Is the 150 showing any signs of cracked inner guards

[smakb Advanced Member Find all posts View Profile Close smakb]

Smakb

I have a ARB bar and battery on the drivers side, no cracks yet touch wood, mine is one of the first 150's (2009) and I have done heaps of off road including the Cape, Simpson Desert, Outback SA in it. Interestingly another SEQ Pradopointer has a TJM bar and he has cracks on the drivers side. It looks like it is random, I've seen cracked guards on Prados that are stock standard.

Richo.

Good to see yours is still going strong. I think this will come down to a lot of factors, with chassis flex and week inner guards being the issue and then made worse by bars and batteries. It also looks like luck may play a big part.

I thought I was one of the lucky ones as I had always give mine a hard time up in the high country and it did not crack, until I did the Simpson.

[rob_macca67 Avid PP Poster! Find all posts View Profile Close rob_macca67]

Yeah, I have to agree with Richo, I know of people with ARB/TJM bars with cracks..... but in saying that I know that ARB have change the design of their Deluxe Bars (not sure of when though) due to their Bars developing cracks where the bullbar bolts to the brackets. The new design has some cross bracing to helps counteract the some of the horizontal movement apparently..... I've recently had my old 2011 Deluxe bar replaced under warranty due to finding cracks in the ARB itself.


Heading to the Cape in 2014, so I will see how the new bar + inner guards handle the corrugations up there.......






rob

[REV Find all posts View Profile Close REV]

I'll say it again.......I reckon the day of the week your Prado was made just may have something to do with it.

[ARB 4X4 Accessories Corporate Member Find all posts View Profile Close ARB 4X4 Accessories]

Hi guys, I thought I'd offer our 2c worth in relation to this issue.

The issue of cracking of the inner guards around the battery carriers on the 150’s is well documented and is known to have occurred not only on vehicles with steel or alloy bull bars, but also on vehicles with the OE bumper. The only consistent factors that have become apparent are large distances travelled on corrugated roads, high tyre pressures and generally a lack of clearance at the front bump stops.

These vehicles run a dynamic, flexible chassis that is designed to be able to move. Stiffening of the chassis with a bar as has been suggested may actually lead to failure of other components. What needs to be noted is that the body mounts on the 150 are very long, soft and compliant and insulate the body well from noise, vibration, and to a large degree from what is happening at the front of the chassis. Whilst from the driver's seat you certainly see some movement from the chassis flex, a lot of what is being seen is the movement of the body in relation to the chassis. Similar movement is still occurring when an OE bumper is fitted, it’s just that this cannot be seen from the driver's seat.

The ARB bar for the 150 has been engineered so that it does not cause a greater flex in the chassis than what is standard. Nor does it cause an increased load to be passed through to the body. Both extensive finite engineering analysis and field testing on the Prado 150 is conclusive evidence that an ARB bar will not cause this fatigue cracking to occur.

Cheers, Sam.

[SuperDavid Member Find all posts View Profile Close SuperDavid]

Hi guys, I thought I'd offer our 2c worth in relation to this issue.

The issue of cracking of the inner guards around the battery carriers on the 150’s is well documented and is known to have occurred not only on vehicles with steel or alloy bull bars, but also on vehicles with the OE bumper. The only consistent factors that have become apparent are large distances travelled on corrugated roads, high tyre pressures and generally a lack of clearance at the front bump stops.

These vehicles run a dynamic, flexible chassis that is designed to be able to move. Stiffening of the chassis with a bar as has been suggested may actually lead to failure of other components. What needs to be noted is that the body mounts on the 150 are very long, soft and compliant and insulate the body well from noise, vibration, and to a large degree from what is happening at the front of the chassis. Whilst from the driver's seat you certainly see some movement from the chassis flex, a lot of what is being seen is the movement of the body in relation to the chassis. Similar movement is still occurring when an OE bumper is fitted, it’s just that this cannot be seen from the driver's seat.

The ARB bar for the 150 has been engineered so that it does not cause a greater flex in the chassis than what is standard. Nor does it cause an increased load to be passed through to the body. Both extensive finite engineering analysis and field testing on the Prado 150 is conclusive evidence that an ARB bar will not cause this fatigue cracking to occur.

Cheers, Sam.

I'm leaning more towards that its the ARB battery tray, rather than bullbar. But maybe its a numbers game? Maybe ARB Customers are more likely to get on corrigated roads.

[REV Find all posts View Profile Close REV]

I'm leaning more towards that its the ARB battery tray, rather than bullbar. But maybe its a numbers game? Maybe ARB Customers are more likely to get on corrigated roads.

Yeah right!! You go right ahead and believe that.

