18 replies to this topic

[Classic998cc]

Okay so im very new to this and im only 16 (so im still learning lots!)

 

Ive got a 1972 Austin that im going to fix up and i was looking to put a roll cage in (safety feature to help ease my mothers worrying) i live in England and i was reading a forum that was on about it puts insurance up? Anybody have any information on this and weather its a greater deal more expense wise, if its worth putting one in - basically thoughts and ideas.. i thought this might be a nice place to start

 

Cheers Hannah 

[Will16]

Roll cages will do more harm than good in a road car, as if you crash, your head will just get bashed on the scaffolding 

 

It depends on your insurer, but usually they will increase the price of your insurance.

[James_eaton_thewholething]

Roll cage should be fitted with bucket seats and harnesses. Also at least follow the MSA guide lines for fitting cages as it will mean you shouldn't hit your head on anything in the event of a crash.

It is always the first thing that gets mentioned when people talk about cages but the reality is the B post isn't ever far from your head neither is the door or the door glass. Standard mini seats aren't the most hugging seats and you could move around quite a bit in an accident. If you want to fit one do it properly.

The next thing that will get mentioned that in a crash the way the car behaves will be changed by fitting a cage and that they are good in track cars as they have run off areas and tyre walls to slow down the impact and to not put all of the force through your internal organs when using harnesses. Then you have to consider rally cars because they don't drive on roads that the public drive on or crash into things that everyday drivers could crash into like trees, brick walls and bushes. Now consider how big some cars are in today's world and how they are so strong in an accident. So the Stronger you make something will always break a weaker object so even cars made 10 years ago won't survive as well in a crash as today's cars.

Depending on the insurer determines price or wether or not you will even get insured. Learn to drive pass your test and then really learn to drive when on your own to be as safe as possible

[Steve220]

A few professional racing drivers have said to me:
"If your car is fitted with a roll cage, you need a helmet. Or a death wish".

They are not needed on a road car. Yes it will put the insurance up quite dramatically.

Edited by Steve220, 16 August 2016 - 10:45 PM.

[Mk1Dave]

Glad I had one fitted when I had this accident

[nicklouse]

For competition I need to have padding on the roll cage to protect my helmet from it.

Think on that.

[Cooperman]

There are a lot of misconceptions about roll cages.

 

I have fitted them in rally cars and in fact rally cars are used on public roads and often when in a hurry. So long as proper bolted in seats and full harness belts are fitted, and the cage is padded there should be no issues.

 

However, there is little point in fitting one to a road only car as it will probably put up the insurance and make the car a 2-seater due to there being no way of getting in the back with the seats bolted down and belts coming from the rear area to the centre of each seat. If you fit one for other than competition the insurer might feel you drive in such a way that a crash is more likely. I'm not saying that is the case, but that can be how insurance companies see it.

 

People who drive classic cars normally just accept the possible added risk. They do low mileage and drive their valuable classics carefully. If an owner is nervous about driving a classic car without a roll cage, he/she might be best advised to buy a more modern car with better crash-damage-resistance.

[Juniors mini]

I have fitted one too my mini which will only be used on the road for the reason it's not as safe as nearly all the other cars on the road.

Too the above comment (last sentence) you could be the safest drive on the road, that doesn't mean your not going to have a crash it's the other idiots on the road.

[Cooperman]

If you worry about the poorer crash-safety with a classic car, then it is best to stick with modern cars.

You cannot make a classic car into a modern 'Euro-Box' in terms of it's safety rating.

The most likely crash mode is a 3/4 front impact and a roll cage will not make much difference. The problem with classic cars is that they do not deform in a progressive way. Even if you have a roll cage it is just that, a 'ROLL' cage and really will only work if the car is rolled. Fitting door bars will help with side impact, but even then you are relying on the strength of the sill structure, which can easily be reduced significantly by rust/corrosion.

A classic car will never be as safe as a modern car and if that is an issue then, in all seriousness, it is best to stick with a modern. A modern will cost a lot less to buy and a rust-free Mini, or any other classic, will not be cheap.

Most people just keep their classic cars for low-mileage journeys on nice sunny days on minor roads and the crash statistics indicate that they are low-risk. But that is because of the owner profile, the fact that they are treasured things and they are driven not necessarily slowly, but with care and attention by experienced drivers. One doesn't drive a classic Mini like a modern car. It is necessary to look further down the road, to anticipate risks and hazards and to allow for the unexpected.

For a young ab-initio driver, the problems could arise when, after passing the driving test in a modern car, a switch to a classic car is made and the technique will need to change a lot.

[Batmini]

Totally agree with coop, modern cars are designed to crumple in certain areas to absorb the energy of the crash. Mini's never were, they were designed to get the most amount of stuff (luggage and people) into the smallest space without a second thought about crash resistance. Roll cages are to protect you in a roll, not a collision. In a collision they just shift the energy of the crash elsewhere, possibly into you.

[Cooperman]

If fitting a roll cage, it is vital to fit bolted-down competition-type seats and full harness belts. To fail to do this negates any possible advantage of a roll cage.

The cost of a pair of seats, a full cage and proper full-harness belts will cost around £1000. For £1000 you can buy a modern and crash-resistant car such as a Ford Fiesta 1.25 Zetec with lots of fitted extras which will go so much better than a 57-year-old-designed Mini. Once the mods to the Mini are declared the insurance for the modern will be less as well and the value of the Mini may be reduced. It will also be a 2-seater car for all practical purposes.

The Mini would need to be completely rust-free as well or the cage will not really help in a high-energy impact, so add another £4000 for a decent Mini to start with.

Now look at what £5000 will buy you in modern small-engine cars.

