Would you pull me out?

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

But that's not the same thing. Being able to take 18,000 lb strain as a straight, gradually applied, pull is not the same as a snatch. I'm not a mechanical engineer but I don't think that having two 18,000 lb points is the same as one 36,000 lb one either.

Thinking about it some more I think that saying the double line pull puts 18,000 lb on the tow point is wrong as well - I believe it is still 9,000 lb. The double pull is at the snatch block not the mounting points - the winch and hence tow point are only seeing 9,000 lb each (and that's a gradual pull not a snatch).

You are probably right about it still only being 9000lb as the winch end will take half that strain. Yes I realize a snatch is different to a winch, but has any other point been shock load tested? You are back to the old "you have no other options with an ARB bar" so you can't come. Which in our case virtually eliminated the entire committee and would have forced the cancellation of the whole event.

I am familiar with the case of the bent ARB points, take into account though the guy in question and the sort of driving he does and the extreme situations he has posted pictures of when bogged, you can bend or break anything if you try hard enough.

Those hooks are rated to 10,000lb, if you damage them what does that tell you?

As we all know from our training, a snatch is generally the last option.

Cheers Andrew

[Heath74 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Heath74]

Look, stop all this.
It's not the weld that is the weak point, but further up on the chassis rail.
If you want to stuff your chassis rail, or the risk off, use these tire down points for recovery. Simple.
If you don't want to risk this happening, go and spend some money on a good set of recovery hooks for your vehicle.

Sorry John you've lost me there? As far as I can see the recovery points used by the majority of members on here attach to the same point as where the tie down loops are. I don't understand how the loop applies more force to the chassis that the aftermarket recovery point?

And just to wade into the debate, what it's actually about and has as far as I can see not been mentioned, is where the weak point should be in a snatch. The weakest point should always be the strap. If you are going to apply the sort of force possible in a big snatch something will give, and the best thing to give is the strap., ideally all metal parts should stay where they start!

For mine though after a couple of light to medium tugs on the snatch if it doesn't move, get out the shovel.

[Trekrider Banned Find all posts View Profile Close Trekrider]

Look, stop all this.
It's not the weld that is the weak point, but further up on the chassis rail.
If you want to stuff your chassis rail, or the risk off, use these tire down points for recovery. Simple.
If you don't want to risk this happening, go and spend some money on a good set of recovery hooks for your vehicle.
It's that easy.
The evidence is in that video that was posted earlier in this thread. The one where the whole front comes off the vehicle, and that vehicle really becomes a right off over here in Australia. Welded chassis are not a good thing, the repair thing.
The Roo.

I'm with Heath74 on this one. In that video the chassis has broken behind where aftermarket recovery points are fitted so it makes no difference (in that case) if the OEM Tow loops or an aftermarket recovery point were used.

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

I'm with Heath74 on this one. In that video the chassis has broken behind where aftermarket recovery points are fitted so it makes no difference (in that case) if the OEM Tow loops or an aftermarket recovery point were used.

As I stated previously, that particular video proves the need for a bridle or equaliser strap to halve the load on the chassis rail. As Andrew pointed out, in the event of a failure the bridle keeps the flying object captive.

[Anth120playdo Banned Find all posts View Profile Close Anth120playdo]

Well this one's getting tired.
Safe to say, most if us will be safer after having some read, input or fun here.

Another cold case put to bed for now.

[Anth120playdo Banned Find all posts View Profile Close Anth120playdo]

I don't think this subject will ever die lol

Not while your around :-)

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

Hey Roo, I think Jasen is on your side this time, may be time to swap sides?

[Anth120playdo Banned Find all posts View Profile Close Anth120playdo]

I learn the most and get the most entertainment from these threads that are lets say a little bit controversial!

#### you started this thread, have you learned anything from it?

Have you ordered aftermarket points for yours yet?

Great stuff.

I'd have to read it all again, to be sure but I'd say confirmed not learned.

No, too busy got other prioritys, But when you see points for the 120 that have 3 or 4 bolts on each point, & fit up without interfering with Toyota winch cradle, & they have to be red not yellow, please let me know where they are.
Then I will consider them & check mine again & make a fresh decision.

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

So has anyone confirmed that the recovery point mounting points are actually designed for the purpose or are they just some convenient bolt holes?

