Thread: 2012 110 DEFENDER ROLL CAGE FITTED

Originally Posted by slug_burner

Good on you for getting on and doing something about it if it worried you. I too worry a little about it. I think that even a cargo barrier would help.

I am surprised that the 2012 model should be different enough that they need to develop a new design. It is probably a case of interference with the bits of plastic as I think the metal work is unchanged. On a closer look it appears that the seat boxes have an extra fold not present in my 300Tdi defer.

I enquired about the 6 point internal cage for the 2012 model but was told SD don't have an updated cage for it yet by the Australian supplier. It may have something to do with the different seats but I'm not entirely sure what it was.I just wasnt going to continue travelling with my kids and wait till they did release one.

Originally Posted by slug_burner

Good on you for getting on and doing something about it if it worried you. I too worry a little about it. I think that even a cargo barrier would help.

I am surprised that the 2012 model should be different enough that they need to develop a new design. It is probably a case of interference with the bits of plastic as I think the metal work is unchanged. On a closer look it appears that the seat boxes have an extra fold not present in my 300Tdi defer.

Hi slug_burner,

Yes, there are huge differences between a Puma's "load box" and that of any preceding Defender. Folds, seams, seat belt mounts etc.

What is odd though is the inference that there is a difference between the bodies of the 2007 to 2011 Defender vs the 2012 onward ones...

The last G4 vehicles (the one that got cancelled) still had Safety Devices cages on the Puma Defenders.

Regardless mate, that is a pretty spectacular result for a custom build without a template and jig! I love the way the pipes "step" in and out to allow as much clearance as possible.

Cheers,

Lou

Why did it have to be engineered? or was that just for the baby restraints? You see alot of homemade roll bars in the back of utes of which I am sure none are engineered.

I reckon it looks really good, Actually now I think of it, I have a homemade roll bar in the back of the 130. The previous owner had it made or made it himself after seeing one that rolled over.

Originally Posted by Gillie

Why did it have to be engineered? or was that just for the baby restraints? You see alot of homemade roll bars in the back of utes of which I am sure none are engineered.

I reckon it looks really good, Actually now I think of it, I have a homemade roll bar in the back of the 130. The previous owner had it made or made it himself after seeing one that rolled over.

This has been discussed before.
Under the national rules, there are two modification codes - one for commercially manufactured cages and one for custom made cages.
Neither of the codes cover external cages or roll bars, so they don't need to be engineered.

Nice work but I am very surprised that the bars do not have protective padding on them. This is similar to ROPS fitted to mine vehicles and there is an Australian Standard covering the padding required for head strike. We mould ROPS padding for several manufacturers from polyurethane who then have them tested and certified to ensure they comply with the head strike requirement of the Standard.

Because the cage is fitted inside the normal body, it is closer to both adult and childrens heads and of a shape which more likely to cause damage.

Originally Posted by isuzurover

Neither of the codes cover external cages or roll bars, so they don't need to be engineered.

I discussed this with my engineer and he said they have to comply with pedestrian requirements.. if it was inside the brush bars / side steps and didn't have anything sticking out it would be OK - but he was not encouraging of an external cage, and recommended pretty much exactly what Voltron has.