PDA

View Full Version : Are these the best and cheapest Recovery Point ever designed????



Islandnomad
19th April 2015, 11:56 AM
I found these on a website http://www.lrisolutions.co.uk/index.php/land-rover-defender-4x4-towing-recovery-eye-point-tow-loop-strap-white-90-110-luke.html and they look like they'd work? Maybe for heavy vehicles, 2 on the front would work ok. Certainly a lot cheaper than steel or alloy recovery points and a lot, lot, easier to find a place to fit them.

What do the gurus think?

Blknight.aus
19th April 2015, 05:52 PM
Nope,

refer to down to a cost V up to a standard.

the reason why its not going to be "best" is the practicality of its use in the 4x4 world.

Dust mud dirt and abrasion, last time I checked in on it were words that were synonymous with four wheel driving and australian outback touring and were antonymous with webbing strap life.

BigBlackDog
19th April 2015, 06:02 PM
They might have a 5000kg load rating but you're hanging that off one bolt. I can't think of another recovery point with only one mounting. I would be nervouse snatching off it, even gently.

clubagreenie
20th April 2015, 06:58 AM
These are primarily designed for motorsport applications. The soft strap is simply to prevent damage to bodywork.

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 10:20 AM
Blacknight : They use them in the mud in the UK and they cost $25 so you'd buy 8 of them to equal one of those Philco points. Why couldn't you attach them using a wingnut to a strong point on the front of the chassis when needed, otherwise they'd stay in the toolbox with the snatch strap?

BigBlackDog: Landrover Jate Rings are rated at 5000kg each and attach via a single 8.8mm high tensile bolt. What I'm proposing is two of them on the front by the way.


clubagreenie : The ad says "Essential piece of kit for motorsport and track days (or just a bit of off roading fun for when we get stuck in the mud)" they seem to use them for offroading in the UK???? It a good part of its design that they don't damage the bodywork.

clubagreenie
20th April 2015, 12:35 PM
Because I'm not standing in front of them in the UK when they fly off. Moreso since they undoubtedly will have a shackle attached.

KarlB
20th April 2015, 01:53 PM
The recovery 'fitting' would still have a 5000 kg rating if it was attached to a baked-bean can! Such figures are meaning-less. What is important is the 'strength' of the whole recovery point which includes the nuts and bolts and most importantly the part of the chassis to which the 'fitting' is attached.

Cheers
KarlB
:)

clubagreenie
20th April 2015, 03:02 PM
Towbars are rated to a std but put a snatch strap over the ball and watch people die.

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 03:23 PM
Well you'd have to set up a high tensile maybe 1/2" bolt with a wingnut to a strong point in the chassis of course, but it should work??? Why wouldn't it?

clubagreenie
20th April 2015, 04:17 PM
Because snatch straps.

The end is basically a seat belt end, and seat belt webbing (Luke make seat belts and harnesses in the majority).

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 04:26 PM
It's a rated connection that works according to the manufacturers.

clubagreenie
20th April 2015, 04:32 PM
BTW, give me a link to a grade 8+ rated HT wing nut pls

Because CAD full of stds for fasteners doesn't have one

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 04:36 PM
I'm no expert, if a wing nut doesn't work then a nut. Just saying...

clubagreenie
20th April 2015, 04:56 PM
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/568.jpg

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 07:22 PM
"When they fly off" how are they flying somewhere?


Because "snatch straps" ?? Please explain?

carneeki
20th April 2015, 07:47 PM
"When they fly off" how are they flying somewhere?


Bro, do you even


CAD model?
Finite element analysis?
Understand basic principles of pressure, force, mechanics, and tensile strength?

clubagreenie
20th April 2015, 07:48 PM
Sorry for the delay in replying. Been a bit busy...

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/554.jpg

Basic model of plate, 2mm HT Steel.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/555.jpg

Side view of plate, under 5000kg load.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/410.jpg

Red area is 9.534mm PLASTIC (permanent) deformation.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/556.jpg

Just for interest loaded at 90deg.

And here's a replacement rear bar for a D2, winch mount. Loaded at 20tonnes. Mounted to original bar mount and two rear crossmember tow bar bolts. 6mm plate steel, HT bolts and capscrews.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/557.jpg

carneeki
20th April 2015, 07:50 PM
^-- Like that.

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 07:52 PM
I'm impressed mate! So at 5000kg it deforms but doesn't shear? So its a pretty strong bit of kit isn't it?

clubagreenie
20th April 2015, 07:59 PM
Then you're easily impressed.

Thats 5000kg static slow applied load. There's far more at play than a simple FEA test. THAT result is in no way reflective of a pass. Given that there should be 2:1 margin after safety factors of (used for say climbing equipment) of 5:1. At 5000kg there should be zero deflection. Put a snatch strap on that and it's a deadly missile waiting to happen, they will apply easily 3 x actual load and probably more depending on the strap itself.

The bar in the last pic at 20tonnes has 7mm of total deformation. Most of that is in the eyebolts (5mm) and they're only 2tonnes (at the moment). Their deformation is also plastic, the bar movement is elastic. And we haven't put an additonal reinforcing plate behind the bolts which will remove the face deformation. But also needs to be balanced with not being too rigid.

What surprised me is the strength of the OEM outer chassis mounts.

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 07:59 PM
"Bro, do you even

CAD model?
Finite element analysis?
Understand basic principles of pressure, force, mechanics, and tensile strength?"
I'll have what you're having....

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 08:18 PM
So if you had 2 of these mounts on the front of the chassis somewhere and use a bridle between the snatch strap and the webbing recovery point, what would your analysis look like then?? To be fair, if you look at the photos the real plate has more meat on it at the slot, which would make it a bit stronger too.

clubagreenie
20th April 2015, 08:21 PM
Something in between the linear and 90deg tests. They are not designed to be side loaded in any way. They are a VERY poor device for this application. PEOPLE HAVE DIED USING THE WRONG EQUIPMENT FOR RECOVERY. Some of these people spend mega bucks building vehicles with all the brand name gear and then scrimp on recovery equipment.

Do I build my own stuff. Hell yes, but nothing that hasn't been tested to destruction (bit wasier now with FEA). For example, the pin that goes through tow bar insert. They apparently can be used to put through the eye of a strap. Personal test bed results have them bending below bar rating (with strap). My own pin (4140HT steel) will rip the bar apart (not catastrophically) at 4+ x bar rating. is std size, used for both straps and tow bar insert.

The D2 bar is a work in progress, will be FEA'd and possibly destruction tested too.

Don't stress, I just emailed the tests to the manufacturer to see what they say. Of course all results are simulations, but the CAD used Aust and other standards for material and fasteners and other stuff correlates to results.

Last word: If you were stuck on a beach with a raging rising tide I'd move up the beach and give you a beer as we watched because unless you had ten of these things bolted to appropriate holes (individually) you'd not get me to put a winch rope on it let alone a snatch strap, which I never use. But thats another debate.

carneeki
20th April 2015, 08:25 PM
So if you had 2 of these mounts on the front of the chassis somewhere and use a bridle between the snatch strap and the webbing recovery point, what would your analysis look like then?? To be fair, if you look at the photos the real plate has more meat on it at the slot, which would make it a bit stronger too.

Depends on the distance apart. Part of me wants to ask how good is your trigonometry. The other part wants to say - even when tested in the *best case scenario*, the device still failed simulations at what the manufacturer claims they were rated.

Choose appropriate parts for appropriate tasks.

Tombie
20th April 2015, 08:25 PM
It (the strap) is a TOW recovery point...

Even thinking of recovering off that other than towing it very very very smoothly, without the webbing being wet, and no dirt / grit in the webbing... Is just foolish...

Why is this even being debated?

Not fit for use other than on a race track..

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 08:39 PM
My idea to look at it, seems too obvious really, if it were to be strong enough?? Its an 1/8th the cost of anything else sold as a recovery point if it works, I'm just putting it up for discussion?


Also because LRSolutions UK sell them as a Land Rover Defender 4X4 towing recovery eye point, "Ideal for off road as flexible and easy to attach to. These are quality items made in the UK by seat harness manufacture 'LUKE' This MSA compliant tow strap from Luke is suitable for fitting to the front or rear of the car."


Thought it was worth looking at is all....

Tombie
20th April 2015, 08:42 PM
As a ******TOWING****** recovery point...

Tombie
20th April 2015, 08:43 PM
Perhaps LR Solutions has decided that a race track application will translate to offroad kinetic recovery... Doesn't mean they got it right!

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 09:21 PM
"As a ******TOWING****** recovery point... "






YEP!!!

clubagreenie
20th April 2015, 09:21 PM
OK

Here's some examples of what goes wrong when the right stuff is used by idiots.

And remember this first video is a paid crew making a TV program.
LiveLeak.com - 4x4 Recovery Gone Wrong (comments) (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d60_1383536563&comments=1)

This one is graphic but shows perfectly something rated being used incorrectly.
*link removed*

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/motoring/a/10126780/towing-death-highlights-danger/

Coroners Report into Snatch Strap death (http://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/showthread.php?2238-Coroners-Report-into-Snatch-Strap-death)


We're not here to poo poo. We just want people to do it safely and stay alive. There's a reason I'm 43 and still alive after 40 years doing this. And that included growing up being winch bitch when there wasn't a heap of education and knowledge and testing. It was really just well if it looks good enough then whatever you made in the backyard was good enough because there was no aftermarket supply chain. And even then, I get bagged for using 6.5T shackles (19mm yellow pin) when everyone else buys the 3T green ones off the shelf because if thats what they sell... But I know each part of my gear, it's margins and safety factors and even at double potential load from the winch, using a pulley it's still over engineered.

