Securing / Bolting Seats in a Tornado

[Mark Worthington]

Originally Posted by Gregg

Sorry, but safety is paramount with me.

I would've thought that being a pain in the ass is paramount with you.

Let's extend this line of critical thinking, shall we? According to the late Carrol Smith, rivets should only be used in shear. My RF uses rivets (and adhesive) to fasten the bottom panel to the space frame, and I believe most space-frame cars use this same fastening technique. Obviously, the loads on this panel (weight of driver and passenger) put the rivets in tension. I suppose I should drill out all the rivets on the bottom of my car and replace with grade-8 screws? I mean, come on, safety is paramount, right?

If safety was indeed paramount, more paramount than performance, more than style or the fulfilment of dreams, we'd never set foot in a GT40. Really, they're too low for soccer moms to see, they have side mounted fuel tanks that can rupture and spray fuel all over the cockpit in a side impact, no airbags or ABS or anything like that. Who in their right mind would drive one of these death traps?

If you want to harp on safety, Gregg, there is no shortage of potential safety issues with any given replica that are more substantive than the seat mounting provisions in a Tornado. Maybe we should start a thread where we can all take pot shots at cars that are we don't own and haven't built.

[Gregg]

Hi Mark,

Thanks for the kind words. I'm sure that Andy & Scott would also like to thank you for keeping this thread alive and in the forefront.

I think John Snook's comments pretty much sums up the issue. A review of other forum members replies also speak of their concerns.

From John Snook, (I do not know who manufactured his car, but)

"Just exactly what I did - I had failed SVA with seats bolted directly to the alu floorpan and was forced to rethink."

Apparantly bolting seats to the floor alone is not acceptable for SVA compliance.

Now, as far as the rest of your comments, I'll play.

"I would've thought that being a pain in the ass is paramount with you."

No, being a "pain in the ass" is not paramount with me, more like third or fourth on the list. I would put thinking right up there with safety though.

"Let's extend this line of critical thinking, shall we? According to the late Carrol Smith, rivets should only be used in shear. My RF uses rivets (and adhesive) to fasten the bottom panel to the space frame, and I believe most space-frame cars use this same fastening technique. Obviously, the loads on this panel (weight of driver and passenger) put the rivets in tension. I suppose I should drill out all the rivets on the bottom of my car and replace with grade-8 screws? I mean, come on, safety is paramount, right?"

I now know that Carrol Smith was the foremost authoritative author on rivets and shear. Thank you. However, I believe that most space frame manufacturers have some type of steel support, welded to the chassis which the seat bolts to. I do not believe that they rely on the aluminum floor pan alone to support the seat. If they do, my comments would extend to their cars as well. As far as drilling out the rivets on your car..... well, it is your life and your car, do what makes you feel comfortable.

"If safety was indeed paramount, more paramount than performance, more than style or the fulfilment of dreams, we'd never set foot in a GT40. Really, they're too low for soccer moms to see, they have side mounted fuel tanks that can rupture and spray fuel all over the cockpit in a side impact, no airbags or ABS or anything like that. Who in their right mind would drive one of these death traps?"

Wow, I guess there really is no need to factor safety into any aspect of the car then. I would think that you would want to build the safest car you could bearing in mind the nature of the beast. Might as well toss your fuel caps. What is the chance of fuel spitting up the tank and through the filler tube. I mean, come on, you have gravity on your side, right? Fuel cells, why would anyone think of those. Explosafe foam in the tank, nope, not for me!! How about your seatbelts? Really don't need those when a "soccer Mom" crashes into you. Who wouldn't want to be tossed around the cockpit for some extra fun?

"If you want to harp on safety, Gregg, there is no shortage of potential safety issues with any given replica that are more substantive than the seat mounting provisions in a Tornado. Maybe we should start a thread where we can all take pot shots at cars that are we don't own and haven't built."

Feel free. I do not have a horse in the race, and again, I was unaware that I needed to be an owner to have an opinion. Do you have a Tornado? No. Wow, I guess your opinion doesn't matter than. How about everyone else who posted on this thread who doesn't own a Tornado? I guess there comments are not welcome as well.

I would think from a manufacturers' standpoint, they would want to build the safest car they possibly could for liability reasons. Hey but what do I know. I don't own a 40.

[Ross Nicol]

[quote
Let's extend this line of critical thinking, shall we? According to the late Carrol Smith, rivets should only be used in shear. My RF uses rivets (and adhesive) to fasten the bottom panel to the space frame, and I believe most space-frame cars use this same fastening technique. Obviously, the loads on this panel (weight of driver and passenger) put the rivets in tension. I suppose I should drill out all the rivets on the bottom of my car and replace with grade-8 screws? [/quote]

Are we to believe you've removed the steel floor straps in your RF Mark to place the rivets in tension? Or maybe you've knotched your seat runners to clear the steel straps.
When I read this thread I can't help but remember the old thread which asked the question "If you see something unsafe should you say anything?" My answer would always be yes. I can understand the angry reaction by Manufacturer and Distributor of Tornado but when the dust settles and considering some owners have fitted steel straps anyway, hopefully in the future they will be fitted as standard and all owners advised of the upgrade.
Ross

[Gregg]

[quote=ross nicol;222839 When I read this thread I can't help but remember the old thread which asked the question "If you see something unsafe should you say anything?" My answer would always be yes. I can understand the angry reaction by Manufacturer and Distributor of Tornado but when the dust settles and considering some owners have fitted steel straps anyway, hopefully in the future they will be fitted as standard and all owners advised of the upgrade.
Ross[/QUOTE]


I remember that thread too. By the way, please stop posting here as you do not own a Tornado. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation!

[Kalun D]

Mountain out of a molehill here...

What is so scary about aluminum? "I want steel, it's "stronger"", right?

It's not the material it's the design application. Think about it. Almost the entire load bearing structure of a 747 jet is.... get ready.... aluminum.

My GT40 has a .083" 7075-T7 aluminum floorpan. That's less than 3/32" thick. The seats are bolted directly to the floorpan. You guys are afraid of 1/8" aluminum?, you're over reacting.

Mounting directly to an aluminum floorpan is perfectly safe as long as you have a large hardened backup washer on the outside underneath. All this does is distribute the load enough so it's physically impossible for the washer/bolt to pull through under any foreseeable crash loading.

Don't believe me? Let's calculate. Seats bolted in with 4 count 5/16" grade 8 bolts, with hardened 2"OD back up washers, with an 1/8" 6061 T6 aluminum floor pan. Take the weight of the seat, then double it to accommodate loading from the occupant (restrained by the belts), accelerate to 100mph and do a dead stop. I'll guarantee the seat will NEVER pull through the pan. The main reason being it's never loaded that much in the pull direction. The belts are anchored to the chassis, the most loading on the seat occurs when the occupant slams back down or is hit from the rear and that's in the other direction.

You could have a big washer on the inside also, I don't because the sliders are large enough there's no way they could punch through the floor from the inside.

It is imperative that a seat stay in position during an accident, however most of the really large loads are on the belts.

And I will repeat what's already been said, Most GT40 kits are a death trap, seat fastening is way down on the safety(danger) list. The fuel cells on the side are one of the most dangerous positions. A full race roll cage would go right through and obstruct the door opening. The car is too low to be seen very well and most of them aren't designed like modern cars with crumple zones, air bags etc.

Safety in a GT40 is as much in how you drive as anything, just like a motorcycle, you pick your time and place and get eyes in the back of your head.

[Mark Worthington]

Originally Posted by Gregg

I do not have a horse in the race, and again, I was unaware that I needed to be an owner to have an opinion.

Really? I had heard that you have (or perhaps had) a business relationship with a certain manufacturer on this forum. If that is indeed true, then perhaps you, or your client, actually does have a horse in this race.

[Kalun D]

Originally Posted by Gregg

I would think from a manufacturers' standpoint, they would want to build the safest car they possibly could for liability reasons.

IMHO, this is where the basis of your argument falls apart. Because kit car manufactures are quite different from the major manufactures.

I'm always going to back the kit manufacture in this sort of instance, because they dedicate their lives to making the dream achievable to the working bloke for a fraction of the price. So there are compromises, if you don't anticipate that then you are in a dream world.

Let's look at a "safe" example, the Ford GT. As safe as possible and it will cost you 2 to 4 times as much as a kit. How many man hours for development? How many dollars worth of resources behind that development? And you expect close to that from a low production small business like a kit car manufacture, with maybe 1/50th of the resources?

And all that for 1/4th the price?

Okay then Greeej, I hope your "bottom pan" is not too thin skinned, because that could be unsafe.

[Cushmancompetition]

I also heard that Greg has been on the payroll for that same Manufacturer and that explains why he does not want to talk about that same welded aluminum sheet trying to hold fuel without leaking or flexing. How about side impact when your safety barrier of aluminum is holding your fuel at the same time. No horse in this race but maybe a paycheck.

[Jac Mac]

Come on, I have not got all day, What/which manufacturer?????, hurry up or I will change channels & watch the young and the useless. As for the seats/mounts--- Its your ass'es, make it at least strong enough to support it/them!

[Gregg]

Jay & Mark, sorry to disappoint you guys but I am not on anyone's payroll. I wish I was. Have you guys received any checks for me?? I have in the past given my advice to a manufacturer as well as a loan of some original parts.

As far as aluminum welded tanks, they are used widely in the automobile industry as well as the boating industry. My last two boats had aluminum tanks. I had no issues with them, especially carrying 450 gallons of fuel. As an aside, Jay, I never made a discussion of any aluminum tanks.

Kalun, very aware of cost/risk analysis in manufacturing. Confused about your comment regarding the Ford GT being 2 to 4 times the price of a replica. Isn't that the case?

Jac, you always make me laugh. How are we doing on that homework assignment I gave you last week?

[Kalun D]

Originally Posted by Gregg

Kalun, very aware of cost/risk analysis in manufacturing. Confused about your comment regarding the Ford GT being 2 to 4 times the price of a replica. Isn't that the case?

I wasn't talking about cost/risk, although it could be connected. I was talking about expecting similar safety from a small low-production low-cost business as you do from the major manufactures.

Yes it is the case that a safe as possible vehicle, with similar performance/looks, also costs 2 to 4 times the price. Yes that is the case.

I think a lot of people expect a kit car to be more finished/complete/refined and more safe because they have been conditioned by what is available from the major manufactures. I'm just pointing out why this is just not so.

[Mark Worthington]

Originally Posted by Gregg

Jay & Mark, sorry to disappoint you guys but I am not on anyone's payroll. I wish I was. Have you guys received any checks for me?? I have in the past given my advice to a manufacturer as well as a loan of some original parts.

Gregg, that appears to be a carefully crafted reply, in a Clintonesque sort of way. I am a consultant and I do work for Texas Instruments, Hess, and Wal-Mart but, like you, I am not on their payroll. I do, however, have a business relationship with them. I would expect that there must have been some recompense involved in consideration of the advice and original parts you loaned to this manufacturer.

[Gregg]

Originally Posted by Mark Worthington

Gregg, that appears to be a carefully crafted reply, in a Clintonesque sort of way.

Now THAT was low, insulting, downright dirty AND uncalled for! If I run for office, can I count on your support?

[John Snook]

Gregg,
Just for the record mine's a Tornado, I built it in 2002-2005 and it's mine I tell you, mine, mine, mine !!! :-)))))
lol
John