HoseHeads.com | HoseHeads Classifieds | Racer's Auction
Home | Register | Contact | Verify Email | FAQ |
Blogs | Photo Gallery | Press Release | Results | HoseheadsClassifieds.com


Welcome Guest. Already registered? Please Login

 

Forum: HoseHeads Sprint Car General Forum (go)
Moderators: dirtonly  /  dmantx  /  hosehead


Records per page
 
Topic: A statement from Barry Jackson, Crew Chief for CJB Motorsports Email this topic to a friend | Subscribe to this TopicReport this Topic to Moderator
Page 1 of 1   of  12 replies
Crewchiefswife
February 10, 2018 at 12:13:11 PM
Joined: 09/16/2017
Posts: 4
Reply

A statement from Barry Jackson, Crew Chief for CJB Motorsports regarding last night’s crash at Volusia Speedway during the World of Outlaws A Main. 

“In response to questions as to why we covered the roll cage. We quite simply didn’t want this to be a social media spectacle for those to comment without knowing all the facts. I have since had other competitors look at the chassis so that we together can avoid how close this came to being really bad. In my opinion, the time has come for new rules and specs so that these cars can take the hard impacts they receive at the speeds we have today. We (builders) use the best tubing available, but sizes (thickness) may have to be re-evaluated moving forward. I have many friends who sit in these cars and do not want to see anyone compromised. I have invited the World of Outlaws officials to look at the chassis this evening, and also I invite any chassis builders to do the same. We have nothing to hide, we need to learn. Hopefully together we can make some changes and make these guys even more safe!”




MIDDLEFINGER
February 10, 2018 at 12:25:10 PM
Joined: 01/29/2010
Posts: 258
Reply

By doing hat they did they brought more attention to  it



Murphy
February 10, 2018 at 12:29:52 PM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 3261
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: MIDDLEFINGER on February 10 2018 at 12:25:10 PM

By doing hat they did they brought more attention to  it



And maybe that's not a bad thing. Safety is important.




dsc1600
February 10, 2018 at 10:23:50 PM
Joined: 05/31/2007
Posts: 4373
Reply

This is a very good message to send. Too often we wait until tragedy strikes, and then there is always the “well it’s too soon to talk about the cause of the accident etc...” and nothing gets done.



dryslk
February 12, 2018 at 07:50:26 AM
Joined: 02/09/2005
Posts: 51
Reply

 I Agree 1000 % with the CrewChief in this situation r/e Roll Cage Safety .Especially when there are people who have never spent time in an Racing Enviorment & who have advice for something they ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH . I have some thoughts regarding Roll Cage Saftey. What has been suggested make good sense ,but also how about the redesign of the roll cage bracing & configuration with gussets, I have wondered after working on these cars for years  why the rollcage does not have gussets in the corners where the tubes are joined . Also years ago there was a chassis builder that built Cages for a Sprint Car that were similar to Cages used in a AA Dragster . I realize there are always compromises when building ,updating & improving anything . We in this Sport have some Amazing Fabricators & Inovators who have over the years made this a much Improved & Safer Sport .I saw a rollcage built buy Brian Butler for a seat display at Knoxville many years ago & was VERY IMPRESSED. 
 Perhaps its time to turn  to a New Page regarding Roll Cage Configuration . Thanx 4 letting me Rant    

 



Murphy
February 12, 2018 at 08:55:52 AM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 3261
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: dryslk on February 12 2018 at 07:50:26 AM

 I Agree 1000 % with the CrewChief in this situation r/e Roll Cage Safety .Especially when there are people who have never spent time in an Racing Enviorment & who have advice for something they ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH . I have some thoughts regarding Roll Cage Saftey. What has been suggested make good sense ,but also how about the redesign of the roll cage bracing & configuration with gussets, I have wondered after working on these cars for years  why the rollcage does not have gussets in the corners where the tubes are joined . Also years ago there was a chassis builder that built Cages for a Sprint Car that were similar to Cages used in a AA Dragster . I realize there are always compromises when building ,updating & improving anything . We in this Sport have some Amazing Fabricators & Inovators who have over the years made this a much Improved & Safer Sport .I saw a rollcage built buy Brian Butler for a seat display at Knoxville many years ago & was VERY IMPRESSED. 
 Perhaps its time to turn  to a New Page regarding Roll Cage Configuration . Thanx 4 letting me Rant    

 



     A number of years back there was an article in Open Wheel Magazine (so you know it had to be a ways back) that featured a rollcage something like that used on a top fuel dragster on a car driven by Stevie Smith.