If it's just because the manufacturer says...I've got a lovely bridge I knocked up in '32. Lots of users, great harbor views. Only one owner.

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 09:25 PM
http://www.lrisolutions.co.uk/index.php/land-rover-defender-discovery-4x4-towing-recovcery-eye-tow-loop-strap-orange-90-110.html

clubagreenie
20th April 2015, 09:28 PM
This back from the seller.


Our supplier has told us that these are tested by and certified compliant by the MSA (Motor Sports Association) up to 5000kg. You would have to contact them for the results of their tests.

Tested by a Motorsport body. Looked it up. Towed a mandated 2500kg load from a sand trap. Rated to double as safety factor.

NOT ON MY LIFE would be my phrase. Is it on yours?

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 09:34 PM
I see still no good!


Ok so back to finding somewhere to attach my Jate Rings then, thanks. There should be a law against advertising inaccurately...

clubagreenie
20th April 2015, 09:54 PM
Written to the seller again, sent more info, asked them to ask the manufacturer if they approve for off road recoveries with winch or snatch.

For a D2 (which it seems you're on your second) Philco points are the best I've seen. If I was to design front points for a non bar mount they'd look exactly the same (but maybe in black). I use a 6000kg round sling as a bridle with the correct included angle to give it a 1.7x addition to strength. Margins and test figures rate it much, much higher at destruction. Plus it's a lifting sling so there's a huge safety factor built in to the rating as well.

There's also a reason out largest bar manufacturer (ARB also stopped fitting any recovery labeled points to their bars. Originally they used eye bolts, 16mm ones which are <1T (Against my 2.5T 20mm ones which are always used in pairs) and then had a small piece of 3mm plate welded under the bar edge.

Jate rings won't attach to a D2. Trialled and errored that one. And again, they come from a Military use as a tie down lashing point. Rated for higher than the vehicle load with a safety margin.

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 10:00 PM
Philco's aren't a good idea, they twist the shackle the wrong way apparently, had this discussion a while back, puts the pin under too much load from memory.


See Jate Rings on a D2 apparently https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2016/07/797.jpg

clubagreenie
20th April 2015, 10:20 PM
See Jate Rings on a D2 apparently http://www.landroverstuff.com/images/DIIjates.jpg

Yeah, and if you're recovering up hill there goes the bar and the shackle is loaded against the chassis.

The Philco ones may not be perfect Who aid they weren't a good idea?) but without a front bar, mounted correctly with appropriate points or eye bolts integrated there's no way to make a reasonable sized/weighted point in the right location (up high enough and orientated "correctly" and strong enough. I've tried.

Look, we took 25min to knock up a base over engineered replica of the other thing. Run the results past two other engineers who immediately said thats a motorsport part before they even looked at the test and then said no ****ing way would they use it for anything more than towing onto a tilt tray. We've knocked up a bar which on paper will distribute a 20Tonne load across a D2 chassis without plastic deformation of it or the bar, only the eye bolts which despite being RATED at 10x less than load still do not catastrophically fail BECAUSE OF APPROPRIATE SAFETY FACTORS.

We can't stop you killing yourself or others or writing off another car (yours or someone elses). I just hope no one here is with you WHEN it happens.

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 11:07 PM
Well the person that pointed this out, that I had a detailed discussion with, was a very experienced member on here, and I'll quote him "Don't use recovery points that orientate the shackle pins in the horizontal plane as the shackles will become the weakest point if they are not pulled on from directly ahead, shackles aren't designed to be pulled off centre".


He actually convinced me that Philco type recovery points are a flawed design, and he's right!

Islandnomad
20th April 2015, 11:17 PM
Well the person that pointed this out, that I had a detailed discussion with, was a very experienced member on here, and I'll quote him "Don't use recovery points that orientate the shackle pins in the horizontal plane as the shackles will become the weakest point if they are not pulled on from directly ahead, shackles aren't designed to be pulled off centre".


He actually convinced me that Philco type recovery points are a flawed design, and he's right!




We can't stop you killing yourself or others or writing off another car (yours or someone elses). I just hope no one here is with you WHEN it happens.


Give it a break mate I'm just talking, calm down...

donh54
21st April 2015, 05:36 AM
@clubagreenie ..... wouldn't it be more constructive to show us photos of what you use for recovery points? Seems to me there's a potential market for properly designed recovery points, particularly if they come with comprehensive fitting instructions - could be a good little earner for you :p

Tombie
21st April 2015, 08:38 AM
Unless you can fit a self aligning recovery point any design will be compromised.

Lifting and Rigging fundamentals, whilst partially applicable to vehicle recovery are not quite the same.

No recovery gear is rated to SWL, rather they are rated to Maximum eg. A 8,000kg snatch strap will likely fail at 8,000kg of load.

While an off angle pull places additional stress on a shackle pin in a recovery, should the pin be exposed to an excessively high load the mount or chassis (all 2-3mm of it) is likely to take some deformation.


The issue here is that no recovery is ever exactly the same.

If the recovery was to pull a vehicle over the top of a sand dune for example the recovery is likely to be in the vertical plane (vehicle nose up/down, recovering vehicle above/below)

If the vehicle is stuck in mud on a bend and the recovering vehicle is offset say 15 degress then the recovery will be in the horizontal plane...

To minimise the issue a suitable length bridle between 2 points will allow the offset to be handled whilst sharing the forces more equally through the recovery points and chassis.

There are ways to design a recovery point that will work through both planes however the cost will climb well above that of the ones mentioned previously.

Islandnomad
21st April 2015, 08:57 AM
If Philco put a 90deg bend on his recovery point so that the shackle pin aligned vertically it would work. Or alternatively put a slot in his point so that a bow shackle could be used and radius the corner of the slot a bit, it also might be ok. But as it stands they are flawed IMHO.

Tombie
21st April 2015, 09:50 AM
If Philco put a 90deg bend on his recovery point so that the shackle pin aligned vertically it would work. Or alternatively put a slot in his point so that a bow shackle could be used and radius the corner of the slot a bit, it also might be ok. But as it stands they are flawed IMHO.

Your recommendations are also flawed...
Add a Radius or slot and the pin will point load, bringing the same issue.

A 90 degree bend will add a stress to the steel and increase torsional loading and would need to be braced.

Then during a recovery above or below the horizontal plane the same issues will occur (loading the pin)

Unless a design incorporates a self aligning recovery point at some stage the recovery will be out of alignment.

A 3.2t shackle is highly unlikely to fail in a vertical recovery point, when used with a bridle on any recovery.. The strap attached is only rated to 8,000kg (pin failure occurs at approximately 22t (22,000kg).

The strength of the chassis is far below this...


Here is a reasonable design that can handle offset.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/521.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/522.jpg

or there is this custom made example (would not be certified rated) and I would question the single point mounting (but a modification could be an option)
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/


Or an adaptation of this
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/486.jpg

Islandnomad
21st April 2015, 10:01 AM
Tombie I'm no expert and I'm not "recommending" anything, I'm just trying to find a reasonable solution to this recovery point problem. See this ARB Recovery point and its slot for the use of bow shackles (with the bow against the bracket not the pin), I agree point load is an inadequate part of this design as well as the shackle pin alignment. A radius would be better for the bow to bear against, and they are very expensive recovery points so not a lot to recommend (they are flawed):

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/528.jpg

I like the hook idea, where do you get those brackets? Wouldn't JATE rings be better?


If the LUKE Straps worked they'd align really well, if they were strong enough????

Tombie
21st April 2015, 02:45 PM
LRAutomotive does the hook version

Pickles2
21st April 2015, 02:50 PM
Your recommendations are also flawed...
Add a Radius or slot and the pin will point load, bringing the same issue.

A 90 degree bend will add a stress to the steel and increase torsional loading and would need to be braced.

Then during a recovery above or below the horizontal plane the same issues will occur (loading the pin)

Unless a design incorporates a self aligning recovery point at some stage the recovery will be out of alignment.

A 3.2t shackle is highly unlikely to fail in a vertical recovery point, when used with a bridle on any recovery.. The strap attached is only rated to 8,000kg (pin failure occurs at approximately 22t (22,000kg).

The strength of the chassis is far below this...


Here is a reasonable design that can handle offset.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/521.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/522.jpg

or there is this custom made example (would not be certified rated) and I would question the single point mounting (but a modification could be an option)
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/


Or an adaptation of this
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/486.jpg
I like the look of that stuff.
However, I have the LandRover "SVX" front ribbed aluminium crash plate, which makes the mounting of such items, including jate rings, difficult.
Any ideas?
Thanks, Pickles.

AndrewMilne
21st April 2015, 04:55 PM
Hi Tombie,
Just a question about this photo.
It seems to me that the bolts are not long enough to secure the plate shown here safely. They don't even occupy the full length of the nuts on them, and nor do they reach the nyloc ring.


As shown, do you think they are adequate for the stress likely to be involved in a recovery?


