Page 2 of 4

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 11:00 am
by dragonfly
Beautiful! I really like the Minilites

Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 2:38 pm
by Binjammin
mmmm that's turned out great, the decals do make a big difference and the wheels suit it nicely too.

Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 6:53 pm
by Highfield
Lightweight_911 wrote:The decals make all the difference - car looks superb !
I agree - better get on with mine in that case :-)

Ian

Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2009 5:52 pm
by MikeB
Been pondering on which seats to fit out the car with for road / classic rally use. I finally picked the OMP Brands Hatch, which arrived very promptly from Demon Tweeks today

Image


Very pleased with how you feel sitting in them, nice lower body support, but not too high at the sides to hinder the harness getting a hold of you.

I'd made up alloy supports running across the std Porsche chassis mounts, but I'd like the passenger seat to be lower, as well as putting a bit more rearward rake on the cushion. OMP do an adaptor to let these bottom mounted seats fit side mountings (as used on most competition seats), so I'm going to take that route for both seats eventually.

However, the driver's Sparco race seat will stay in for hillclimbing in 2010.

Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2009 8:07 pm
by Cortina
Mike ... tell me (what looks like) the single belt mount at the rear isn't just into parcel shelf ....... :shock:

Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2009 8:49 pm
by MikeB
Alan

Yes it's into the factory mount, the shell had the rear bulkhead replaced with a later one. These 3 point belts are fine for road rallies ( I bought them before realising the regs for Speed Events had changed) but for the hills, I have to fit a 4 point, which I have yet to sort out the rear points for. Currently thinking of using the rear seat points on the tunnel and the side panel, or might get a horizontal bar set into the roll hoop

Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2009 10:27 pm
by 911hillclimber
My hillclimb 911 is 'belted' exactly like that Mike.
No probs with the Scrutes ever, though it is technically wrong. See Blue Book safety pages and the angle you are allowed to run the belts to the rear (side on pic in Blue Book)

Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2009 10:28 pm
by Cortina
Either - I would go for the bar (as I will on my own) ... but not the factory mount there .... unless you plan to stay under 30mph ! :)

Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2009 10:38 pm
by Cortina
Belts to rear +/- 10 degrees off horizontal prefered - down up to 45 degrees acceptable (as per 2010 blue book - no change from memory) - but self preservation is more important than passing scrutiny.
Rear belt run as short as possible to minimise stretch on impact (one could possibly argue that more stretch is better as it slows down deceleration (spelling ?) forces ??)
I'm going for shortest possible !

2.2 S/T

Posted: Thu Dec 31, 2009 9:35 am
by haasad
That is lovely!

A real credit and inspiration.


I was shocked to notice that the belts in my Dads Areonca plane are all fastened to the airframe with what looks like 1/8 rigging wire eyeleted for
6 mm screws :shock:

I suspect that our cars are somewhat stronger than that where ever one fixes the belts if no particular regulation applies. Aren't the standard screw sizes 14 mm ? with some sensible load spreading washers or sub plates the load required for a shear or pull out would be huge I imagine.

Posted: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:04 am
by MikeB
Yes, it's the matter of finding a piece of metal panel where you can put load spreading plates behind, if you are not using factory mountings.

Actually I was wrong in what I said above, the rear mounting is into a new point we created with proper spreading plates. However, as Alan says the best method is probably using a dedicated bar on the cage, it'll just be another bit of "spaghetti" to bang my head off if you ever need to do any work in the back !!

Re: 2.2 S/T

Posted: Thu Dec 31, 2009 1:54 pm
by Gary71
haasad wrote: I was shocked to notice that the belts in my Dads Areonca plane are all fastened to the airframe with what looks like 1/8 rigging wire eyeleted for
6 mm screws :shock:
Aircraft belts are pretty much only for turbulence, a secure belt anchorage is probably the last thing to worry about during a plane crash! :)

Posted: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:29 pm
by 911hillclimber
Some (many) years ago when I stuffed by 911 into the bank at the top Esse at Shelsley Walsh it was a near head-on. I had a stock T seat (!) and 2'' wide 4 point harness. I was in 'tight' but after the crunch it was surprising just how much the belts stretched. I hit my helmet on the screen top roll cage cross bar. I thought I had 4'' clearance!

Fit 3'' belts if you can, just so much better.(are they now mandatory in Mod Prod classes?)

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 10:08 am
by sladey
MikeB wrote: Image

Very pleased with how you feel sitting in them, nice lower body support, but not too high at the sides to hinder the harness getting a hold of you.
Loving those seats! Very cool and very reasonable

Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:37 pm
by MikeB
Well, it's been a rather frustrating Xmas period, with all the cold weather and snow (though it was pretty moderate here compared to what most of you guys seemed to experience).

I decided not to take the car out on salted roads, so it's spent the last load of weeks hiding in my garage.

In the meantime, I got round to tidying up the interior and sorting out the fitting of the OMP Brands Hatch bucket seat. It's now converted to a side mounting, you can get brackets to do this from OMP, but Crossle Cars ran me up a set for a quarter of the price !! So it now sits lower in the passenger side, and give more of a feeling of being "in" the car instead of sitting "on" the car, if you get my drift :)

A bit of a spring clean and now the interior looks like this

Image

The red knob on the dash is a pull cbale that connects to the battery master switch.

Hoping things thaw soon so I can get it out and align the suspension, as well as get some better quality pics :bigsmurf: