Puma recovery points

[nugge t]

Just wondering where guys have installed recovery points front and back on Puma's.

[miky]

Try a search. There are several posts/threads here on that, especially about the front.
Rear is easy - use the tow hitch system.


.

[n plus one]

I went with something along these lines for the front:

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/90-110-130-defender-county/87778-one_iotas-front-recovery-points.html?highlight=puma+recovery

I like something that pulls 'up' despite the potential difficulty of accessing it when stuck.

I just use a hitch style recovery point for the rear.

[nugge t]

The rear is OK to bolt to the existing bolts holes? It looks like it is connected tot eh chassis rails but I wanted to make sure. I don't need to fit a tow bar so it would be great if I can bolt straight tot he rear bar.

[RMB3218]

Just wondering where guys have installed recovery points front and back on Puma's.

I've got a set of front Jate hooks off my 07 Puma if you are interested.

[n plus one]

The rear is OK to bolt to the existing bolts holes? It looks like it is connected tot eh chassis rails but I wanted to make sure. I don't need to fit a tow bar so it would be great if I can bolt straight tot he rear bar.

I think for the rear you'll want to go at least Jate rings (or equivalent).

What exactly are you planning on bolting to the rear? Hooks will need two holes.

[RVR110]

Hi Nugget,

Here's a photo of the rear recovery points on my Puma. Like you, I don't have a tow bar.

Jate Rings
The two jate rings are cool, but not very practical for water/mud recoveries because they're so far under the vehicle. There's two types of jate rings: forged and welded. IMO forged are best. To install them you'll need to buy two M10 x 150mm bolts. Make sure that you get high tensile (8.8 or better) because the tie-down bolts that come from the factory aren't long enough. I think that there's two widths of jate rings, so be careful that you get the size you want. The ones I have allow the factory tie-down rings to remain in place.

Swivel Recovery Point
This is by far my favourite and has proved the most useful. It is a Bearmach BA 2682 swivel shackle. Just Google 2682 swivel shackle. It cost about £40 plus another £32 postage as it weighs about 4Kg. It came with a useless 1.5t rated D shackle. The unit is much more solid than the 1.5t shackle would imply and for $20 a local machine shop drilled the clevis out an additional couple of millimetres to fit a 4.75t bow shackle pin. Another minor mod was required so that the shackle cleared the clevis properly. The photo shows the recovery point with the 4.75t bow shackle in place. The mounting holes in the mounting plate align perfectly with the towbar holes on the rear cross member on both my 1985 county and 2010 puma. The bolts supplied with the recovery point fit the puma perfectly and you can throw away the threaded base plate (the county needed it but the puma didn't).

I bought both the jate rings and swivel recovery point from lrdirect.com (http://www.lrdirect.com) but their web site is very difficult to use due to timeouts and the way it is organised.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2010/11/101.jpg

[nugge t]

Was thinking of somethign along this line

Rear Recovery Hitch | LRS Offroad (http://www.lrsoffroad.co.uk/content/rear-recovery-hitch)

Or this which I could fabricate myself

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2010/11/100.jpg

[RVR110]

I like the look of the LRS hitch... a bit reminiscent of a Patrol. The problem I had when originally researching recovery points was that I could never find a load rating on any of the the recovery points that I looked at so I didn't really know how they stacked up against the ratings on the shackle and strap. But then again, I don't know what the rear cross member is rated at. The Defender is rated to tow 3.5t but (a) the towbar attaches to other points on the chassis in addition to the rear cross and (b) a recovery load rating would be quite different to a towing rating.

[nugge t]

Not wanting to be a smart.... but drilling out the swivel post would change its rating and if it had a 1.5T shackle that might have been for a reason. I would not expect a swivel to be rated as highly as a fixed. Love the idea though.

[Xtreme]

That LRS hitch is very similar to the standard fitment on Patrols which also has the same bolt hole pattern as the Defenders. It may be worth checking out the wreckers.

[RVR110]

drilling out the swivel post would change its rating and if it had a 1.5T shackle that might have been for a reason. I would not expect a swivel to be rated as highly as a fixed.

Exactly the question that should be asked and one that I considered at length. What I could calculate was:

the four M10 12.9 bolts that came with the swivel have a combined tensile strength design limit of approximately 14,800 kgf.
Conservatively assuming that the remaining material (after additional drilling) beside the hole was 4.6 carbon steel it would have a tensile strenth design limit of approximately 9,000 kgf.


What I couldn't calculate was:

The design loading limit of the cross member.
The mode of failure or
The point at which the base plate would fail (IMO probably around the base of the clevis).


Thus my conclusion was that:

the load limit of the swivel recovery point was no more than 9,000kgf
the limiting factor was probably the rear cross member (opinion only - I can't substantiate this)
Snatch straps over 9,000Kg shouldn't be used = 8,000Kg snatch strap.


In conclusion, the question that needs to be answered is: what is the Recovery Load Limit of the rear cross member? Destructive testing can be done on somebody else's puma!

It would also be interesting to analyse the LRS hitch. IMO the result would depend largely on the quality of the weld and what heat treatment was applied after welding. Assuming that (a) the loop is 12mm diameter (b) the loop was the point of failure (is it???) and (c) the loop was made of 8.8 steel (is it???) and (d) the welds did not fail (hmmm....) that would give that hitch a tensile strength design limit of 2 x 5,700kgf = 11,400kgf. Personally, I think it would fail at the welds, yielding a lower design load limit.

Interesting... In truth, the issue that I've been struggling with is whether or not to install the towbar that I've got sitting in the garage simply for recovery purposes or not. Of course then I'd have to (a) compromise my departure angle and (b) calculate the shear strength of the hitch pin... based on more assumptions - and then I'd be wondering about rated towing limits vs recovery load limits.... Agggghhhhhh!

Then of course you need to ask the question: where do you want failure to occur? IMO the answer is the strap. Is the strap the weakest link in the chain? That depends on the design strength of the cross member.... Agggghhhhhh!

[KarlB]

I recall reading somewhere that the chassis on a Puma is 2 mm mild steel suggesting that the rear cross member, except where it has been specifically reinforced, is not very strong. I guess that this is why current Defender towbars link back to the chassis rails for additional strength, by spreading any potential load across several points. I opted for the towbar recovery option but I have a D90, so the rear departure angle was exceptional anyway. I would have gone for jate rings but installing them necessitated removing the fuel tank first. Thought it was too much bother. Obviously not an issue with a D110.

Cheers
KarlB
:)

[LowRanger]

I agree with KarlB.You would have got away with a single fixture on the rear of a series.May get away with it on 110 or early Defender (wouldn't recommend it though).But the rear cross members on later models are made of very thin metal.Most people use the towbar hitch,as the towbar mounts back to the chassis rails on both side to spread the shock load,similar to what using Jate rings does when used in conjunction with a bridle strap.I think if you used the heavy welded type mount that you have pictured,and ran a piece of heavy plate across the inside of the rear cross member,with plates welded on the ends and mounted this to the chassis with High tensile bolts and used crush tubes in the holes in the chassis,you would have something fairly solid,and keep your departure angle,which is the problem with towbars.

Wayne

[rijidij]

Keep an eye on this other thread for more ideas...........

County, front recovery points ... (http://www.aulro.com/afvb/technical-chatter/117996-county-front-recovery-points.html#post1379148)

[nugge t]

Thanks LowRider and KarlB...I had read that as well but it all seemed heresay which was why I asked the question. Guess I need to get down and dirty and really check it out.

[Loubrey]

nugge t,

At a little over $300 the genuine LR tow hitch is still not a bad option. The entire arrangement sits nice and high and allows for the vehicles full maximum tow rating to be employed. As stated before, the load is spread over a number of connections and the square inset arrangement allows a vast number of "attachments" to be used. Recovery swivels, removable winch mounts, bike racks etc.

Front I've just gone for the aftermarket hooks shared attached to the chassis and bullbar. I like spreading the load in any case, so I opted for two and a bought a plasma/Dineema strop bridle to even the load on the front.

Saying all this it is still a Defender and I've only used the rear fetching "inferiors" from where they were stuck!

Cheers,

Lourens

[newhue]

Interestingly I have a genuine LR tow bar on my 130. It says not for recovery purposes, or words to that effect.

It's odd how it's rated for 3500kg for towing but not a recovery. I wonder what LR are thinking sometimes.

[RVR110]

Just checked the spare OE towbar (Part No RAA608) I've got sitting in the garage. As per newhue's post it has "FOR TOWING PURPOSES ONLY" stamped underneath.

Whist there's plenty of options available to choose from I'm not aware of an official rated rear recovery point being available, so no matter which way you choose you'll be guessing what it can withstand and where the failure will occur if recovery forces exceed the capability of your setup. Yes, some choices are significantly better than others, but at the end of the day you're still left guessing as to how strong it really is.