Regards,
AndrewMilne

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/486.jpg

Barefoot Dave
21st April 2015, 05:57 PM
Possibly just done up finger tight for the photo?
But, yes, not enough thread through.

clubagreenie
21st April 2015, 05:58 PM
Tombie I'm no expert and I'm not "recommending" anything, I'm just trying to find a reasonable solution to this recovery point problem. See this ARB Recovery point and its slot for the use of bow shackles (with the bow against the bracket not the pin), I agree point load is an inadequate part of this design as well as the shackle pin alignment. A radius would be better for the bow to bear against, and they are very expensive recovery points so not a lot to recommend (they are flawed):


Google Image Result for http://www.arb.com.au/site/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Toyota-Hilux-2011-on-Recovery-Point.jpg (http://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http://www.arb.com.au/site/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Toyota-Hilux-2011-on-Recovery-Point.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.arb.com.au/toyota-fj-cruiser-2006-2010/recovery-points/&h=303&w=538&tbnid=_GZ4-Pm82Nmk-M:&zoom=1&docid=5hL2IiV_0XflOM&ei=6581VeXgFIbYmAXfqYDwCg&tbm=isch&ved=0CGoQMyhEMEQ)

That pic for one is a rendering of the point over an image. The reflection is completely wrong.

A bow shackle is designed to have up to a three way loading. Imagine the pin end fixed to an eye. You can either pull in a straight line (also use a D shackle) or run two legs off the bow end, which is rated for the offset loading. They are designed as I interpret the ARB information where the bow end is in the loop, loading one side only, and the pin is to the bridle. This creates the exact same problem of offset loading as having the pin bind in any other point.

I use eye bolts, lifting rated so they have an adequate safety factor on top of their rating. Aligned so the shackle pin is vertical, but there is still enough room for some deflection from their vertical alignment WITHOUT pin bind, the pin hole surround hits the bar first so the pin cannot be twisted in the eye. I had them horizontal but that wasn't good enough for some despite the same pin bind negation from the bar.

The eyes were selected in conjunction with the bar maker and after building a replica bar section and destruction testing with a complete setup that I use to see how it all interacted. There was acceptable deformation at up to 32tonnes, which is far beyond anything that I could put through it or the chassis would take.

While I could design something, everyones setup is different. Making it a very challenging proposition to cater to everyone on top of which you can never guarantee the chassis integrity or someones ability to execute the installation. Then there's the legal liability issue, anything suppled fails and you're in a minefield.

I'll stick to making sure my own stuff is adequate and won't affect myself, family or anyone I travel with. Fortunately I've never had to worry about anyone else's stuff (to date) that I've been away with either.

Tombie
21st April 2015, 06:56 PM
Possibly just done up finger tight for the photo?
But, yes, not enough thread through.


Exactly... A longer bolt (or in this case done up)!

Blknight.aus
21st April 2015, 07:36 PM
The "best" recovery brackkets are the ones that are positioned to put the pull where its needed most, and thats generally on the axels.

Forgive me for not putting a pic link in but with <2k/sec access fancy stuff isnt easy..

Picture a round bar loop that has 2 flat plates on it that bolt onto the radius arm bush mounts using the same bolts (although slightly longer ones) as the radius arms..

one on each side and a bridle strap that keeps the angle of pull inside of 15 degrees.

If youre worried about angles of pull on pins of shackles on barmount type recovery points you replace the recovery point with a rotating swiveled lifting point. and so long as you've anchored it correctly you're good to apply up to the max load of the swivel.

I'm also a fan of hammer lock joints and a length of chain with an eye on it as an attachement point, they worked great looped through the front spring mounts on fozzy, equal pull on the chassis and then the axle through the spring.

Islandnomad
22nd April 2015, 08:48 AM
Tombie doesn't this photo have the pin bind issue that we are talking about (orientation is good)?


http://www.overland.co.za/Recovery_Gear/Mike_Lauterbach_01.jpg


All of the Philco, Arb etc type of fittings, orient the shackle pin horizontally and IMHO are a flawed design.


As an aside if the LUKE straps had a longer loop you could hitch it around your recovery strap loop (or bridle loop if you use one) prior to install and do away with those shackles that can turn into missiles.

Islandnomad
22nd April 2015, 09:13 AM
With regards to the LUKE Strap, Clubgreenie why couldn't they just put some more meat/steel where the red is on your cad drawing, even thicken or double up the plate thickness and thicken the strap if necessary, once their physical properties are increased in size enough, the LUKE Strap will eventually be a strong enough connection, as long as they are mounted to the chassis adequately.


https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/410.jpg

It has none of the orientation issues compared to the other recovery point systems, is a much easier recovery point system to install, could be left in the toolkit until needed, does away with the traditional shackle so is safer, doesn't damage the bodywork, connection to the bridle could be out in front of the car if the loops were longer, is 1/8th the cost of traditional recovery points AND it comes in 11 different colours:


http://www.corbeau-seats.com/towstrap

Tombie
22nd April 2015, 12:18 PM
With regards to the LUKE Strap, Clubgreenie why couldn't they just put some more meat/steel where the red is on your cad drawing, even thicken or double up the plate thickness and thicken the strap if necessary, once their physical properties are increased in size enough, the LUKE Strap will eventually be a strong enough connection, as long as they are mounted to the chassis adequately.


https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/410.jpg

It has none of the orientation issues compared to the other recovery point systems, is a much easier recovery point system to install, could be left in the toolkit until needed, does away with the traditional shackle so is safer, doesn't damage the bodywork, connection to the bridle could be out in front of the car if the loops were longer, is 1/8th the cost of traditional recovery points AND it comes in 11 different colours:


http://www.corbeau-seats.com/towstrap

Straps lose their strength / rating as the radius of the material they are around decreased (radius decrease).

Straps also lose strength as they get wet, and any grit or dirt trapped in there abrades the webbing reducing its strength.

They still damage body work (as the snatch recovery will rip the strap up into whatever is in alignment with the 2 recovery points)

They will suffer from UV, Heat, Abrasion damage.

The shackle really isn't the risk (its less likely to break) - Mounting points are a thin chassis section ;), the strap is attached by single point/bolt and contains a lovely ballistic piece of metal..

They are cheap because their design is cheap, material is cheap and their use is as a light weight (race car) tow point

Islandnomad
22nd April 2015, 01:19 PM
I'm not trying to be a smart arse about this. I'm just looking for a decent recovery point for my vehicle as they vary from $200- $400 each depending on the design, plus installation and none of them work particularly well, and most are pretty agricultural looking.


1. "Straps lose their strength / rating as the radius of the material they are around decreased (radius decrease)". Well increase the webbing thickness then??? Its an engineering issue, whatever the engineers recommend.

2. "Straps also lose strength as they get wet, and any grit or dirt trapped in there abrades the webbing reducing its strength". Keep them in the toolkit like the snatch strap and attach when required, keep them clean then.

3. "They still damage body work (as the snatch recovery will rip the strap up into whatever is in alignment with the 2 recovery points)". Yes depends where they are installed I agree, it's design does not negate thoughtful competent installation.

4. They will suffer from UV, Heat, Abrasion damage. Yes just the same as a snatch strap, they need to be in good nick.

5. The shackle really isn't the risk (its less likely to break) - Mounting points are a thin chassis section ;), the strap is attached by single point/bolt and contains a lovely ballistic piece of metal.. Most recovery systems contain a lovely ballistic piece of metal, if it were thickened up it would be fine, again whatever the engineers recommend.

6. They are cheap because their design is cheap, material is cheap and their use is as a light weight (race car) tow point. Maybe this exact recovery point should be strengthened a bit, that's an engineering issue that could be fixed. If this was done, I think this could be a much better solution than anything else on the market, sheer luck that its cheaper.

clubagreenie
22nd April 2015, 03:46 PM
1. "Straps lose their strength / rating as the radius of the material they are around decreased (radius decrease)". Well increase the webbing thickness then??? Its an engineering issue, whatever the engineers recommend. Engineers do not recommend. They design to spec. If they recommended then they are liable, they design, just as I have, to a requirement, and FEA and destruction test. When passed all liability passes to owner of the design, installer and end user.

2. "Straps also lose strength as they get wet, and any grit or dirt trapped in there abrades the webbing reducing its strength". Keep them in the toolkit like the snatch strap and attach when required, keep them clean then. Yeah, you've clearly never traveled in serious mud, where you keep the winch rope unrolled and on the passenger seat so you don't have to be waist deep in water and mud to get it out and also have the bridle, tow or snatch strap attached and slung up on the bar, front and rear.

3. "They still damage body work (as the snatch recovery will rip the strap up into whatever is in alignment with the 2 recovery points)". Yes depends where they are installed I agree, it's design does not negate thoughtful competent installation. Without removal of the OEM bar it will always cause damage, with any other bar fitted, if fitted to the bar chassis mounts I would be concerned about the bar damaging the webbing.

4. They will suffer from UV, Heat, Abrasion damage. Yes just the same as a snatch strap, they need to be in good nick. Smartest thing you've said all thread.

5. The shackle really isn't the risk (its less likely to break) - Mounting points are a thin chassis section ;), the strap is attached by single point/bolt and contains a lovely ballistic piece of metal.. Most recovery systems contain a lovely ballistic piece of metal, if it were thickened up it would be fine, again whatever the engineers recommend. Again, they don't recommend...And of course they don't recommend, they engineer to a purpose. In this case recovery of a sub 2000kg vehicle without any consideration for slope, suction or other factors.

6. They are cheap because their design is cheap, material is cheap and their use is as a light weight (race car) tow point. Maybe this exact recovery point should be strengthened a bit, that's an engineering issue that could be fixed. If this was done, I think this could be a much better solution than anything else on the market, sheer luck that its cheaper. It would be better IF it had two attachment points, the webbing wasn't susceptible to water (immediately weakens it), dirt and mud (gets in and abrades it, most incidious because you can't see it) and UV (only potentially noticeable if the color was faded and correlated to UV damage).