     In general terms, barring an accident that junks the chassis, what is the usual likespan of a modern sprint car chassis?




dmantx
MyWebsite
February 12, 2018 at 11:06:48 AM
Joined: 09/15/2005
Posts: 5174
Reply

There’s a balance between tubing materials, wall thicknesses and diameters that go in the ‘formula’ of chassis construction – and then there’s the division type, which affects those as well. So you’re going to see different materials and construction across the board from one division of racing to another.

And as scary as the following statement may sound, you need to read on to understand what I’m actually saying: if a roll cage bends in a severe crash, it’s not necessarily a bad thing.

Back in the 50’s-60’s the cars were built so rigid, the cars themselves could nearly survive nuclear holocaust, but the drivers absorbed the brunt of the crash impact, and they didn’t fare so well.

Chassis built in the more modern area in many cases are built to absorb ‘an’ impact (kind of like an egg), which helps to dissipate the energy of a crash. And like snowflakes, no two crashes are the same.

After evaluating crash after crash, and their result, many sanctioning bodies put forth chassis construction guidelines that are posted in their rules. In many cases, those guidelines are in conjunction of working directly with chassis manufacturers to get a good baseline.

That never means there’s a ‘one-size fits all’ solution; as track sizes, speeds and safety are a variable across the country.

To a casual observing fan, witnessing the result of a crash can be quite disturbing and it’s easy to try to point a finger…but in many cases it is a result of the fact that racing is still a dangerous sport, and sanctioning bodies and chassis manufacturers want nothing more than to try to mitigate this as much as realistically possible by utilizing the closest formula as possible in chassis construction.   

A good personal example I can give you is from the modified racing segment. We were building and selling a lot of moly chassis (vs. DOM) and we had a customer that wanted us to build him a cage from moly as well.

Down the road, that car was involved in a wreck I witnessed at Jackson, when the car got ‘pit maneuvered’ right at the flagstand and the car flipped directly cage-first on the concrete wall.

The cage essentially did what the material used was designed to do – which crushed, or wadded, upon impact. The driver was knocked out, but didn’t have any long term injury.

But the point is this. The cages were always built for those cars out of DOM because it typically has the attributes of bending during an impact, whereas moly tends to wad/crush during a similar impact.

And on the front or rear of the car, moly was a great option in most cases, as you could just cut that section of the car off and replace it with a new stub or tail section, and you’d have essentially a ‘new’ car again.

Lesser strength tubing used in those areas can tend to reverberate a crash into the chassis, creating a ‘diamond’ in some cases, or require frame straightening. (again, where moly in many cases would pay for itself right then, as it kept the crash more confined, requiring less $ to repair)

Again, none of this is an exact science as each crashes components/variables are different. But hopefully this will help give some casual fans more insight on what is really happening when they witness a crash and its results at the track.

 



YungWun24
February 12, 2018 at 11:16:36 AM
Joined: 01/19/2009
Posts: 1179
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: on at


It's always a good thing when we're looking to improve safety. 

The portion of the chassis around the driver you'd want to bend the least amount, and want front end of the chassis to do the absorbing, however, in this case, and in a sprint car, there's not much framing around the driver. 

Would a halo, some nonwing drivers use, even of been useful or helpful in Gravel's case? 


Keep It Real

dmantx
MyWebsite
February 12, 2018 at 11:23:05 AM
Joined: 09/15/2005
Posts: 5174
Reply

There’s also a misconception some people have about the ‘weight’ difference of moly and DOM. Many people think that moly is lighter than DOM. Not the case. The exact same diameter and wall thickness of DOM and moly weight is identical.

The reason why some people think moly is lighter, is because you can achieve similar tubing strengths between DOM and moly by using thinner wall thicknesses or smaller moly tubing diameters as it is a generally stronger material…so the car weighs less, which gets misinterpreted as the material moly being lighter.

>And YungWun24, some groups might argue that a halo could be cause for a driver to not be able to get out of a car in certain crashes, or perhaps a fire. There's certainly instances where halo-type constuction would be a positive thing - but then it all comes back to one type of crash scenario vs. another.




DakotaDude
February 12, 2018 at 12:05:54 PM
Joined: 12/19/2010
Posts: 273
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: dmantx on February 12 2018 at 11:06:48 AM

There’s a balance between tubing materials, wall thicknesses and diameters that go in the ‘formula’ of chassis construction – and then there’s the division type, which affects those as well. So you’re going to see different materials and construction across the board from one division of racing to another.