[miky]

I have a LRA tow bar on my 2010 Puma station wagon and I feel happy to use it for recovery purposes.
I suggest people have a good look as to how it is fixed. I doubt that it will pull off before a recovery strap breaks.

[VladTepes]

I absolutely prefer a proerklyu rated one that goes into teh Hayman Reese tow hitch. Suits me better as i have a 130 and the cross member isn't conveniently at the rear flush with the body.

[RVR110]

I have a LRA tow bar on my 2010 Puma station wagon and I feel happy to use it for recovery purposes.
I agree 110% and may use the same setup as soon as my new defender arrives. My point however (if anyone gets it) is that you are exactly correct - it is a **feeling** and as VladTepes states a **preference** but it isn't substantiated by a relevant and valid recovery rating. :D:D:D


I absolutely prefer a proerklyu rated one that goes into teh Hayman Reese tow hitch.
Again, I agree with you but what's your Hayman Reese tow hitch rated at? Sure, it may be rated at 3,500Kg for towing, but what's it rated at for recovery? This is rhetorical of course because there is no technically valid answer!

[one_iota]

I have access to the Australian Standards and had a look at those that relate to towbars. It involves all sorts of dynamic loadings expected to be exerted under towing conditions applied to the towbar assembly on a rig.

There is no way that any company would certify any other capability to its product. That is not to say that a recovery won't break it it's just that they don't know...too many variables.

I'd trust the tow bar or any other attachment only so far...and how far is that...I don't know and nor does anyone else.

BTW I have a LR Tow Bar and a hitch block.

[newhue]

Personally I think the standard tow bar regardless of brand will suffice if it looks relatively heavy duty.
My feeling on LR stamping for "towing purposes only" reside in exactly what one-iota is saying. The variables are so many to suggest it a designated recovery point is too open.
People have been yanking other cars out of bogs for decades with tow bars, I have never heard of one being ripped off a car. I have seen some pretty bent flimsy looking ones on Hiluxs' but thats about it.

[nugge t]

Personally I think the standard tow bar regardless of brand will suffice if it looks relatively heavy duty.
My feeling on LR stamping for "towing purposes only" reside in exactly what one-iota is saying. The variables are so many to suggest it a designated recovery point is too open.
People have been yanking other cars out of bogs for decades with tow bars, I have never heard of one being ripped off a car. I have seen some pretty bent flimsy looking ones on Hiluxs' but thats about it.

Very valid point and I agree.....in fact have been doing it that way myself for a few of those decades.

The same can not be said for usiong the bullbar being used as a recovery point and there have been bad accidents as a result of that but solid anchoring to the chassis has always worked for me.

[nugge t]

Anyone know what size and threads the rear bolts holes are?

Looks close to the top 4 being 12mm and the bottom 2 being 16mm but they don't quite feel right. 12mm feels a touch loose and the 16mm feels a bit tight. Makes me suspect they might be imperial.

Can anyone save me looking like a dill at the local fastener place!

[nugge t]

I have posted more pics of this in my build thread in Members Rides but thoguht it was appropiate to conclude this thread as well.

I decided to make my own rear recovery point based on the South African design I found on the net.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2011/07/1299.jpg

[Beckford]

I just ordered the attached from MR Automotive for the front. (I tried ARB, OL, and Rovercraft first.)

For the back I purchased a Bushranger recovery point which fits in a standard square tow bar from ARB on Saturday.

Thanks for all the info on this site.

Beckford.

[kenleyfred]

I just ordered the attached from MR Automotive for the front. (I tried ARB, OL, and Rovercraft first.)

For the back I purchased a Bushranger recovery point which fits in a standard square tow bar from ARB on Saturday.

Thanks for all the info on this site.

Beckford.

Good choice.
36171
Supplied and fitted earlier this year by MR Automotive.

[Beckford]

Some pictures of the MR Automotive Recovery Points I installed yesterday, before I put the front bar back on.

I purchased 4 x 120mm long M12 8.8 High Tensile Bolts from Gosford Bolts & Bearings. I had to drill an additional 12.5mm hole in the top of the chassis for each point, and drill out the hole the factory tie down point was in to 12.5mm. Cleaned up the swarf with a magnet & degreaser, then sprayed some cold gal & black kill rust in the holes and area. (should have let it dry longer than a few hours, but started raining) I then used some 3/4" galvanised pipe inside the top of the chassis to stop the chassis from crushing and galvanised washers as packing as required.