[Richoson Avid PP Poster! Find all posts View Profile Close Richoson]

Here's another observation, my dual battery tray actually bolts in two places to the metal on the side of the engine bay as well as to the bottom, it is an Outback Ideas tray. Maybe that support helps as well.

See ya on the tracks, Richo.

[AJ120 Out of control poster! Find all posts View Profile Close AJ120]

Talk to anyone who does outback recoveries and repairs, most that I have spoken to tell me that 90% of the problems they see are from people driving too fast and / or with too higher tyre pressures.

I see it all the time when I travel, people driving like madmen but still thinking they are taking it easy. Add some extra weight, stiffer suspension, stiffer tyres and some combination of all those factors will be your cause. I doubt it's any one of those on their own but a combination of a few of them.

Too be honest, with the roads I drive on I expect things to break, although touchwood they haven't yet. You can't gauge how much mechanical sympathy any given person has, if you don't have much then you may well be treating your vehicle very harshly without even realizing it.

Cheers Andrew

[SWR Banned Find all posts View Profile Close SWR]

It's always that meaningless quote without an in depth explanation! "ASK ANYONE??" ..

WTF!! Thats why we continually ask the same questions isn't it? That's exactly why this thread is Soooooo long and Soooo repetitive!...

Because everyone is guessing?".. With a touch of propaganda/ Hidden agenda's and bias of course!

I personally "Believe" IMHO (And an in-depth explanation & opinion just like everyone else) that it "IS" the "EXTRA" weight that is being anchored to the front of the vehicle for which the vehicle was "NOT" originally designed for by the OEM manufacturers! ..

The battery is the least of your issues.

Funny how the cracks always seem to start from under the arch up!..

If it was the battery wouldn't it be from the top inner guard down?? ... Lol ... And even that is questionable because the inner gaurd is sitting on the chassis rail via a rubber mount!! LMAO even more!!

When the vehicle was designed they (OEM) had occupant safety in mined with a energy absorbing crumple zone designed and backed-up with a world wide recognised ANCAP & ENCAP in mined with a star rating in mined for there good "All-rounder vehicle)...

Tanks/ Tractors/ humber's/ Doon buggies where a specific design for "A" specific job in mind!... A Prado was designed as a good all-rounder and nothing more or nothing less!

The metal bar companies (Who ever they may be? ..) are really hurting because of this star rating and that is exactly why the big mine companies pulled the pin on these extras added to there vehicles and is also exactly why the 150 series "IS" 245 Kg heavier than the 120 series!

Where did that extra 245kg go to on the 150 series you ask?

SIMPLE!... It went directly to the safety cell to improve Front/ Side impact and roll-over! ..

Without the extras from the aftermarket guy's! With this in mind given that you basically have an identical chass as the 120 series you suddenly realise that the 245kg is allot of extra distributed Weight/ Stress on the chassis! With this "Extra" pay-load added to the 150 series which means "Less" ability to carry as much as the 120 series.

If you don't believe me (Some are in denial) Check/ Compare your max front Axel load/ Max Rear axle load and total COMBINED load to the 120 series and the penny will eventually drop!

Once you have worked all of that out, and don't forget to add the person's and cargo on top of that you will have an overloaded (Especially front axle) to your rig before you start your journey!

EG: From the "A" pillar to the rear "D" pillar which is the "safety cell" that is designed to "Protect" it's occupants!...

This safety cell is also bolted to the chassis via 8 x rubber Mount's (Absorb vibration = similar to the same as engine mounts!) and gives minimal body movement but the body does move within it's desighned reason!

Now you can picture the rail's being supported directly by the safety cell (A,B,C,D pillars) from extreme body twist this can "NOT" be said for the "FRONT" two chassis rail's that support the two front independent strutts!

WHY?? .. Simple!!... The only thing that Stops/ Supports the the two front chassis rail's is the ????????? .... You guessed it!!........ "THE CRUMPLE ZONE!"

Meaning! .. The front inner/Outer guards are designed to "CRUMPLE" and "NOT" carry weight like the safety cell can with it's "A,B,C,D strengthened pillars including the bonded windscreen and roof included of course!

From the "A" pillar forward the two front chassis of the vehicle the rails are allowed to flex more than appose to the "A" pillar back to the "D" pillar!..

Note: There is 6 x of the 8 x rubber mounts holding the safety cell to the chass and rear live axle to reduce body twist.

The only thing supporting the two front narrower chass rails is the two front rubber mounts (forward to the front of the vehicle away from the ridged "A" pillar & safety cell).

EG: You put "More weght on the front of the vehicle and you automatically notice the nose of the vehicle drop!...