I contacted the seller who was both amused and confused about my concern. So I sent the following in reply to:



I'm a little confused as to what information you require from ourselves.

Our supplier has told us that these are tested by and certified compliant by the MSA (Motor Sports Association) up to 5000kg. You would have to contact them for the results of their tests.

Again note, tested by MSA (who are part of the RAC, basically a Motorsport oriented offshoot of the NRMA) There is no information about how they are tested, apart from I found a BS for tow points for motor vehicles, which is how I drew the previous conclusion on how they were tested. This applies in writing to solid metallic based points, I have worked on an assumption that this has been applied to the Luke points as the MSA has no testing facilities and they are a motoring organisation at the end of the day and it's the most likely source, ESPECIALLY considering the end use (NOT off road). But basically what you are looking at is a product the NRMA has said is ok for towing a vehicle and using it for off road recovery.

Again I attached the images and detailed more,



The problem is.

Motorsports applications are static, rolling cars, maybe a sand trap at worst. These really are designed purely just for towing. NOT recovery. You guys are selling to and actively marketing at off road users. That thing with a snatch strap which puts min 3 x load though it. I ran a cad and catastrophic failure occurs at 6400kg. Same level as a 12,000lb winch. And thats without adding suction from mud, slope etc. Add to the webbing loosing strength when wet, dirt gets into the fibres and weakens the structure.

People die using the wrong gear for recovery. I strongly urge you to simply rework the advertising to read only for use as a tow strap. Not for off road recovery.

Luke are a great supplier, I've used their (and others) harnesses for racing for decades but this has been tested by a motorsports assoc. What they know about the forces involved in a serious mud based off road recovery the kellogs monkey could teach.

Attached are three images, one of the basic design.

First image, 18_18_39. I've been generous and said it's 3mm HT steel. It looks like a generic seatbelt end. Programmed a grade 10.8 HT bolt as the anchor and applied a 5000kg load.

Second image, 18_20_22, shows side view of deformation at 5000kg. Deformation is plastic meaning permanent stretch, of 9.534mm.

Third Image, 18_20_19 is another view of above.

Fourth image, 18_16_56 is extreme loading at 90degrees.

This all comes about because on our local forum (aulro.com) the question was asked "How about these, they're way cheaper than the locally made (correctly rated) product (you could buy 8 straps for a pair of recover points) What do the recovery guru's think?"

Well we told him and told him and even after presenting him with the same data he still thinks we're out to get him and despite 8 people, having no association with, still thinks we're out to sell the rated points. Now I hate this litigeous society as much as anyone with common sense (if someone doesn't listed and dies well thats just Darwin's revenge). But unfortunately the legal system (and here in Aust it has and will happen). Someone will buy this product, get hurt or die and then they'll sue because it says "Ideal for off road" & "or just a bit of off roading fun for when we get stuck in the mud".

Please, ask the manufacture if they approve them for dynamic and off road winch or snatch recovery.


There's a reason they cost, engineering is not cheap. The work I did, design and FEA if from scratch, engineering to a requirement of 5000kg tow point would set you back $300- to $400/hr. Post design assessment of results std $250/hr (which I had done by two others).

Thats thing has taken a known piece of steel, a seat belt end, with a 12.7mm (1/2") hole that would normally take a specialised shoulder bolt, low profile head, shoulder 12.7mm to allow it to rotate for comfort and a 9.53mm (3/8") thread. It would be rated for 5000kg, given that there's a lot of seatbelt, and that webbing alone also is designed to stretch and absorb. There's very little webbing for shock absorption in that when you consider the entire sewn area is no longer a stretch point.


With regards to the LUKE Strap, Clubgreenie why couldn't they just put some more meat/steel where the red is on your cad drawing, even thicken or double up the plate thickness and thicken the strap if necessary, once their physical properties are increased in size enough, the LUKE Strap will eventually be a strong enough connection, as long as they are mounted to the chassis adequately.

Firstly, of course you can just add away, but then you add cost, complexity of manufacture (thicker material needs to be drilled/laser/gas cut and then finished rather than punched). The webbing available doesn't get thicker, it gets wider (next size up is 3") which is F1/WEC/WRC spec, basically top echelon motorsport harness webbing. These in typical use have a 5 year lilfespan, and that's when they don't get wet, muddy etc. I only ever use this spec of harness even at club level as while they cost at least twice the price ($1200 + eace for a 6 point) they are far more comfortable, both in use and in crash and cause less soft tissue injury in the event of a crash. Put it this way, they are removed and returned for manufacturer inspection after every race. Regardless of weather, crash or any other event. This webbing is still susceptible to weakening by water, abrasion by dirt. And it would not be a lesser rate because "it's bigger and takes longer". More area, more dirt, same abrasion rate.


As an aside if the LUKE straps had a longer loop you could hitch it around your recovery strap loop (or bridle loop if you use one) prior to install and do away with those shackles that can turn into missiles.

Good luck getting them apart. The std practice of looping eyes is to put something (solid, ie: metal or wood) in between = missile. usually dome when you don't have a shackle. Also the crushing of the webbing from it's designed flat or folded/sewn form weakens it. Just as a rope becomes weaker at a knot.


Tombie doesn't this photo have the pin bind issue that we are talking about (orientation is good)?

While the shackles will turn in they will not sit pin vertical, the body of the shackle will load against the underside of the chassis, and the bridle will load one side of the bow. And again there's only one bolt.

Next?

PS: since I'm not at the CAD box, had someone run 4mm HT steel same dimensions, similar straight pull results, 7.824mm plastic deformation. Thats double thickness for 2mm less permanent deformation. Still at 5000kg. Not testing higher to a safety factor and rating down to a SWL. If these were correctly designed and their SWL was 5000kg, I would have no issue because:

The designation of a SWL means they have been tested to a Miniumum Breaking Strength (MBS). SWL=MBS/SF. SWL is commonly 1/5 of MBS. A series of product are tested, a MBL is established, that figure is divided by the Safety Factor (often 5:1). So the minimum point established that it will break at is 5 x the rating. This is the std used by everyone working with lifting equipment which is why we generally do not have a problem working with same equipment for recovery. This IS NOT the std that the Luke points have been assessed to.

Informed guessing would have me make that out of (and this is just for a 5000kg load on the metal) 6mm MINIMUM and increase the width (same webbing size cutout) by 15mm each side (add 30mm to overall width) and 20mm to the strap edge.

AND we haven't considered the variable of the webbing may have the bow end of a shackle on it, which, being curved will load the webbing more on the outside. So more offset loading again.

Next?

Islandnomad
22nd April 2015, 05:39 PM
Excellent now we're getting somewhere, so to pr?cis:
6mm plate 30mm wider
30mm wider strap or 3" webbing
Longer loop
Should maybe contact LUKE themselves rather than this seller, just sayin...

Islandnomad
22nd April 2015, 05:51 PM
Maybe a little beefier like this :


http://www.ecproducts.com/products/18879/anchor-seat-belt-interior-chrome-each-64-66/

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/400.jpg

Maybe put a hole for a 20mm high tensile bolt if that's what it needs ???

Islandnomad
22nd April 2015, 07:04 PM
You can get thicker webbing though, same thickness as snatch straps maybe???


You're starting to talk about a pretty strong bit of kit now aren't you clubagreenie??? 6mm plate, thick 3" webbing, 20mm high tensile bolt. That has to be as strong as any connection you'll get into a 3mm chassis, isn't it?


Its a really simple strong idea.


The AULRO recovery point, designed by AULRO for AULROLIANS! Haha

Disco Muppet
22nd April 2015, 07:36 PM
RUD swivel recovery points.
/thread.

Seriously, the fact that this thread is still going is slightly absurd. The question the OP presented has been unanimously and thoroughly answered with a resounding no. Not a piece of equipment designed to be used for 4WD recovery applications.
There's nothing wrong with Philco points. Had them on for upwards of three years, used many times in lots of different applications including angled pulls and no problems.
Don't go recovering people like a dickhead and you'll be okay, use a bit of common sense.

Tombie
22nd April 2015, 08:19 PM
Its a really simple strong idea.


The AULRO recovery point, designed by AULRO for AULROLIANS! Haha


Designed (poorly) by someone who is too stubborn to concede the idea is NOT sound, Impractical, increases risk, will be expensive as it won't be mass produced in volumes that would make it cheap.

And highly likely that the only person who would throw cash at it is solely you.

Will wear quickly, will derate once wet......

Give it a bloody rest; it's a crap idea for this situation.

93031

clubagreenie
22nd April 2015, 09:42 PM
Oh. Did I forget to mention the 3" webbing is around $200/m?

Unless you buy a 1000m roll. Then it's 10% off.

A 20mm hole means re-engineering the other end.

Got anything else? I can go all night (just ask the wife).

clubagreenie
22nd April 2015, 09:44 PM
I'll mock the philco points. Muppet, whats the rough dimensions/thickness?

Islandnomad
22nd April 2015, 09:46 PM
I don't agree.




But I do also like this one as an alternative for my D2 as well, nearly $400 tho:

Disco Muppet
22nd April 2015, 10:25 PM
Seriously. Google RUD swivel recovery points. If you want to spend mega $$$ get a set of those and you'll never have any issues.

I stand corrected, the above unit is tested and rated.
Still overpriced pimp bling :p

Sent from my HTC One using AULRO mobile app

Tombie
22nd April 2015, 10:31 PM
......

Disco Muppet
22nd April 2015, 10:50 PM
Cluba-
12mm thick, 25mm hole, 65mm between bolt holes.