Any ideas how I should rust proof the zinc coated High Tensile Bolts?
(The best idea I can come up with is to smear them with grease.)

Again, thanks for the info already posted on this site.

Beckford.

[IGL002]

G'day, I fitted a Hayman Reese towbar to my 2011 Defender 110 today. Needed to use a podgie bar a couple of times to align bolt holes but it was a pretty painless excercise in the end.
This tow bar allowed me to retain the rear step.
Very happy :)

Iglooist

"I started out with nothing and still have most of it left"

[nugge t]

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2011/07/1299.jpg


Several people have asaked me to make these and I have finally found the time. Info is in the classifieds if anyone else is interested.

[Camper]

Some pictures of the MR Automotive Recovery Points I installed yesterday, before I put the front bar back on.

I purchased 4 x 120mm long M12 8.8 High Tensile Bolts from Gosford Bolts & Bearings. I had to drill an additional 12.5mm hole in the top of the chassis for each point, and drill out the hole the factory tie down point was in to 12.5mm. Cleaned up the swarf with a magnet & degreaser, then sprayed some cold gal & black kill rust in the holes and area. (should have let it dry longer than a few hours, but started raining) I then used some 3/4" galvanised pipe inside the top of the chassis to stop the chassis from crushing and galvanised washers as packing as required.

Any ideas how I should rust proof the zinc coated High Tensile Bolts?
(The best idea I can come up with is to smear them with grease.)

Again, thanks for the info already posted on this site.

Beckford.

After looking at your front recovery points, I needed to insure they will fit the bill. I took the picture and asked our mechanical engineer if this fitment is causing uneven stresses and bending moments when in use. His reply was yes, the strain is on the single lower bolt. If the bolts are in line with the direction of pull, both bolts will shoulder the load. The greater the angle between the pull point and a line through the bolts the greater the stress on a bolt. Two ways to reduce this imballance, 1) mount the recovery point with bolts in line with attachment point. 2) use a "D" shaped recovery point. This has a bolt in the top and bottom with the recovery point in the center of the "D" thus the load is shared across the bolts.
Hope this helps.

[KarlB]

After looking at your front recovery points, I needed to insure they will fit the bill. I took the picture and asked our mechanical engineer if this fitment is causing uneven stresses and bending moments when in use. His reply was yes, the strain is on the single lower bolt. If the bolts are in line with the direction of pull, both bolts will shoulder the load. The greater the angle between the pull point and a line through the bolts the greater the stress on a bolt. Two ways to reduce this imballance, 1) mount the recovery point with bolts in line with attachment point. 2) use a "D" shaped recovery point. This has a bolt in the top and bottom with the recovery point in the center of the "D" thus the load is shared across the bolts.
Hope this helps.
Yes, the load on the centre bolt is greater than the recovery load because it is some distance from the bolt. This is simple high school physics. The bracket is acting as a lever, increasing the load on the bolt and the chassis rails through which it passes. I would be very interested to see any engineering test results.

Cheers
KarlB

[Camper]

I fear an engineer would need to look at the individual install to work out the physics. The cost of this would be inhibitave as they then would be rating the recovery point. If it failed,, oh heck you get the drift, you know where it's going from here!

[DiscoMick]

Hi guys. Looking to fit Defender front recovery points.
Have read several threads on Puma recovery points, but they go back a while, and am wondering what the consensus is.
Although opinions vary, there seems to be some consensus in favour of the Maxidrive mounting points. They take two M12 bolts each, with a top hole needing to be drilled.
My 2009 Defender has the ARB bullbar, but the opinion seems to against using recovery points mounted to it.
I have a Terrafirma steering guard, but it seems recovery points can still be fitted to the chassis.
So I'm looking at the recovery points shown below. Do you think I'm on the right track?

Land Rover Defender HD Recovery Points (pair) MAXI-DRIVE (https://www.landybitz.com.au/land-rover-defender-hd-recovery-points-pair-maxi-d)

I have also seen the ones below advertised. They look similar. Has anyone tried them?

Recovery Tow Points 3400 for Land Rover Defender (https://www.aironboard.com.au/store/products/recovery-gear/tow-points/recovery-tow-points-3400-for-land-rover-defender.html)

[Dorian]

My 2009 Defender has the ARB bullbar, but the opinion seems to against using recovery points mounted to it.

Why ? , I have used mine in anger to help people out a few times without any problems and given they are mounted in exactly the same place on the chassis. Am I missing something ?

Cheers Glen

[DiscoMick]

Interesting. I was just referring to previous comments in this thread.