Post the best animated GIF's in this thread.
- Thread starter stosh
- Start date
-
Two more days to enter the Secret Santa!
Entries must be in by midnight on November 29th. We're kicking off the 2024 Secret Santa! Exchange gifts with other monkeys - from beer and snacks, to bike gear, to custom machined holiday decorations and tools by our more talented members, there's something for everyone.
danger to manifold...
haha what an asshole bird. That dog is going to shit EVERYWHERE
It is like a Reliant Robin, but dumber.
Soon. There will probably even be snow at the top this year.
Dead?
Nom nom nom.
This guy was blasted by so many racecar builders for building what essentially amounted to a road race cage at the *minimum* requirements. It was pretty amateur hour according to these guys, and a quick look at his build and the cage supports that. FIA WRC cages don't let body panels fly off like his did, and if you watch the whole thing the passenger's head actually exits the cage at one point. The stupid design has a single diagonal on the roof (wtf) and a huge lack of gusseting and triangulation. The cage was also highly deformed. He was extremely lucky to be alive. The owner is incredibly arrogant and while admitting he's going to 'reevaluate' his design and make changes he is adamant his work was fine because they guys survived. Guys who built actual WRC cages were ripping him apart.
maybe it got deformed from nearly plummeting to his death a few thousand feet below the road?
That cart was probably built for $800,000 and built to comply with a 4000 line specification.
And the deformation served to absorb energy.maybe it got deformed from nearly plummeting to his death a few thousand feet below the road?
QUOTE="IH8Rice, post: 4064273, member: 30216"]maybe it got deformed from nearly plummeting to his death a few thousand feet below the road?
[/QUOTE]
Cages are supposed to deform to a certain degree. They are designed in CAD and FEA is performed on them to achieve the desired results. In this case, the deformation is enough that the roof lowers to helmet level. It didn't deform that much to 'serve' anything. The deformation is also exaggerated due to there being no braces or gusseting and the top diagonal bar isn't supported the way they should be. The deformation didn't 'serve to absorb energy' as it was beyond that. This has been discussed by many actual cage builders, The cage was built to NASA road racing, not NASA rally spec. Think about that for a few seconds. The car didn't plummet a few thousand feet. It fell a good amount and rolled quite a bit, but it didn't come to a dead stop instantly, or roll into trees, the same way rally cars do. Those ones have the cages that actually hold up to this sort of thing. Take a gander at a WRC or NASA rally cage at some point, or watch similar accidents where a rally cage is used to get the idea. This car was built to the minimum *road* racing specifications then raced where a WRC style cage should have been used, because the owner was trying to go as light as possible and said pikes peak was a road race not a rally. Technically he was correct, and the cage was very well built for what it was (road racing), as the welds didn't fail (although the cage separated from the floor in places because they didn't seam weld the chassis like they would have for a WRC car), but the outcome could have been much worse for the passenger who was extremely lucky.
Pikes peak regulations are not in line with the modern racing world, where similar crashes have happened many times (youtube) without cars disintegrating. This is why a weaker cage was allowed.
The cage looks impressive if you haven't been around many cages. Pure arrogant amateur hour by a mid 20s 'engineer' (who wasn't actually a PEng mind you) who's racing experience was FSAE and crushing cones in parking lots.
[/QUOTE]
Cages are supposed to deform to a certain degree. They are designed in CAD and FEA is performed on them to achieve the desired results. In this case, the deformation is enough that the roof lowers to helmet level. It didn't deform that much to 'serve' anything. The deformation is also exaggerated due to there being no braces or gusseting and the top diagonal bar isn't supported the way they should be. The deformation didn't 'serve to absorb energy' as it was beyond that. This has been discussed by many actual cage builders, The cage was built to NASA road racing, not NASA rally spec. Think about that for a few seconds. The car didn't plummet a few thousand feet. It fell a good amount and rolled quite a bit, but it didn't come to a dead stop instantly, or roll into trees, the same way rally cars do. Those ones have the cages that actually hold up to this sort of thing. Take a gander at a WRC or NASA rally cage at some point, or watch similar accidents where a rally cage is used to get the idea. This car was built to the minimum *road* racing specifications then raced where a WRC style cage should have been used, because the owner was trying to go as light as possible and said pikes peak was a road race not a rally. Technically he was correct, and the cage was very well built for what it was (road racing), as the welds didn't fail (although the cage separated from the floor in places because they didn't seam weld the chassis like they would have for a WRC car), but the outcome could have been much worse for the passenger who was extremely lucky.
Pikes peak regulations are not in line with the modern racing world, where similar crashes have happened many times (youtube) without cars disintegrating. This is why a weaker cage was allowed.
davek said:
The cage looks impressive if you haven't been around many cages. Pure arrogant amateur hour by a mid 20s 'engineer' (who wasn't actually a PEng mind you) who's racing experience was FSAE and crushing cones in parking lots.
Last edited:
I want to see the next 10 seconds.