Sent from my HTC One using AULRO mobile app

Islandnomad
22nd April 2015, 11:06 PM
"I'll mock the philco points" I wish you'd mock the improved design, tell us how big it really should be???


"Pimp bling" you got to be kidding?

MR LR
22nd April 2015, 11:22 PM
Well what an amusing thing to read while I was on the throne this afternoon... it makes my brain hurt when I see things like this.

First off, that's a seatbelt restraint point, with seat belt webbing attached. To put it in perspective, the same thing held my baby seat in the car, 21 years ago. These days I get held in to a racing seat by 5 of them! They'd be ok to tow a car, in the same way that I can pull a car on flat ground with a length of telstra rope.

Clubagreenie has very nicely covered the technical side of it... (I wish I could use CAD that well, learning SolidWorks at the moment...), here's what I've found out through experience.

These are a set of recovery points I made to fit my Range Rover a few years ago, very similar to Philco ones, these are 12mm x 50 flat bar with a 25mm hole made on the mill which is a snug fit on the pin of my bow shackles, I had two on the car, and would use a long bridle to pull on both. I've never actually had to recover it off them though... only ever as a return on double line winch pulls.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/376.jpg (http://s1348.photobucket.com/user/mrlr/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsyza4nx8w.jpg.html)

This is the rear recovery point, it's made of 30mmx90mm bar, with a 25mm hole again, and welded into the 100x50x5 rear bar/tow bar. Fully welded on the outside and plug welded on the inner (holes can be seen in photo).

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/377.jpg (http://s1348.photobucket.com/user/mrlr/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsgaqgz87o.jpg.html)
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/378.jpg (http://s1348.photobucket.com/user/mrlr/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpss4qat9sz.jpg.html)

I orientated this with the pin horizontally, the logic being that in a recovery you are always trying to pull straight... and with the design of a cars suspension, the greatest force will be up and down, not sideways. This is when the tow vehicle is higher up than the towed vehicle, and it pulls the tow vehicle down, compressing the suspension, and adding greater traction >>> increased force. Of course on the front it may be a different story, if the car is in ruts, but lets face it, the chassis will fail first.
So far I've bounced off it many times with a 10t snatch strap on everything up to a 5t tractor, and had no issue. Certainly never bent or sheared a shackle pin...

I've gone on to find that single shear recovery points are flawed, because the chassis is not strong enough! (see snap shots from the video of my bull bar failure when the car fell down a step with the rope slightly slack).
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/379.jpg (http://s1348.photobucket.com/user/mrlr/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpshadgvu9k.jpg.html)
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/380.jpg (http://s1348.photobucket.com/user/mrlr/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zps013riyw2.jpg.html)
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/381.jpg (http://s1348.photobucket.com/user/mrlr/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsf2ifai35.jpg.html)

The bar is a temporary thing I made up out of two old bars I had laying around, just for a high country 'tough trip'; a D1 non-winch brush bar, and a D1 factory winch cradle, all with appropriate bracing to the bar, which is still perfect. EXCEPT, in my rush to get the car ready for easter I decided not to bother boxing in the chassis rails, as a result, when the above happened, the bar was in single shear, the high tensile 1/2" bolts at the top ripped straight out of the outside of the chassis rails (inside remained intact), and the bar has hung forward like this since... (haven't been arsed to fix it yet, as that would involve me finishing off the actual bullbar). The problem is due to me mounting the cradle higher than the chassis rails and the previously mentioned single shear, it would also have been beneficial to make a third mount, further back.

To think that a single one of these points would be used to recover off is absurd, it's not just the seat belt loop and tab, but also the chassis material, which is not at all beefy.

You're also adding another point of failure, instead of connecting a point to a chassis, a bow shackle to the point, and a strap to the shackle, you are adding another strap, and what for?!?!

The whole strap thing is silly... we need to design a better recovery point to begin with! And thats where the RUD rings come in. The ring should be mounted to a bracket that boxes in the chassis rail on both sides, and adds a point further back. This is not to make the recovery point stronger, (the Philco [Tombie] point and bow shackle is perfectly strong enough) but to pick up more of what is a material that is somewhat under rated for repetitious use as a recovery point, the chassis!

I'd happily design a different style of point, and have it rated and produced if there was the demand, but I don't think there's really anything wrong with the Philco/Tombie ones unless they're used stupidly, after all, the lower mount hole is further back in the chassis.

MR LR
22nd April 2015, 11:28 PM
I don't agree.




But I do also like this one as an alternative for my D2 as well, nearly $400 tho:
That's nothing more than a stock tow point with a second bit of bar welded on... I doubt the plates are any more than 3mm either...

Redback
23rd April 2015, 10:04 AM
OK enoughs enough, if you can't be civil then we have no choice toclose the thread.

philco
23rd April 2015, 01:28 PM
Here is an open letter to Island Nomad that i am sending about some comments that were made this week.

Dear Island Nomad,
Thanks for the info about my recovery points, since i dont know you and you have never used my recovery points or taken the time to call me or message me about them, then I will disregard you attitude towards me and my products.
I dont need to justify myself to you or anyone else as my sales are more than your unproven comments.
No one has ever let me know of a failure with my recovery points.
They may not be perfect but they are mounted to the chassis and the engineer i showed them to said the HT bolts would snap before the recovery point broke.
I am only 30 min drive from you and a ferry crossing, so not far to come to have a look at my products, I often travel to Nth Stradbroke Island doing 4wd tours, so I could have dropped off a set for you to try out.
I am happy to consider any changes to the styles I make.

Regards Philco

clubagreenie
23rd April 2015, 02:36 PM
Subscribed. Sitting back with popcorn.

Redback
23rd April 2015, 02:42 PM
Thread re-opened but with a warning PLAY NICE.

OK I had 4x4 Itellegence points, had them for 7yrs, never had an issue and had been recovered many times, even with the camper in tow, so they do work well, designed by Tombie originally, Philcos are very similar and from all accounts unbreakable as well.

APT Fabrication also do a similar design, so the design works.
http://www.aptfabrications.com.au/component/hikashop/product/271-apt-recovery-points-dog-leg-discovery-1-2-range-rover

Eevo
23rd April 2015, 02:46 PM
Subscribed. Sitting back with popcorn.

* brings deck chairs

p38arover
23rd April 2015, 02:53 PM
Does anyone do a recovery point for a P38A (not that I'd need one)?

Islandnomad
23rd April 2015, 03:54 PM
Due to a lack of choice that I was happy with, I've settled for these two:

Disco Muppet
23rd April 2015, 05:15 PM
Looks like a pair of Jate rings?

Sent from my HTC One using AULRO mobile app

MR LR
23rd April 2015, 05:17 PM
Due to a lack of choice that I was happy with, I've settled for these two:
So, tell me, what's going to happen when you try and snatch off them? Will they not just rotate up into the crush can, distorting it and the bumper bar?

Whilst they're double shear, I don't believe a single bolt is really satisfactory, make sure you use both points and a bridle.

Still dunno why you don't like the Philco style... I'd like to see some evidence to support your dismissal of them.

Islandnomad
23rd April 2015, 05:20 PM
I don't have a bulbar, yes Jate Rings. The military swear by them...

Tombie
23rd April 2015, 05:23 PM
See the store has retracted the item from sale.

Disco Muppet
23rd April 2015, 05:29 PM
Same military that I've personally seen ringbark trees with a tirfor, try and snatch recover things with chains, etc?
If they're so good, why do the perenties have specific recovery points?
Recovery points and equipment aren't things you should go cheap or 'near enough is good enough on'.
Amongst all the bull**** there is good advice in here, it's in both your best interests and the interests of anyone you go wheeling with to have good solid recovery points and quality gear. :)

Sent from my HTC One using AULRO mobile app

MR LR
23rd April 2015, 05:29 PM
I don't have a bulbar, yes Jate Rings. The military swear by them...
I said bumper bar.

Look at the pic you posted, tell me what's going to happen to the crush can (aluminium thing infront of/above Jate ring) when you load the jate ring up in a snatch scenario (pulling forwards, at a slightly upward angle).

I'll give you a clue, it'll be messy and the idea is Dumb with a capital D.

Jate rings are designed for lashing, they're also meant to be attached to mounts on Defenders, D1's and RRc's which are lower than where you want to bolt them on. Also, their operating angle is designed to be between about 30 and 45 degrees to the horizontal. i.e. not suitable for where that pic shows them mounted.

Lets see, maybe you'll get lucky, the third time.

clubagreenie
23rd April 2015, 06:15 PM
Oh, Oh, sir, sir, can i answer?



So, tell me, what's going to happen when you try and snatch off them? Will they not just rotate up into the crush can, distorting it and the bumper bar? The crush can pins are aluminum with a small steel centre pin, designed to shear at <500kg (by my previous testing). Several thousand kilograms of force will be applied through the strap, because of it's elastic nature. The vehicle, most likely being submerged to a degree and the rear recovery point of the vehicle in front will force the strap upwards. In addition to the natural whip of the strap as it goes from slack to full elastic deformation in a matter of a second or two, which will be exacerbated by the additional mass of the connecting shackle. The bridle will whip upwards and the outer skin, which is attached to the deformable structure (steel backing) by adhesive tape, will deform and if not immediately detached will at least be weakened if not cracked.

Islandnomad
23rd April 2015, 06:22 PM
Thanks for the rant club, but I don't talk to abusive members.

Islandnomad
23rd April 2015, 06:26 PM
Both you and Tombie owe me a public apology for abusing me publically!

Tombie
23rd April 2015, 06:29 PM
93056

MR LR
23rd April 2015, 06:32 PM
Haha, this reminds of of preschool.