Inturn you strengthen the front coil springs and when you drive "ONE" wheel over a mogul then "ALL" of that weght is forced through that single chass rail and it "WILL" twist that bit more and stress that front Inner/Outer gaurd that bit more from that very front rubber mount into the inner/outer gaurd but that twist will not twist as much through the "A' towards the "D' pillar as much due to being supported by the safty cell.

Please do not ramble on about tyre pressures again with intent to de-rail/ bury this thread again as certain guy's did in the past threads!..

Here is "Some" of the Past threads on chass stress below!

Take note of the dates of the threads!

http://www.pradopoint.com/showthread...l=1#post357008

http://www.pradopoint.com/showthread...l=1#post357275

http://www.pradopoint.com/showthread...l=1#post358603

http://www.pradopoint.com/showthread...l=1#post359742

http://www.pradopoint.com/showthread...l=1#post359944

Gross Vehicle Mass
http://www.pradopoint.com/showthread...l=1#post369219

http://www.pradopoint.com/showthread...l=1#post369233


Cheers

[mjrandom Out of control poster! Find all posts View Profile Close mjrandom]

How much weight does a bar and winch add? The V6 is 80kg lighter than the D4D. There are reports of standard D4Ds having cracked guards but not a single report of a V6 with winch, battery and steel bar with cracked guards?

Like so many things it is likely a combination of issues and not one that is easily discovered (if it was the problem would be gone).

I am regularly amazed at the way people drive on the tracks we use. Waaaaay too fast and taking weird lines to increase the bumps. Partly the manufacturers are to blame, when was the last time you saw a 4wd in an ad being driven sensibly? The new Prado ad is as bad as any.

Yes I have nothing to add!

[SWR Banned Find all posts View Profile Close SWR]

The V6 is 80kg lighter than the D4D. There are reports of standard D4Ds having cracked guards but not a single report of a V6 with winch, battery and steel bar with cracked guards?

OK???? So can we safely say that the fact that the V6 "IS" lighter and no issues and that without the metal bar added to the diesel "IS" still 80kg heavier off the bat THEN when the metal bar added can we safely say that the "EXTRA" weight could be cracking the crumple zone?

Go all ball's out and add a battery and winch while you are at it!! ..How much heavier would that make it to a V6?... Mmmmmm?... We can always say that the V6 will always be 80kg lighter!... But the 150 series will always be 247kg heaver than the 120 series.

We are aware that jumping off sand dunes and going flat-out on high tyre pressures and constant corrugated roads will knock your teeth out etc but we can not get away from the over-loading of the front Axel can we!!

This is what i do believe is stressing the front crumple zone!

Check out all the rigs on this forum alone who are running metal bars as appose to stock standard!

Cheers

[mjrandom Out of control poster! Find all posts View Profile Close mjrandom]

I think you miss my point. If it is only the weight of a steel bar that causes the issue then a fully loaded V6 should have the same problem. Also where does the 245kg weight increase come from? I just checked the brochures I have and an option pack 150 GXL D4D auto is 160kg heavier than the 120 equivalent. Still heavier yes but not as much as indicated. GVM is up 90kg.

[SWR Banned Find all posts View Profile Close SWR]

I think you miss my point.

Yep!!.... I think you missed my point as well but that's ok!

Read what i had written then read all of the links attached to it and see if you Get/ See my point!

Anything past me trying to explain any more than what i have already fall's into repetitive and a forceful opinion!

As long as i get it and my pocket coin is safe i don't really have to worry about any apposing opinion's as long as i get it!

Funny how a alloy bar hardly moves around but the metal bar likes to wriggle around allot!..... Why is that???......... Mmmmmm?

How come the stock standard bumper dont move at all?? ... Whats the go there? .. It only has a 1 maybe 2mm gap as well!

How many millimeters does the metal bar dance around and more importantly why?

Cheers

[Guest Close Guest]

I'll throw in another difference to the debate. The cross member aft of the gearbox on the V6 is closer to the engine than the diesel. Perhaps the front half of the V6 chassis is stiffer and coupled with a lighter engine, causes less deflection on the chassis. Just a thought and IMHO.

[SuperDavid Member Find all posts View Profile Close SuperDavid]

I think you miss my point. If it is only the weight of a steel bar that causes the issue then a fully loaded V6 should have the same problem. Also where does the 245kg weight increase come from? I just checked the brochures I have and an option pack 150 GXL D4D auto is 160kg heavier than the 120 equivalent. Still heavier yes but not as much as indicated. GVM is up 90kg.

I dont think all of the 245kg or 160kg comes from saftey cells.
I've got a 240v power point in my 150...I dont think the 120 has that! Little things like that, that the 120 doesn't have adds up.



yeah..I've got nothing to add either