And as scary as the following statement may sound, you need to read on to understand what I’m actually saying: if a roll cage bends in a severe crash, it’s not necessarily a bad thing.

Back in the 50’s-60’s the cars were built so rigid, the cars themselves could nearly survive nuclear holocaust, but the drivers absorbed the brunt of the crash impact, and they didn’t fare so well.

Chassis built in the more modern area in many cases are built to absorb ‘an’ impact (kind of like an egg), which helps to dissipate the energy of a crash. And like snowflakes, no two crashes are the same.

After evaluating crash after crash, and their result, many sanctioning bodies put forth chassis construction guidelines that are posted in their rules. In many cases, those guidelines are in conjunction of working directly with chassis manufacturers to get a good baseline.

That never means there’s a ‘one-size fits all’ solution; as track sizes, speeds and safety are a variable across the country.

To a casual observing fan, witnessing the result of a crash can be quite disturbing and it’s easy to try to point a finger…but in many cases it is a result of the fact that racing is still a dangerous sport, and sanctioning bodies and chassis manufacturers want nothing more than to try to mitigate this as much as realistically possible by utilizing the closest formula as possible in chassis construction.   

A good personal example I can give you is from the modified racing segment. We were building and selling a lot of moly chassis (vs. DOM) and we had a customer that wanted us to build him a cage from moly as well.

Down the road, that car was involved in a wreck I witnessed at Jackson, when the car got ‘pit maneuvered’ right at the flagstand and the car flipped directly cage-first on the concrete wall.

The cage essentially did what the material used was designed to do – which crushed, or wadded, upon impact. The driver was knocked out, but didn’t have any long term injury.

But the point is this. The cages were always built for those cars out of DOM because it typically has the attributes of bending during an impact, whereas moly tends to wad/crush during a similar impact.

And on the front or rear of the car, moly was a great option in most cases, as you could just cut that section of the car off and replace it with a new stub or tail section, and you’d have essentially a ‘new’ car again.

Lesser strength tubing used in those areas can tend to reverberate a crash into the chassis, creating a ‘diamond’ in some cases, or require frame straightening. (again, where moly in many cases would pay for itself right then, as it kept the crash more confined, requiring less $ to repair)

Again, none of this is an exact science as each crashes components/variables are different. But hopefully this will help give some casual fans more insight on what is really happening when they witness a crash and its results at the track.

 



Thank you for a common sense perspective by someone as yourself who has a direct knowledge of car construction.  It's refreshing on this board. 



dmantx
MyWebsite
February 17, 2018 at 08:46:44 PM
Joined: 09/15/2005
Posts: 5174
Reply

No problem DakotaDude. 

And technically, I am a Dakota dude as well.

I was born in Huron and attended my first race there at the SDSF when I was 2 weeks old...but I don’t remember who won.

 wink  Lol. 



alum.427
February 18, 2018 at 05:49:00 AM
Joined: 03/16/2017
Posts: 1599
Reply

Very good points. But, one must remember, you can never figure into any equation of 1 car hitting another as was the case in this wreck. I believe Jackson would like, and will, be looking over that chassis to see if something could be different. If that car would have been bent anywhere else other than were it was, this discussion would not be taking place i believe. It's why these teams have multiple cars. They understand through the course of the year they may lose a few. The most important thing is that the cage with stood repeated direct impacts squarely on the cage and it held up well and that gravel came away unhurt. 




J&J
February 18, 2018 at 08:11:31 AM
Joined: 08/17/2012
Posts: 289
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: alum.427 on February 18 2018 at 05:49:00 AM

Very good points. But, one must remember, you can never figure into any equation of 1 car hitting another as was the case in this wreck. I believe Jackson would like, and will, be looking over that chassis to see if something could be different. If that car would have been bent anywhere else other than were it was, this discussion would not be taking place i believe. It's why these teams have multiple cars. They understand through the course of the year they may lose a few. The most important thing is that the cage with stood repeated direct impacts squarely on the cage and it held up well and that gravel came away unhurt. 



We must point out as well the importance of other safety equipment these drivers are using.

 

After photos appeared in this weeks AREA AUTO. Having belts secured properly also had an important role keeping this young man low and tight in his Butler Built Seat . Keeping David low in his seat. If he were a taller racer would this of been a different circumstances??  I also heard that his helmet was compromised, & his seat was also bent several inches. 

 





Post Reply
You must be logged in to Post a Message.
Not a member register Here.
Already registered? Please Login





If you have a website and would like to set up a forum here at HoseHeadForums.com
please contact us by using the contact link at the top of the page.

© 2024 HoseHeadForums.com Privacy Policy