MR LR
23rd April 2015, 06:36 PM
Oh, Oh, sir, sir, can i answer?

The crush can pins are aluminum with a small steel centre pin, designed to shear at <500kg (by my previous testing). Several thousand kilograms of force will be applied through the strap, because of it's elastic nature. The vehicle, most likely being submerged to a degree and the rear recovery point of the vehicle in front will force the strap upwards. In addition to the natural whip of the strap as it goes from slack to full elastic deformation in a matter of a second or two, which will be exacerbated by the additional mass of the connecting shackle. The bridle will whip upwards and the outer skin, which is attached to the deformable structure (steel backing) by adhesive tape, will deform and if not immediately detached will at least be weakened if not cracked.
Good answer Clubagreenie! Obviously you've been doing your homework!

Now, it's over to Islandnomad to confirm our theory, hopefully we hear back in a little while!

Tombie
23rd April 2015, 06:51 PM
First rule of Rant club; Nobody talks about Rant club... :D


I am unsure of your agenda in this thread, it started with a simple question.

You received several educated responses.

You ignored and argued with Engineering, testing, modeling and facts.

You got upset when people challenged your PUBLIC slander of Philco and his product.

You proposed suggestions, which were (in great detail) provided with feedback. Mostly confirming that they (the suggestions) lacked engineering understanding or Materials knowledge.

YOU continued to argue when all the facts presented indicated that they were not suitable/unsafe/outright dangerous.

YOU assumed the 'meme' posted was about you! (If the shoe fits..... Or something like that).

YOU sent a PM demanding something you likely won't be receiving...

The thread is re-opened, and again technical info is provided...

And AGAIN you refuse to listen, acknowledge the answer, or recognize that people are trying to offer you real world advice, assistance and impart experience and knowledge.

These early responses were given to prevent injury and endangering people and property through incorrect equipment for tasks...

Listen, think, be safe..

clubagreenie
23rd April 2015, 06:59 PM
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/337.jpg


Thanks for the rant club, but I don't talk to abusive members. Seems some are more happy with my efforts than not.


Both you and Tombie owe me a public apology for abusing me publically!Mate, I barely got past vaguely irritated at my own persistence in trying, however with the encouragement and positive feedback of others I continued for their benefit as much as yours.

I do not enter into many discussions, when I do I make sure that I am at least as informed as the most intelligent person in the discussion. If I do not know, I will ask, as you have done. And when confronted with a point of view that may differ from what I thought or would even like or prefer to be the outcome I will ask for clarification (as again you did and I provided). I will take this on board with whatever other information, may use for presenting a secondary argument, based on other views I have researched and eventually come to a conclusion that is most likely agreeable. In fact on AULRO I am yet to find something that I have disagreed with after a discussion and explanation. Even in recovery scenarios. In fact I have altered my own setup due to feedback from another here despite the fact that testing proved that it did not alter any physical testing result. I deferred to someone with many years of experience in an industry that uses the same equipment and has practical as well as theoretical knowledge.

So after a private demand for an apology, I'm with Tombie.

When an apology for sheer disregard of everyones efforts here to help you to select the best tool for the job, with the best information possible (provided FOC, considering to have it done would be a few thousand dollars work) is forthcoming we many do the same.

Back to basics.

F=MA

Islandnomad
23rd April 2015, 07:09 PM
I was called an arsehole and a fool by the two of you.


Is this how you always behave when people disagree with you, it sounds like it?


Poor behavior in a public forum.

Disco Muppet
23rd April 2015, 07:16 PM
Does anyone know which recovery points will help me find something that tastes like real milk?

Sent from my HTC One using AULRO mobile app

Islandnomad
23rd April 2015, 07:18 PM
JATE Points Muppet, in the end you gotta trust Landrover Engineering!!

Disco Muppet
23rd April 2015, 07:23 PM
Jate rings don't taste like real milk!

Sent from my HTC One using AULRO mobile app

MR LR
23rd April 2015, 07:23 PM
JATE Points Muppet, in the end you gotta trust Landrover Engineering!!
Work well in their designed application.

FAIL in what you are using them for.

But go on, try it, worst you could do is kill a passer by.

Islandnomad
23rd April 2015, 07:32 PM
Work well in their designed application.

FAIL in what you are using them for.

But go on, try it, worst you could do is kill a passer by.



Some of you blokes on here are a bunch of old woman! So are the JATE Rings going to explode? or is it the high tensile bolt? or is it going to tear off the end of the chassis. You've been reading too many comic books, seriously!

Disco Muppet
23rd April 2015, 07:35 PM
Well MR LR kind of has...just ripped things out of his chassis....ya know?


Sent from my HTC One using AULRO mobile app

Tombie
23rd April 2015, 07:38 PM
I was called an arsehole and a fool by the two of you.


Is this how you always behave when people disagree with you, it sounds like it?


Poor behavior in a public forum.


Careful... I have screen shots of this entire thread...

Not once did I call you either of these...

Your current attitude and refusal to recognise good advice certainly constitutes foolish behavior, your public tantrum and PMs seem like a foolish attempt to garner attention for *whatever* agenda it is you are working towards.


You have every right to your opinion, it was proven consistently unsound, and you continued right on with it...


To answer your question, should I disagree with someone - happens a lot - go take a browse around here... We often work through it and arrive at a result... Not a blatant refusal to listen.

If we were in public; I would have likely walked away laughing having thrown my hands in the air in exasperation!

If you then spoke to me in the tone of your PM I doubt you would consider doing it again.


JATE RINGS:

How do you propose to attach the strap to the Jate Ring?
I'm hypothesizing via shackles.
If that is so, then I suggest considering this - Jate rings swing through a range of motion fore and aft.
With a shackle attached it will forcefully apply itself into the chassis as it loads up and swings forward.
The ring will point load on the shackle.

Luckily, vehicle recovery is about using your head, take 2, think about it.. Not lifting loads (Rigging) where there is a need for a 5:1 safety factor.

You need a point that won't break/bend/shear, a secure mounting point, a shackle strong enough, and then the strap becomes the weak link.

Not rocket science...

Good luck in your endeavors...

Homestar
23rd April 2015, 07:40 PM
Ok, I've been sitting here looking at this thread evolve. A couple of posts have already been reported and removed.

This thread has been locked, then unlocked thinking things might settle down.

I've just got one more thing to say - KNOCK IT OFF - ALL OF YOU!

There appears to be nothing more to add from either side and I can't believe this is still going on and that it has turned into a bitch session. Grow up, suck it up and move on.

I'll lock this thread again if things don't improve.

clubagreenie
23rd April 2015, 07:42 PM
When Land Rover engineer JATE rings I'll consider them. While they are available as a genuine item (part no RRC3237) they are not manufactured by LR. Also there are both cast and forged rings available (forged about 25 pounds, welded plate/tube version 11 pounds, cast steel 8.50 pounds). No prizes for guessing which are preferable and which get sold as "genuine" but are cheap copies. And I've even seen alloy ones.

Original use: Lashing down of vehicles. Most specifically to airportable pallets for airdrops, with impact absorbing structure. Max loading would be rebound of vehicle against lashings. Use for recovery came later, probably through field use "because they were there". Original series LR had a 3/4" (?) plate and about the same ring well and truly welded, bolted to the chassis (remember the series chassis is much more substantial than disco) by 4 x 1/2" (?) bolts. And even the later defenders which were supplied to NATO with JATE rings std, when here have vastly different recovery points.

MR LR
23rd April 2015, 07:43 PM
Some of you blokes on here are a bunch of old woman! So are the JATE Rings going to explode? or is it the high tensile bolt? or is it going to tear off the end of the chassis. You've been reading too many comic books, seriously!
Stop running your mouth for a second and think about it, it's all there, laid out in front of you.

1: Jate ring not designed for shock loading, possible cracking leading to failure (unlikely)
2: Will ruin the bumper bar when it pivots up (guaranteed)
3: possible shearing of bolt as for the Jate ring to work correctly it would be unable to be clamped up (bolts are designed to be loaded in tensile, not shear.) (possible in freak accident like I have experienced)
4: Tearing chassis (as above).

For a recovery point I believe it needs a minimum of two mounting points, preferably in double shear with high tensile 1/2" hardware. But I don't know anything compared to Clubagreenie, I'm only training to be a Mech Engineer.... [funny that we seem to agree, though... ;) ]

Tombie
23rd April 2015, 07:45 PM
Keep this in mind... From another forum.

A member there used Jate Rings for recovery.

93059

You can see how it would happen in this pic
93060

clubagreenie
23rd April 2015, 07:47 PM
Except that was defender, no crush cans to shear so actually a preferable result.

Disco Muppet
23rd April 2015, 07:56 PM
IslandNomad
Have a look at these.

http://www.rud.com/en-au/products/lifting-and-lashing-means/lifting_points_bolted/vlbg_load_ring.html

Rigging standard so far greater safety margin.
Members have used these on vehicles to great effect, pics in next post.

Sent from my HTC One using AULRO mobile app

clubagreenie
23rd April 2015, 08:06 PM
I prefer these,

RUD VWBG Swivel Ring Bolt - Nobles | Lifting and Rigging Suppliers (http://www.nobles.com.au/Products/Lifting-Rigging/Lifting-Lashing-Points/RUD-VWBG-Swivel-Ring-Bolt)

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

I'd use (if I could afford it) the M24 @ 3.5T. But 4 of at $$$ = danger to the wallet.