As before, if the lack of built-in safety in an old classic worries you, save a lot of cash and buy a modern car. They are safer, more economical, cheaper to run, more comfortable (especially on any sort of longer journey) and much more reliable. But they are not 'retro', don't have the 1960's driving 'feel' and are quite simply not 'classic icons'.

[Ivor Badger]

Totally agree with coop, modern cars are designed to crumple in certain areas to absorb the energy of the crash. Mini's never were, they were designed to get the most amount of stuff (luggage and people) into the smallest space without a second thought about crash resistance. Roll cages are to protect you in a roll, not a collision. In a collision they just shift the energy of the crash elsewhere, possibly into you.

Not exactly correct. The Mini from day one was designed to pivot the steering column up and forwards in a head on collision. The subframe gets hit at the front and pivots around the upper cross member. This forces the back legs into the steering rack and pushes it back. So the steering wheel goes through the windscreen and the column does not get forced back into the drivers chest. The later being a common fatal injury in the design period, especially in Jaguar XK120s.

[Cooperman]

The steering column danger was recognised back in the mid-'50's when, as said, cars like the Jag XK's, the TR range, the Healey 3000, etc, could 'spear' the driver with the steering column in a frontal impact - rather unpleasant. This was probably the first time crash damage was considered during design.

 

However, deformable body structure didn't really come into being until much later with progressive deformation of frontal structure. In fact, in a straightforward roll over a classic Mini is quite good. It is front, side and rear impacts where it is lacking and a roll cage will not really take care of that.

There is another major safety issue with the Mini which is more critical than roll-over strength. The fuel tank is in the boot and the boot is not isolated from the interior of the car. There is a gap at each end of the rear seat back panel and, on earlier cars, there is a hole in that panel covered with a piece of cardboard plus a couple of speaker holes in the back shelf. In the event of a heavy rear end shunt the filler neck can be damaged as it sticks out and is not recessed as required on modern cars. At the front the engine bay is not isolated from the interior, so any fumes from a damaged exhaust or an engine bay fire can gain instant ingress into the car. These are all things which have to be accepted when driving classic cars in general and the classic Mini in particular. If you can't accept them then don't drive one - simples!

 

I guess those of us who grew up with 1950's & 1960's cars have accepted the safety limitations and don't really consider them. For competition use classics have to have certain safety engineering done, such as sealing up the fuel tank and engine bay areas from the interior. This includes removing the fresh-air ducting which, on a Mini, runs with plastic parts through the engine bay and into the car! How stupid is/was that?

There are so many things which render a classic car unsafe in comparison with modern vehicle engineering and it is not possible to re-engineer a classic to provide modern protection.

 

On a lighter note, my first car was a 1950 Ford V8 Pilot (Google it maybe). It had a 3.6 litre flat-head V8 engine, weighed a lot, did 90 mph, had cross-ply tyres and drum brakes with the rears being rod-actuated. The wipers were vacuum operated and there were no internal safety features - not even seat belts. I always say that it taught me to drive because I had to look so far down the road and pay attention. But I never had a crash in it or even scratched it. When I got my first Mini, an 850, in 1963 I thought that it was super-safe because it went, cornered and stopped so much better than the Pilot. It may be hard to realise now how safe the Mini seemed, and indeed was, back in the early 1960's, especially when first fitted with radial ply tyres. In a Mini you could actually steer your way out of trouble as often as not.

[Spider]

Here in Aust, the Mini and all cars made since 1970 had to comply with ADRs (Australian Design Rules) and in late years, a similar, but different named scheme.

 

One of the ADRs is ADR10a and another is ADR10b. These refer to 'colapsable steering columns' a little bit of a misnomer in the name, but non the less, the main part of these standards are that the driver not be impaled by the steering wheel or column in an accident.

 

Needless to say, the Mini passed this test without modification as it was part of it's design since day 1.

 

Also, it is illegal (here in Aust at least) to fit most roll cages available to a Mini as it takes away use of the rear seats. The car is complied here as a 4 seater and if the rear seat space is taken up with roll bars, then it's no longer a 4 seater and therefore non-compliant and defective.

 

From what I've seen with many roll cages that are 'fitted' to cars, they make them more dangerous than safer. They should not be 'fitted' but engineered in to the car. Most cars, Mini includes as Ivor pointed out above, are designed to behave in certain ways in an accident. Merely 'fitting' a roll cage will make it behave in a different and potentially unpredictable and dangerous way in an accident.

 

IMO, a Mini is no more dangerous than most other cars on the road. That they are a small car doesn't make them any worse than any other car of it's era.

Edited by Moke Spider, 19 August 2016 - 10:54 AM.

[Cooperman]

Very interesting, Mr. Moke. The last 3 words are the important ones:  '......of its era'. That says it all.

 

Why would anyone buy a classic car, then spend a small fortune trying to give it modern safety features which would alter the character of the car. Why not save quite a bit and have a safe, quick, reliable, economical and comfortable modern car.

 

I still think the biggest risk with a classic Mini is a heavy rear end shunt from a big car or a commercial vehicle. The ability of the rear end to sustain such an impact without the petrol tank rupturing plus the battery shorting out is doubtful should the impact mode cause this type of damage. Surely that is far more likely than a roll over crash.

 

In modern cars the petrol tank and filler are isolated from the interior. It's just he evolution of design for safety. I recall the Mk.1 Cortina GT I had where the boot floor was the top skin of the petrol tank!

 

However, the basic thing necessary to optimise safety is a completely rust-free and correctly welded body-shell. Now how many classic cars, especially Minis, are totally rust free with structural integrity as good as it was when new? Not a lot of point in putting a roll cage, or any other safety feature, into a Mini with basic rust issues or even poor quality restoration work.