Style bar VS Roll bar

Alex · Postby **Alex** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:39 pm

I thought the BD could be defectable because it uses a seatbelt mounting point (the mx5plus bar doesn't though), and it's within a certain distance of your head.

Roof can still be lifted from driver seat but requires 2 hands passing it over the bar, or you can put a stap onto it and raise it easily, or you can raise it using your right hand on the edge of the softop rather than lifting from centre

Visability depends on how you have your mirror, since it can be high or low, for me it's fine as mine is just right to see above the diagonal and below top bar.

RG.net · Postby **RG.net** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 12:48 am

End of the day, anything that is not left from factory, IS DEFECTECTABLE! it doesnt mean sh*t if its cams approved, ADR approved etc if it is not a factory item, it can be deemed a defect UNLESS ENGINEERED!

now, if everyone is worried whether they will get defected or what not, either contact and engineer, run it at your own risk, or dont get it!

its all up to how linient the officer is, when they pull you over.

RG.net · Postby **RG.net** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 12:50 am

sliq wrote:

bumping up an old thread....

just found a pic of a style bar mouse trapping

Bitch, i was going to post this.

in conclusion, stylebars fail.

fecat · Postby **fecat** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 4:14 pm

Old Dude wrote:Hi fecat
If you like the look of the twin hoop bars have a look at the MX5 plus twin hoop roll bars, I have been in a roll over and it happened because we were T boned so it can happen in any car, I just put one of the twin hoop MX 5 plus bars in my NB8B and they are great...!!! I looked at the BD bars as well but was more impressed with the MX5 plus bars and the way they mount and the position of the support arms.
The guys that designed them are engineers, and have these bars in their cars and their kids cars, so they feel pretty secure with them, as do I. From memory the bar I have will take about 9 tonne for and aft and about 3 tonne downward pressure before it bends, hope fully I'll never test it.

I have seen a few photo's of rolled 5s and not on the track, and did a lot of research before I bought the bar I did, and for me its a no brainer, roll bar or nothing and these bars look just as good as a style bar anyway.

My has a mod plate so no problems with the law.
Roof works fine
No problem with visibility at all
And I can still put the roof up from the drivers seat.
The wind deflector goes( working on a new one to fit between hoops)

Good luck with your decision
Regards

Old Dude

Thanks Old Dude.

I guess I have missed the group buy. need to ring Mania for individual pricing. if anyone is interested to buy the Twin Hoop design bar in Sydney, please let me know and I can organise another group buy with Mania.

thanks

StanTheMan · Postby **StanTheMan** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 5:13 pm

That is an epic fail. Never seen a pic of a mousetrap before.

I think I've just changed my mind about stylebars :shock:

Boags · Postby **Boags** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 5:38 pm

StanTheMan wrote:That is an epic fail. Never seen a pic of a mousetrap before.

I think I've just changed my mind about stylebars

I would love to see a BD bar after the same hit. I think it would also be a mangled mess of metal about where the driver's head should be...

BD is a style bar with a few more bolts. If David Brown wasn't on the CAMS roll bar committee the BD would not be CAMS approved. It does not comply with CAMS regs.

/end rant

Now, lets see if we can get this thread to 10 pages before the end of the week. :mrgreen:

RG.net · Postby **RG.net** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 6:04 pm

Boags wrote:
StanTheMan wrote:That is an epic fail. Never seen a pic of a mousetrap before.

I think I've just changed my mind about stylebars

Now, lets see if we can get this thread to 10 pages before the end of the week.

HAHA!

it would be intresting to see a rollover with a BD, i'd presume they may just hold up, as they are bolted onto the parcel tray more then the seatbelt towers ... anyone have any pics of a rollover with a BD?

sliq · Postby **sliq** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 7:55 pm

Boags wrote:If David Brown wasn't on the CAMS roll bar committee the BD would not be CAMS approved. It does not comply with CAMS regs.

where do you get this gossip from?

i like it.

i'm interested.

we should start up a gossip girl for mx5cartalk.

Jeo · Postby **Jeo** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 9:23 pm

sliq wrote:we should start up a gossip girl for mx5cartalk.

oooo, dibs!

Firstly, we are all secretly hairdressers.
You know you love me :wink:

StanTheMan · Postby **StanTheMan** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 9:32 pm

Boags wrote:
StanTheMan wrote:That is an epic fail. Never seen a pic of a mousetrap before.

I think I've just changed my mind about stylebars

I would love to see a BD bar after the same hit. I think it would also be a mangled mess of metal about where the driver's head should be...

BD is a style bar with a few more bolts. If David Brown wasn't on the CAMS roll bar committee the BD would not be CAMS approved. It does not comply with CAMS regs.

/end rant

Now, lets see if we can get this thread to 10 pages before the end of the week.

well....you've let the cat out of the bag....we have 6 pages to go......
tell us how & WHY... I know the bling bar does not comply with cams
And since I'm not an engineer........plain English would be great :mrgreen:

sliq · Postby **sliq** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 10:13 pm

Jeo wrote:
sliq wrote:we should start up a gossip girl for mx5cartalk.

oooo, dibs!

Firstly, we are all secretly hairdressers.
You know you love me

xoxo gossip girl.

like what STM says, i'm keen to see some photos of a car flipped with BD bar.

maybe we should get danny/orx in to work some of his magic in CAD or whatever you use to calculate these things.

Speedyblue · Postby **Speedyblue** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 9:33 am

As I understand it, most of the TB bars aren't cam's compliant either. Except possibly the single hoop with the single diagonal. Not that this is a huge problem for most of the population. I'm still getting one through the GB though. It looks the goods, and I don't need to comply with CAMS on my drive to work. I do however drive along a few roads everyday that have a high rate of car rollovers. Incidently, a car rolled in front of my girlfriend last month. A 4WD coming the other way too fast and ran wide on the corner. Clipped the car in front of her which then slid and rolled. Luckily it rolled on the centre of the road, and not off the side and down the hill.

Everyone carries on about the very low number of crashes that actually involve a car rolling over, but once you leave the flat streets of the suburbs and head out into the hills, things are different.

RobH · Postby **RobH** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 9:49 am

I am not going to profess to being an expert as I am far from it, but how does the BD not comply with CAMS? I have seen diagrams in the CAMS handbook and it appears to be designed to these specifications.

As far as I am concerned the TB roll bar is ugly. The TB accross the middle looks like it belongs on a 1950's building site and should have five guys sitting on it having lunch 45 stories up.

The way Boag's goes on about the TB I am starting to think he is sleeping with the guy who makes it :shock:

Let the debate and mud slinging begin :wink:

StanTheMan · Postby **StanTheMan** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 10:32 am

just beacuse something is cams aproved doesn't mean its safe.....lets face it
lets get Bob Jane and Mr Brown Davies involved in all this too.

popcorn is ready...

where is bigdog & AJ...... time for a new episode of Underbelly?

bruce · Postby **bruce** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 10:43 am

Speedyblue wrote:Everyone carries on about the very low number of crashes that actually involve a car rolling over, but once you leave the flat streets of the suburbs and head out into the hills, things are different.

So when a car goes into the hills it just wants to flip over onto it's lid?
You would still have to drive like a complete lunatic to put any car on it's roof.