Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I'm also interested in this. Had a quick look at Brown Davis and they show a full cage which is built into the car over the top of the rear seat, but certainly wouldn't allow for any passengers to sit there. Perhaps I'm not looking in the right spot? PaulosECR33 - Can you shed any more light on them?

Do you need it to be CAMS approved? If not your cheapest solution are the cusco jap cages they make ones that retain rear seats, otherwise yes you can make a proper ones that retains seats.

Cusco are not cams or roadworthy.

Brown davis will do a half cage that is cams and adr, so no trouble on or off the track, i reckon you would be really pushing it to be able to put people in the back with a cage there but they do build cages that let you keep the seat.

It would be possible, but it wouldn't be CAMS approved, even minimum CAMS spec requires a cross bar (in main hoop is most common) but either way it's going to restrict passengers.

uncomfortable passengers... why do you want a cage?

uncomfortable passengers... why do you want a cage?

Truth is I don't like the ''becauseracecar'' look of a cage that restrict the back seat. And I know local police won't like it too.

2) Both my sister and father.. heck even my young brother don't drive so it happens from times to times we take the skyline and need the space behind.

3) I might just go with the do-luck room bar if I can't fit any cage/bar down there. Actually, tbh, I wanted a cage so I could fit my harness safety. Instead of bolting them on the floor which I was told are not safe to do.

Edited by cobrAA

Hey guys, just curious if theres a model of cage that would allow me to still fit passenger in the back seat or its impossible ?? Or could it be done if done custom-made !?

Thanks.

This guy has "sort of" done it - could probably get one passenger in. Given you're in Canada though I'd have no idea where you'd get it made.

http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/105872-my-skyline-gt-r-r32.html

It's ridiculous if you're thinking about buying a roll cage just to fit a harness.

There are countless places you can mount your shoulder straps without a roll cage.

Read the CAMS manual and make sure the straps are within the recommended range of angle and you will be fine.

IMG_9975_zps35c2ec8e.jpg

Rear seat is for homo's =P

Thats exactly what the back of mine used to look like cept for a fire stringuisher on the tunnel, i refitted the top half of the rear seats a while ago so at a glance it looks like the whole thing is there.

It's ridiculous if you're thinking about buying a roll cage just to fit a harness.

There are countless places you can mount your shoulder straps without a roll cage.

Read the CAMS manual and make sure the straps are within the recommended range of angle and you will be fine.

thank you. will look into it. i was told by a instructor here that i couldnt fit a harness without cage.

It would be possible, but it wouldn't be CAMS approved, even minimum CAMS spec requires a cross bar (in main hoop is most common) but either way it's going to restrict passengers.

for cams you can have a cross bar( diagonal) go from one of the rear legs to the other , it doesnt have to be on the main hoop

thank you. will look into it. i was told by a instructor here that i couldnt fit a harness without cage.

This is probably due to the angle of the harness straps after you mount them to somewhere like your rear seat anchors.

Check out page 4 in Schedule I of the CAMS regs: http://docs.cams.com.au/Manual/GeneralRequirements/GQ10-Schedule-I-2014-1.pdf

The other option is to look at getting a harness bar. These are removable so you can still fit passengers in the back when you're not at the track.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Very decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...