For cost, the M12 starpoint rotating eyebolts are over $150- ea. And they're only .75T

Disco Muppet
23rd April 2015, 08:28 PM
Cluba, what's the cost of those eyelets?

Pics! We all love them...

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/332.jpg (http://s1166.photobucket.com/user/DiscoMuppet/media/11136930_10205853226231068_1642492920_n_zpsh6pnxjl p.jpg.html)

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/333.jpg (http://s1166.photobucket.com/user/DiscoMuppet/media/11173532_10205853226391072_585137867_n_zpsooliexco .jpg.html)

Vehicles belonging to Tombie, Defender now owned by another member here. Note the recovery points?

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/334.jpg (http://s1166.photobucket.com/user/DiscoMuppet/media/IMG-20130119-01267_zpsz0hctid3.jpg.html)

Vehicle owned by forum member who lives in UK. Note the recovery points?

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/335.jpg (http://s1166.photobucket.com/user/DiscoMuppet/media/d2wheellift_zpslz4bcztw.jpg.html)

Vehicle previously owned by forum member Shepp and Psimpson7. Note the recovery points?


These are the types of recovery points you want :)

Islandnomad
23rd April 2015, 08:40 PM
Muppet thanks that's exactly what I want but I don't have/want a bullbar.

Disco Muppet
23rd April 2015, 08:47 PM
Your trimmed front bar won't last long in most offroad :)
But it should be easy to find an engineering shop who will manufacture you some suitable replacement crush cans, perhaps find an ARB bar fitting kit, in which you can have a solid base for some swivel eyelets that will fit through your plastic stocker.

MR LR
23rd April 2015, 08:48 PM
Muppet thanks that's exactly what I want but I don't have/want a bullbar.
This is where the gadget I mentioned at the end of my first post comes in.

Islandnomad
23rd April 2015, 08:54 PM
Oh yes...do tell then

Blknight.aus
23rd April 2015, 08:59 PM
I don't have a bulbar, yes Jate Rings. The military swear by them...

Thats news to me.... you Know they're a tiedown/lift fitting right?

but that said..

I havent seen one listed in an EMEI, RPS, CES or UHB ever.

Heres a short list of military vehicles I've never seen them fitted to.


a landrover (series or perentie)
unimog, (any varient)
mack, fleetliner or R series
S liner
M I, III or V international
dingo
ferret
bren gun carrier
M113 a1, m113a4
m548
m577
centurian
matilda
leapoard
m1a1
Gwagon
Scania
Hino FT or GS
Aslav
Bushmaster
ARVM
ARVL
IIMV
Actros
Sprinter
panther
trident
titan


IF you have a look at the front of the deefer on the cover of the 4wd custom action that disco muppet put up. these are the exact type of liting swivel point I was talking about in an earlier post, notice how theres 2 of them, what you cant see in the photograph is the 10m bridle strap and snatch block that usually hangs from them instead of having the winch hooked to it. (make what inferences you like about how I know what normally hooks up to the front of that defender)


just by the by....

your abuse-o-matic sensor is dud and throwing false indications.

would you like a hand recalibrating it?

clubagreenie
23rd April 2015, 10:03 PM
Cluba, what's the cost of those eyelets? Hate to think but I'll find out.



Muppet thanks that's exactly what I want but I don't have/want a bullbar.

It's very possible to have a discrete winch mount which will also fit recovery points. Here's a close up of my first setup, behind the plastic.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/329.jpg https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/04/330.jpg

Made from parallel flange channel, with 6mm sided bolted to the two chassis holes, which were folded under the channel and bolted (4 bolts each side and it sat on the wombat bar to further prevent rotation. Held 12,000lb winch and never moved. Fitted behind original plastic (above was during mfct of 1st tube bar). Now fitted to another members vehicle.

The JATE rings are a NATO device so we never saw them until recently and even then only as a retail product.

clubagreenie
24th April 2015, 07:31 AM
Waiting on call back for pricing on rud, beaver & pwb rotating points.

Beaver.
https://www.beaver.com.au/m20-alloy-wll-2500kg-bolt-rlep

PWB.
Swivel Hoist Ring, with alloy steel washer (http://www.pwbanchor.com.au/chain-fittings/grade-80/rov-fittings/swivel-hoist-ring-with-alloy-steel-washer/product-detail.aspx)

Heres a thought. The issue with everything is point loading the shackle. If you had a sleeve to fit over the pin,between the body cheeks. That may distribute load better and certainly prevent damage. Of course its fidly fitting etc but theres always a compromise.

p38arover
24th April 2015, 07:55 AM
I was called an arsehole and a fool by the two of you.

Is this how you always behave when people disagree with you, it sounds like it?

Poor behavior in a public forum.

As one of the forum Admins I can see deleted posts and if posts have been edited.

I cannot see any post where you have been called that. If you had been, you should have reported it immediately and the Moderators would have dealt with it. Having now read all the thread, what I can see is the other forum members being frustrated by your refusal to accept their replies, all of which are based upon experience and engineering knowledge. It also appears that the manufacturers of the system you liked have taken clubagreenie's engineering analysis seriously.

Islandnomad
24th April 2015, 08:54 AM
When I first joined AULRO I researched the site and elsewhere as I was after a set of recovery points for my D2.


I thought I'd researched well and decided to buy some Philco points. It took some time for Philco to respond through here, a couple of weeks. During that waiting time my discussions continued on here, I even started a thread about it. I was convinced by a very senior member on here that "Don't use recovery points that orientate the shackle pins in the horizontal plane as the shackles will become the weakest point if they are not pulled on from directly ahead, shackles aren't designed to be pulled off centre". I agreed with this member, the Philco points and others are a flawed design for this reason. Philco contacted me eventually, I discussed this with him and he blew me off, he certainly didn't offer to give me free points then. I cancelled the order.


I am still looking for a recovery point for my bullbarless D2. The strap seemed like a good idea, strong, flexible, no orientation issues, less damaging, more flexible install. If its not strong enough, it could be if its size were increased.


I have put this up for discussion, I have been accused of wanting to kill, bystanders, been called an arsehole and a fool for wanting to find a solution to my problem. Well I don't apologise I haven't been rude to anyone, I do question biased one-sided engineering results by some on here tho.

bee utey
24th April 2015, 09:12 AM
Vehicles and their poorly designed recovery points are soon parted.... I'd rather trust an engineer (or a very experienced 4WDer) than some random internet dude.:)

Tombie
24th April 2015, 09:30 AM
So one member on here (a knowledgable man) says he doesn't like the horizontal loading - and you'll accept his word.

Several engineers, experienced mechanical people and product designer and manufacturers all offer a multitude of reasons why the product you initially enquired about are not suitable and you refuse to accept that?!

You then proposed "up scaling" the design to make it work. Fair enough...

And again, the brains trust provided feedback - material not suited, single point mounting, wear hazards, etc etc...

And still you continued to refuse to take the information on board...

You seem overly sensitive at the moment.
Accusing me and others of all sorts of things (appreciate the blog post btw).

The solution to your problem is the style of point we've all been suggesting, even offered you a different solution using the hooks, there was a suggestion of mounting RUD units.

Cluba is even costing some recovery eyes up for you at the moment.. After the abuse you've given out - I'm amazed anyone is helping.

We get concerned because we've seen people hurt through improper recovery techniques..

Please don't apologise, an apology should be sincere and I don't believe yours would be.
Your comments are always full of sarcasm and jibe remarks (biased one-sided engineering etc).

Wanting to find a solution is one thing, refusing to accept the imparted knowledge of experienced people is different..


Perhaps some time on the boat relaxing would benefit you... Life's to short!

Tombie
24th April 2015, 09:40 AM
Just to add some food for thought...

There are several Rigger/Dogger ticket holders in this forum...

Some have given you advice and opinion. Remember that lifting vs recovering are different yet similar...

:cool:

Islandnomad
24th April 2015, 09:54 AM
This is really getting out of control but anyway I'm just after a suitable recovery point for my car.


To respond:
So one member on here (a knowledgable man) says he doesn't like the horizontal loading - and you'll accept his word. He was/is very convincing, but is currently very quiet on this.

Several engineers, experienced mechanical people and product designer and manufacturers all offer a multitude of reasons why the product you initially enquired about are not suitable and you refuse to accept that?! No one on here displays qualifications, so your left with judging their credibility by what they say, overly dictatorial people like you, don't come across too well .

You then proposed "up scaling" the design to make it work. Fair enough... I'm looking for a solution, the down side is a single bolt install, but with a big enough bolt?.....

And again, the brains trust provided feedback - material not suited, single point mounting, wear hazards, etc etc... All issues that I retorted, my right, looking for reasonable responses but got abuse instead because I dared to question

And still you continued to refuse to take the information on board...I've taken it all on board, I went back to the Jate rings that I wasn't that happy with, worst of a bad bunch. Still no solution...these swivel rings are going to cost me $1000 for sure by the time they've installed, too much for what is, in the end two loops.

You seem overly sensitive at the moment.
Accusing me and others of all sorts of things (appreciate the blog post btw). The sensitive people are those who have been abusive, not me you and Clubgreenie because I DARED to question you.

The solution to your problem is the style of point we've all been suggesting, even offered you a different solution using the hooks, there was a suggestion of mounting RUD units. The Philco points are a flawed design. The cost of swivel mounts are probably going to be the cost of a bulbar.

Cluba is even costing some recovery eyes up for you at the moment.. After the abuse you've given out - I'm amazed anyone is helping. Cluba is a biased abusive tosser, I don't a word he says.

