krypto you miss the point. The plates are not bending the add on structure below the chassis and the loading from the bolts to the bolt holes is double shear. Yes the bolts were torqued correctly. I agree that there is no way that the recovery plate makers had any assistance from Toyota but I disagree that Toyota design these for anything other than a load that is static and angle down not parallel to the ground or higher.
Anyway whatever.
The big mothers on our cars face forwards.
Tie down points face down. Much much much weaker.
You talk like your talking about the tie down points
On a pulsar.
2014PPGTG, interesting user name. Do whatever you want and set whatever rules you want. I am just trying to explain the difference between the two. I will do what I want the way I want.
My 150 build - http://www.pradopoint.com/showthread.php?27423-A-Random-approach-to-a-Bluestorm-150-GXL-D4D-automatic
My bolts are 12.6 and torqued up as recommended in the instructions.
Agreed that maybe only the plates and bolts are rated to the SWL but that is surely 2/3 being rated is better than the tie down points which are 0/3?
Jasen, that's a bit like saying you carefully designed a bridge or a house but built it on sand. In this case 2/3 is no better than 0/3, but at least they look good Whats that saying about half pregnant ?
Having said all that I think that carefully considering how and where to attach a recovery point is the key and there is nothing wrong with using recovery points. I just don't think that they are as well engineered as everyone thinks.
I would be interested to know if the bolt holes used to attach the stamped plates are designed for that purpose by Toyota. It is all fine and well using high tensile bolts provided the bolt holes are designed for that purpose. Otherwise you might end up with intact bolts and damaged chassis.
Of course all of this is speculation or as Roo said opinions, has anyone heard of the welded loops tearing off or recovery points coming off?
Interesting read this one. When I fitted recovery points to my Prado I made a plate to attach them to the chassis to spread the load. Similar to the ones that have been fitted to the 150's.
If any of you were to cut the box section of the chassis and see how thin the material is that the chassis is constructed of you'd would seriously reconsider your eagerness to go gung ho snatching anything and everything out of a bog. Check out this video of a 120..
Anyone who doesn't use a bridle strap or equaliser and dampners is dicing with death IMHO. At least if something did break the bridle "should" prevent that part from becoming a missile.
Ades
Silver '04 KZJ120~Manual~GXL~Dobinson/Kings lift~Custom valved Ironmans~Detroit Locker~Endless Air~X9 Superwinch~Madman EMS1~TJM Dual Battery~Rhino Roof Tray~120W solar panel~Foxwing awning~Bushskinz UVP~Long Ranger water tank~Bushman fridge~Steinbauer P-Box~Beaudesert 2 3/4"~Airtec Snorkel~TJM Sliders~Prico Boost Gauge~BFG-KO2s~TPMS~GME TX3420~Front and Rear Cameras~Ultimate Camper hanging off the back!
2014PPGTG, interesting user name. Do whatever you want and set whatever rules you want. I am just trying to explain the difference between the two. I will do what I want the way I want.
Hey you sound a bit upset, it's just everyone expressing their opinions, as you know not everyone agrees on stuff.
It's just opinions, don't worry about facts, an owners manual I read said to the bottom of the bumper, things change, the vehicles are the same. The fact is there is no evidence factory points are no good, the same as there is no evidence aftermarket ones once fitted are rated on vehicle.
I'm like you, I will do what I want the way I want, the same.
My problem is, as a committee member for the 14gtg, I need to comply with requirements also.
Not only do I believe my factory points are satisfactory for towing (snatching is a from of towing)
I'm unable to fit aftermarket points, due to my Winch cradle already using the holes that mount the aftermarket point.
I point out that they would be mounted on the same lower panel, creating more leverage to the panel as they would end up lower. That is welded part if the chassis. Same thickness steel.
So if we adopt unsatisfactory requirements ( that where for another trip in another place)
I for one will be excluded.
Interesting read this one. When I fitted recovery points to my Prado I made a plate to attach them to the chassis to spread the load. Similar to the ones that have been fitted to the 150's.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]11826[/ATTACH]
If any of you were to cut the box section of the chassis and see how thin the material is that the chassis is constructed of you'd would seriously reconsider your eagerness to go gung ho snatching anything and everything out of a bog. Check out this video of a 120..
Anyone who doesn't use a bridle strap or equaliser and dampners is dicing with death IMHO. At least if something did break the bridle "should" prevent that part from becoming a missile.
Ades
Ohhh nice idea with the extra plate.
A perfect example of a strong chassis tow point hey.
The material of the whole main chassis is only about 2mm.
Either point might tear the vehicle apart, point is gung ho isn't cool. Lol.......
Dampen that!
P.s can I ask, does this prove how strong the welds at the tow point are?
Here we go........ :-)
Not upset at all, not sure if that address is a real member or someone in the GTG committee who is having an anonymous dig; the manual calls them towing points so that is what they are. A mate of mine drives a car transporter ship and the towing points are used to stop the cars bumping into eachother as well. Like I said I have done snatch recoveries off those points and when I had my 120 also had no option. The good thing was that the 120 was the rescuer not the rescuee for the 6 years I owned it. When I could fit something to the 150 I didn't think twice. I don't actually care if anyone thinks I am wrong either. I've had a good look at the geometry and the materials and made my decision. As I also posted when I did the recoveries they were gentle affairs to minimise the impact. I can't get Adrian's video to run at the moment so cannot comment there.
I was surprised way back when the first GTG requirements were announced and likewise I would not have been able to go.
Michael
My 150 build - http://www.pradopoint.com/showthread.php?27423-A-Random-approach-to-a-Bluestorm-150-GXL-D4D-automatic
Just a bit of extra info on the theory behind tensioning the bolts. Bolts are generally designed for tensile loads. In this application they are being used to handle a shear load.
The main reason for putting tension on the bolts is to clamp the plate to the chassis and to create friction between the plate and the chassis. Hence the importance of correct tension and clean matting surfaces on both the plate and chassis. Dirt, flaked paint, corrosion etc can reduce the joint friction which will mean the shear load is transferred to the bolts which is not a good scenario.
Interesting comment about how thin the chassis rails are, although it would probably be high tensile steel.
[B]Steve[/B]
2010 Silver GXL Prado 150, D4D Auto, with a few non standard bits
Ohh good.
It's the 2014gtg.
It's is for use to post info for the gtg. I didn't see any dig.
Towing points is correct, recovery is a 4x4 word that manufacturers avoid.
Effectively a snatch is towing.
You cant tow with a tie down point.
Naturally they can use the tow points as tie down points.
Comment