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

I don't think it matters what the mounting points were designed for as long as the recovery points were designed to use the available mounting points. It's a bit like saying ware the mounting points designed to mount the ARB Bullbar, no one would ask that question, so why the recovery points? The mounting points are designed for accessories and that's what we use them for.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's absolute BS. A recovery point is not just some static accessory being mounted on the chassis.

A modern vehicle chassis is designed to absolute limits, and its a big assumption that all bolts holes are designed or capable of holding the weight of a couple of suspended Prados (This is in effect the load that snatching produces).

The problem with cracked guards is an example of how little margin is in the design.

Without a design for both the recovery plates and the mounting points it is not an engineered or rated solution, end of story. I have investigated lots of equipment failures over the years and from what I've read so far it's all just heresay.

Happy to be proved wrong, just get Toyota to put in writing that the mounting points are designed for 5t plus shock loads.

On a more positive note it does meet the Wallace and Gromit design rules, so it's not all bad, after all they did put a rocket on the moon and saved Wensleydale cheese from extinction.

[Trekrider Banned Find all posts View Profile Close Trekrider]

If I add accessories to my my car the supplier of the accessories assumes the design role, in this case Roadsafe. I have no need for a letter from Toyota. Roadsafe have designed my recovery plates specifically for my car, stamped them with a SWL and painted them bright yellow. I am very happy with them.

I have no idea who Roadsafe are but I seriously believe you are dreaming if you think they have done any calculations to justify the recovery plates - like everyone else, they will have just used convenient holes in the chassis to mount two pieces of steel that at 12mm thick will not fail before the chassis. As long as their pieces of steel don't break (which they won't as the chassis will fail first) they are safe.

[Trekrider Banned Find all posts View Profile Close Trekrider]

I am not aware of a single failure of these AMRP's yet but it looks like using the factory point has been known to pull the front of the car off. I make that 1-0 to the AMRP's

I have never seen the factory tow point fail - nor has anyone given an example of it doing so.

Using the aftermarket suppliers argument (in the case where the factory tow point was used and the chassis broke) the factory tow point was still intact and still attached to the chassis - the chassis failed behind where the tow point is located. This means the factory tow point was actually up to the job - given where the chassis failed, it would have made no difference if the factory tow point or an aftermarket point had been fitted, the chassis would still have failed at the same point.

Now, if the factory tow point HAD failed then the front wouldn't have been ripped off - only the tow point. With the aftermarket tow point you are guaranteed that the point wouldn't fail and hence the front of the chassis would have ripped off. In a way it would be better if the factory tow point was weaker thus preventing too much force being exerted on the chassis. This is actually AJ120s argument for using the 10,000lb recovery hooks as they will fail before you put too much force on the chassis.

[Trekrider Banned Find all posts View Profile Close Trekrider]

At the end of the day for me it's all about using the best available recovery point and to my mind the factory tow point is excluded as it is recommended against by the manufacturer.

So by process of elimination the AMRP is the best available option.

What is your argument?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I don't need an argument I've only been making the point that there are no rated recovery points available for a Prado (or any other vehicle for that matter).

If you were to ask Toyota's view of aftermarket recovery points I'm sure they would say they don't recommend fitting them as the vehicle was never designed for the fitment of aftermarket recovery points. Interestingly, when I bought my Prado from my local Toyota dealer the salesman assured me that the two loops were recovery points not tie down loops. Even when I challenged him and said he was wrong he insisted that he was right.

[Trekrider Banned Find all posts View Profile Close Trekrider]

I would trust the bloke down the pub before I'd trust Toyota lol


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

More to the point, I would trust the bloke down the pub before I'd trust a salesman

[Trekrider Banned Find all posts View Profile Close Trekrider]

OK, I've just googled Roadsafe and found this statement about their 'Tow Points' - note, they call them Tow Points not Recovery Points.

"It is the Tow Points themselves as supplied that have been tested to the WLL advised. It is at the vehicle owners discretion for fitment, ensuring that the chassis is adequately designed, constructed and/or rated to suit this application."

So, this just proves my point - they are designed as Tow Points (the same as the Toyota ones), the WLL applies to the Tow Points only and they have taken no account of the actual vehicle to which they are attached - that's up to you (the owner).

Nowhere do they mention snatch recoveries - only tow recoveries.

http://www.roadsafe.com.au/tow-points.html