A place for more technical discussions. Please make sure you post in the correct section on the site, this way it keeps the site tidy AND ensures you get a more relevant answer.
I would go for as tight as you can - about 1cm otherwise it will look like a climbing frame!
The only advantage of a bigger gap is that if the cage deforms, it is less likely to deform the body as well. However, in that situation you have bigger things to worry about - like your internal organs staying where they are meant to be!
Keeping it close makes it less likely to get hooked up on things and minimises the gaps that the vehicle will fit through.
You can't see it but mine has an internal diagonal added (not by original cage supplier) which bolts through the roof to the external frame and through the floor to the chassis.
This is because, as you say, the external frame flexed freely from side to side (KAP Suzuki cage)
Martin
2003 M13 early KAP build.
3" Trailmaster lift with 1.5 Spacers on front
Customised winch bumper and roll cage
235/85R16 Maxxis Bighorns on 16" Rims, 4:1 Rocklobster, Rear ARB locker and on-board air
Corrected arms all-round, rear disks, Recaro seats and harnesses
The cage on ours has a triangular design where the uprights meet the roof and the front and rear tubes curve to meet the B post tube part way over the roof - they are then reinforced with narrower tube running parallel to the gutter - if you give it a good shake whilst standing on it it doesnt seem to flex much
For offroading I would always prefer an external cage to an internal one
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. Please let us know if you agree to all of these cookies. Accepting the Cookies also accepts the Disclaimers for the website.