We get concerned because we've seen people hurt through improper recovery techniques.. I understand, me too that's why I'm discussing it, but I get called a fool for discussing it, poor behavior mate!

Please don't apologise, an apology should be sincere and I don't believe yours would be. I don't have anything to apologise for, I have been rude to anyone, you have, because I dared question, poor behavior mate!
Your comments are always full of sarcasm and jibe remarks (biased one-sided engineering etc). Cluba's engineering results were self serving rubbish, when I questioned them and asked him to rerun them properly he refused.

Wanting to find a solution is one thing, refusing to accept the imparted knowledge of experienced people is different..This is the real issue isn't it...someone has questioned Tombie's opinion, well mate you owe me an apology for calling me a fool in public. I'm not holding my breath.


Perhaps some time on the boat relaxing would benefit you... Life's to short! I'm retired mate I'm actually pretty chilled. Don't abuse people in public is the moral of this story Tombie!!!!

p38arover
24th April 2015, 10:30 AM
I have been accused of wanting to kill, bystanders, been called an arsehole

Please show us where you have been called this and the Mods will deal with it. I've already told you above that I haven't found any instance of that.

clubagreenie
24th April 2015, 10:48 AM
Here we go...


This is really getting out of control but anyway I'm just after a suitable recovery point for my car.


To respond:
So one member on here (a knowledgable man) says he doesn't like the horizontal loading - and you'll accept his word. He was/is very convincing, but is currently very quiet on this.

Several engineers, experienced mechanical people and product designer and manufacturers all offer a multitude of reasons why the product you initially enquired about are not suitable and you refuse to accept that?! No one on here displays qualifications, so your left with judging their credibility by what they say, overly dictatorial people like you, don't come across too well .

You then proposed "up scaling" the design to make it work. Fair enough... I'm looking for a solution, the down side is a single bolt install, but with a big enough bolt?.....
The chassis will still fail without adequate reinforcement. Which would exceed the cost of any point, if you could find someone willing to weld a chassis of a SRS equipped vehicle.
And again, the brains trust provided feedback - material not suited, single point mounting, wear hazards, etc etc... All issues that I retorted, my right, looking for reasonable responses but got abuse instead because I dared to question
As I said earlier,you've barely been hassled, let alone abused by comparison to other threads that have gotten out of hand here and certainly nowhere nearing the capacities of my ability. In fact my wife is more scathing of you than I have been. But then I'm a sucker for lost causes.
And still you continued to refuse to take the information on board...I've taken it all on board, I went back to the Jate rings that I wasn't that happy with, worst of a bad bunch. Still no solution...these swivel rings are going to cost me $1000 for sure by the time they've installed, too much for what is, in the end two loops.
The cost will be in mounting them. Which I've shown one solution that will also fit a winch and points without a bar which you've stated you don't want. When i have a price I will post it, there are 3 manufacturers quoting.
You seem overly sensitive at the moment.
Accusing me and others of all sorts of things (appreciate the blog post btw). The sensitive people are those who have been abusive, not me you and Clubgreenie because I DARED to question you.
Question me all you like thats the benefit of a democratic society (which I served to provide) and an equally democratic forum. Again, earlier I stated my own method of enquiry, which is question,reply, analysis and follow up if necessary.
The solution to your problem is the style of point we've all been suggesting, even offered you a different solution using the hooks, there was a suggestion of mounting RUD units. The Philco points are a flawed design. The cost of swivel mounts are probably going to be the cost of a bulbar.
One person says the philco points are flawed, not because they are under engineered but because of the shackle orientation. And you accept this. Now I know who said that and I trust him in these matters (practical experience aside education) and I have altered my own setup because of his advice. But we take the time to run analysis, which btw as opposed to your statement WAS correctly sized, both by analysis of the pic on the screen using the known size of the strap and by going to the garage and measuring a luke harness using the same mount, and you completely disagree with results that you believe are somehow doctored to my favour. Clearly you have some experience in manipulation of FEA data that I dont. All the data is from standards in the CAD program.
Cluba is even costing some recovery eyes up for you at the moment.. After the abuse you've given out - I'm amazed anyone is helping. Cluba is a biased abusive tosser, I don't a word he says.
Thank you. Nicest thing I've been called all year.
We get concerned because we've seen people hurt through improper recovery techniques.. I understand, me too that's why I'm discussing it, but I get called a fool for discussing it, poor behavior mate!
As stated by a mod. There is nowhere you have been called any of the two things you state.
Please don't apologise, an apology should be sincere and I don't believe yours would be. I don't have anything to apologise for, I have been rude to anyone, you have, because I dared question, poor behavior mate!You have more than questioned, you outright went against all advice at every level.
Your comments are always full of sarcasm and jibe remarks (biased one-sided engineering etc). Cluba's engineering results were self serving rubbish, when I questioned them and asked him to rerun them properly he refused.
I did rerun them. With double the material thickness. With very similar results. You even commented that it should be made even larger. Rerunning a test isn't just changing the thickness. You have to completely redraw the part,select material quality and even finishing treatments. Go and do some research on what the same thing would cost you in the real world. Makes a bullbar a cheap proposition.
Wanting to find a solution is one thing, refusing to accept the imparted knowledge of experienced people is different..This is the real issue isn't it...someone has questioned Tombie's opinion, well mate you owe me an apology for calling me a fool in public. I'm not holding my breath.
Again theres no record in this thread. Existing or deleted where either of your claimed abuses occurred.
Perhaps some time on the boat relaxing would benefit you... Life's to short! I'm retired mate I'm actually pretty chilled. Don't abuse people in public is the moral of this story Tombie!!!!Again. Where did this occur? I am not retired but have the fortune of being selective of what I do. So I have the time to research and examine as well as doing my own engineering and having practical destruction testing performed. Most people who know me would say I'm relaxed to the point of apathy. Except when it comes to areas that affect others. And that's the underlying issue. You're free to do as you choose. But others cannot always be.

Islandnomad
24th April 2015, 10:56 AM
Please show us where you have been called this and the Mods will deal with it. I've already told you above that I haven't found any instance of that.



Well it happened, talk to the perpetrators and Redback who deleted their posts, they are denying it now, see posts above, but if they do they are liars.

MR LR
24th April 2015, 10:57 AM
This is really getting out of control but anyway I'm just after a suitable recovery point for my car.


To respond:
So one member on here (a knowledgable man) says he doesn't like the horizontal loading - and you'll accept his word. He was/is very convincing, but is currently very quiet on this.

Several engineers, experienced mechanical people and product designer and manufacturers all offer a multitude of reasons why the product you initially enquired about are not suitable and you refuse to accept that?! No one on here displays qualifications, so your left with judging their credibility by what they say, overly dictatorial people like you, don't come across too well .

You then proposed "up scaling" the design to make it work. Fair enough... I'm looking for a solution, the down side is a single bolt install, but with a big enough bolt?.....

And again, the brains trust provided feedback - material not suited, single point mounting, wear hazards, etc etc... All issues that I retorted, my right, looking for reasonable responses but got abuse instead because I dared to question

And still you continued to refuse to take the information on board...I've taken it all on board, I went back to the Jate rings that I wasn't that happy with, worst of a bad bunch. Still no solution...these swivel rings are going to cost me $1000 for sure by the time they've installed, too much for what is, in the end two loops.

You seem overly sensitive at the moment.
Accusing me and others of all sorts of things (appreciate the blog post btw). The sensitive people are those who have been abusive, not me you and Clubgreenie because I DARED to question you.

The solution to your problem is the style of point we've all been suggesting, even offered you a different solution using the hooks, there was a suggestion of mounting RUD units. The Philco points are a flawed design. The cost of swivel mounts are probably going to be the cost of a bulbar.

Cluba is even costing some recovery eyes up for you at the moment.. After the abuse you've given out - I'm amazed anyone is helping. Cluba is a biased abusive tosser, I don't a word he says.

We get concerned because we've seen people hurt through improper recovery techniques.. I understand, me too that's why I'm discussing it, but I get called a fool for discussing it, poor behavior mate!

Please don't apologise, an apology should be sincere and I don't believe yours would be. I don't have anything to apologise for, I have been rude to anyone, you have, because I dared question, poor behavior mate!
Your comments are always full of sarcasm and jibe remarks (biased one-sided engineering etc). Cluba's engineering results were self serving rubbish, when I questioned them and asked him to rerun them properly he refused.

Wanting to find a solution is one thing, refusing to accept the imparted knowledge of experienced people is different..This is the real issue isn't it...someone has questioned Tombie's opinion, well mate you owe me an apology for calling me a fool in public. I'm not holding my breath.


Perhaps some time on the boat relaxing would benefit you... Life's to short! I'm retired mate I'm actually pretty chilled. Don't abuse people in public is the moral of this story Tombie!!!!
Islandnomad, please provide an FEA analysis of a 4.75t shackle in one of either my, Tombie's or Philco's 12mm recovery points mounted with 1/2" high tensile hardware to the bumper bar mounts (being the 2.5mm mild steel chassis).

I'd like to see that the shackle pin is the weak link. Before you disregard the design.

I think I know who the member you are referencing is, and I amongst I'm sure others, would appreciate it if he weighed in on your behalf.

My qualifications are as a third year mechanical engineer... so I have 5/8's of a clue about it ;)

p38arover
24th April 2015, 11:03 AM
Well it happened, talk to the perpetrators and Redback who deleted their posts, they are denying it now, see posts above, but if they do they are liars.

I have just read the deleted post and there is nowhere that you were called what you claimed.

incisor
24th April 2015, 11:10 AM
enough is enough

closed