was once at a talk given by Ron Tauranac where an early Brabham was on display and I was tempted to ask about the sufficiency of the roll-hoop but thought better of it.

Still wondering though ....

Edited by tsrwright, 29 December 2012 - 07:09.

[timbo]

I was once at a talk given by Ron Tauranac where an early Brabham was on display and I was tempted to ask about the sufficiency of the roll-hoop but thought better of it.

Still wondering though ....

How many photo's do you see of 1960's open wheel cars where the rollover hoop went only half way up the back of the drivers helmet (if that).
But that was how it was back in the day.

Edited by timbo, 29 December 2012 - 07:37.

[Stephen W]

How many photo's do you see of 1960's open wheel cars where the rollover hoop went only half way up the back of the drivers helmet (if that).
But that was how it was back in the day.

Still a problem due in no small part to there being no requirement for the driver to be sat in the car with his crash helmet on during scrutineering.

[ZOOOM]

Last summer at the Monterrey Historics, John Morton rolled the Scarab. It had the original style roll bar from the 50's. John is still walking around....

ZOOOM

[tsrwright]

Still a problem due in no small part to there being no requirement for the driver to be sat in the car with his crash helmet on during scrutineering.

Hmm ... rules generally require 50mm over helmet but don't you think that's taking scrutineering too far?

I made a personal decision that 50mm over was visually out of character with my car(s) so I settled for level(ish). Maybe I can duck if I need to maybe not. But it's my head, neck etc.

[tsrwright]

Here's an interesting example, Southern Rhodesia, 1954. How come a guy in darkest Africa had reasonably good roll-over protection in 1954? What was the inspiration?

Come on folks, let's have more early examples, good or bad.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

PS Jimmy de Villiers had Coopers, ERA, D Type etc and I have some information on him but more would be welcome.

[Lee Nicolle]

Hmm ... rules generally require 50mm over helmet but don't you think that's taking scrutineering too far?

I made a personal decision that 50mm over was visually out of character with my car(s) so I settled for level(ish). Maybe I can duck if I need to maybe not. But it's my head, neck etc.

I may be wrong but I think it is 50mm over the drivers head without his helmet. It was in speedway at least.
Though in those days they wore either body belts or just a lap belt so the driver could move in the car. These days most wear modern harnesses and you cannot move in the car. Personally I want at least a helmet height double braced bar which can cause some problems in some cars. Or with a tall co driver too.

[Frank S]

I might have already told of the last time I tried to race my MGB tourer: accessory races to the 1969 Trans-Am at Riverside. Tech inspection went smoothly until the last step: "Strap yourself in, helmet on, and 'stand on' the brakes". Relaxed, the bar was just over helmet-height; stressed, it was an inch too short.

My understanding of the basic requirement for actual usefulness in a rollover bar was that it should be tall enough that a straight line drawn from roll bar high point to the top of a forward structural element (fender, for instance) should clear a prepared driver's helmet by a significant distance. At that time it seemed to me the only cars that met the spirit and letter of the requirement were the Datsun roadsters.

[tsrwright]

My understanding of the basic requirement for actual usefulness in a rollover bar was that it should be tall enough that a straight line drawn from roll bar high point to the top of a forward structural element (fender, for instance) should clear a prepared driver's helmet by a significant distance. At that time it seemed to me the only cars that met the spirit and letter of the requirement were the Datsun roadsters.

There is a drawing to that effect in my several years old MSA (ie UK) blue book section K but it may only apply to sports cars as there seems to be a separate requirement for 50mm height over the driver's helmet in single seat racing cars and several versions of how wide it should be at what height. There is also a minimum height above the seat of 920mm for both sports and single seat racing cars. Historic vehicles have to have whatever is in the vehicle's papers. All this may have changed recently of course and other national and international standards may vary but they are unlikely to be significantly different.

[Paul Hamilton]

There is a drawing to that effect in my several years old MSA (ie UK) blue book section K but it may only apply to sports cars as there seems to be a separate requirement for 50mm height over the driver's helmet in single seat racing cars and several versions of how wide it should be at what height. There is also a minimum height above the seat of 920mm for both sports and single seat racing cars. Historic vehicles have to have whatever is in the vehicle's papers. All this may have changed recently of course and other national and international standards may vary but they are unlikely to be significantly different.

Terry, there are quite wide variations in the current regulations governing rollover bar requirements in various categories of motorsport. Here in oz our CAMS regulations for historic racing and sports racing cars have a minimum requirement of compliance with the CAMS 1973 regulations which set out various structural dimensions and a minimum height at least level with the top of the driver's helmet. Any cars originally fitted with equipment to a higher standard are required to retain that which is where the measurement to a line drawn between the roll bar and a forward structural element comes in as that is normally one of the requirements for more modern cars now commonly fitted with a second roll hoop in front of the steering wheel.

The reason CAMS selected the 1973 regulations as the standard appropriate for historic cars was that they were regarded as compatible with older types of car and it was the first year in which any Australian regulation set a minimum height requirement level with the top of the driver's helmet. The initial CAMS roll over bar regulations introduced in 1969 set a minimum height requirement of one inch BELOW the top of the driver's helmet!!

The current FIA requirements for historic cars set out in Appendix K have a higher standard including a minimum height 50mm above the top of the driver's helmet and and quite rigorous dimensional requirements particularly for homologated touring and GT cars.

Both CAMS and the FIA exempt pre 1961 historic cars from compliance with these regulations provided they retain any roll over protection which may originally have been fitted.

[Lee Nicolle]

Terry, there are quite wide variations in the current regulations governing rollover bar requirements in various categories of motorsport. Here in oz our CAMS regulations for historic racing and sports racing cars have a minimum requirement of compliance with the CAMS 1973 regulations which set out various structural dimensions and a minimum height at least level with the top of the driver's helmet. Any cars originally fitted with equipment to a higher standard are required to retain that which is where the measurement to a line drawn between the roll bar and a forward structural element comes in as that is normally one of the requirements for more modern cars now commonly fitted with a second roll hoop in front of the steering wheel.

The reason CAMS selected the 1973 regulations as the standard appropriate for historic cars was that they were regarded as compatible with older types of car and it was the first year in which any Australian regulation set a minimum height requirement level with the top of the driver's helmet. The initial CAMS roll over bar regulations introduced in 1969 set a minimum height requirement of one inch BELOW the top of the driver's helmet!!

The current FIA requirements for historic cars set out in Appendix K have a higher standard including a minimum height 50mm above the top of the driver's helmet and and quite rigorous dimensional requirements particularly for homologated touring and GT cars.

Both CAMS and the FIA exempt pre 1961 historic cars from compliance with these regulations provided they retain any roll over protection which may originally have been fitted.

Some of the older cars are a concern to me. The drivers are strapped in with a modern harness and either no or little roll over protection. Adding older drivers who do not bend as well as younger ones is a worry.Though some of these cars are doubtfull there is anywhere substansial to mount a roll bar anyway.
At PI last year I saw a few decidedly low roll bars in relation to drivers in the faster more modern classes,, and a couple of VERY high ones. One a regular forum member!

[tsrwright]

Terry, there are quite wide variations in the current regulations governing rollover bar requirements in various categories of motorsport. Here in oz our CAMS regulations for historic racing and sports racing cars have a minimum requirement of compliance with the CAMS 1973 regulations which set out various structural dimensions and a minimum height at least level with the top of the driver's helmet.

Paul, thanks for a useful explanation of the Australian situation and I am pleased to see that even with my new fat helmet I still comply.