Ouch! How far is the door skin pushed in? I do have some rear doors. PM me if you're interested.
Updated rear bumper pics (was Project LXXIV)
- Thread starter cruiseroutfit
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
How much extra stress does this add to the factory latch? I have seen in many times in another vehicle starting with "L" that has used a spare tire carrier attached to the rear door where the latch can fail quickly if traveling lots of washboard roads. Pavement pounders have no worries, but for those of us who like a little dirt on our trucks it could cause some headaches.
Based on experience with Expo One for other Toyota platforms, none.
I'd go as far as saying you could lock the carrier in the half open position and hit the roughest terrain imaginable at speeds most Cruisers dream of, and the vehicle would fall apart long before slack would develop in the carrier bearing.
Now, I don't speak for anyone involved in producing or marketing, but it's good stuff. On the FJCs I've hung (and ran, albeit not a carrier) it was a huge improvement for the door, getting the weight completely off the door, fully supported by the big ass bearing, no problem.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2011
- Threads
- 238
- Messages
- 22,178
- Location
- Redding, California
- Website
- trail-tailor.com
First off, I like the look and idea of this design, I have for years. I'm posting from my own experiences with integrated components that I've built for Land Rovers and issues I've researched/encountered with other manufacturers out there over the past 2-3 years.
@Eco 45 has a very good point. Not sure if you have looked at this idea or similar, but what I had to do on my original Disco Land Rover bumpers (no longer make them) was to make a dual two way hiem connection. One for the distance from arm to body/tire carrier attachment and then another for slop management in the hinges. The main reason for this is to try and reduce friction in the hinges and to keep the hinges in the best condition as possible. When new, the bumper/spindle is fabricated at a square 90 degree angle. When the gate/door is in a "cradled" position there isn't hardly any stress on the hinges in a new condition, but mainly on the latch assy itself. When operating, the hinges or spindle is always under load.
Go look at and operate at a few Jeep JCR, XRC Smitty, etc.. integrated bumper systems that have been slightly used or new for that matter. Once the gate or door is released from the latch the arm usually drops, upwards of 5/8" sometimes. JCR started adding a 2-3 degree pre-load on the spindle for their design to try to eliminate customer complaints and warranty issues (per the salesperson in Kalamazoo, MI on my walk through of their facility). I repaired my neighbors JCR by cutting and setting a pre-load into the spindle. But, the spindle is now at 4ish degrees off square so the spindle bearings are taking all the punishment and have had to be replaced since the "fix" less than 6 months ago. BUT, the owners aren't having to lift up on the arm to get it latched now so, his wife is very happy.
The two way hiem allowed me to balance the weight between the two or load it on the spindle to where I could just see the weight coming off the hinges. Still not a perfect solution, but unfortunately every hinge set up is different pending age, added weight, corrosion, wear and tear. IMO, the only way to really guarantee a balanced set up is to build off of each component from the start in its current condition. Otherwise one or the other will start to fail prematurely.
Owners of LoD, Demello and a few others that have an integrated arm have added a jacking foot to keep things aligned and stable while even cradled and assist in closing due to sag. IIRC LoD finally just added it to their design from the start.
Kurt and ExpoOne may have it all figured out though.
Gravity is the true enemy and it will eventually win.
LoD integrated system
- Thread starter
- #146
The difference is the leverage produced by trying to make a center mount tire vs keeping the tire offset so that each door is now supporting only the tension on the carrier, not the actual weight of the tire/carrier. Think of the moment now acting upon the door, its much lower than a similar sized tire mounted on a door carrier (some even making deeper door mount carriers to accommodate wider tires).
The strikers on a 7x Series door are at the top and bottom for the "tire" door (RH) and the middle for the carrier door (LH), they are quire robust and work to pull the assembly tight rather than a single center mount striker on a much flimsier (and wider) door such as found on the FJ Cruiser. That is one major benefit of the narrow width and dual doors of the 70 versus a FJC or JK, the loads are a fraction of that and not being taxed with 35-37" tires in 99% of applications. I'd be more worried about tearing sheet metal from the door but we've addressed that by using load plate on the inside of the door as to greatly increase the surface area.
The original prototype saw a great deal of on/off-road use during the year we had it, zero play or even need for adjustment in the bearings (which are fully adjustable with a spindle nut) or the pivot linkage. Some carrier spindle designs inherently sag much more than others but any sag is simply the product of wear and or damage, if you can't tighten the play out of a carrier to eliminate sag, you've got a bigger problem. @jfrench could chime in and let us know where he stands currently but my guess is it is still holding tight and rattle free.
Fwiw ExpOne has been selling their FJ Cruiser version for 6-7 years? It has a much wider carrier width, more offeset from the carrier (i.e. more moment on the spindle in both directions) and thus potential for sag and yet they have very little reported issues with that setup and these have 1/3-1/2 the effective load on the spindle. The centerline of the stock tire carrier is ~17" from the centerline of the door hinges, the centerline of our carrier is the same distance from the spindle.
The tire side door plate was flexing a bit more than we liked when impacted by the bump stop, the door itself wasn't flexing but rather the plate that bridges the body line. We have a thicker door plate en route and expect that to be the final engineering change.
It would be naive to say that any tire/carrier mount (including stock) won't contribute to wear on the door hinges and latches. Fortunately those parts are still available and can be replaced if/when they do suffer wear.
The strikers on a 7x Series door are at the top and bottom for the "tire" door (RH) and the middle for the carrier door (LH), they are quire robust and work to pull the assembly tight rather than a single center mount striker on a much flimsier (and wider) door such as found on the FJ Cruiser. That is one major benefit of the narrow width and dual doors of the 70 versus a FJC or JK, the loads are a fraction of that and not being taxed with 35-37" tires in 99% of applications. I'd be more worried about tearing sheet metal from the door but we've addressed that by using load plate on the inside of the door as to greatly increase the surface area.
The original prototype saw a great deal of on/off-road use during the year we had it, zero play or even need for adjustment in the bearings (which are fully adjustable with a spindle nut) or the pivot linkage. Some carrier spindle designs inherently sag much more than others but any sag is simply the product of wear and or damage, if you can't tighten the play out of a carrier to eliminate sag, you've got a bigger problem. @jfrench could chime in and let us know where he stands currently but my guess is it is still holding tight and rattle free.
Fwiw ExpOne has been selling their FJ Cruiser version for 6-7 years? It has a much wider carrier width, more offeset from the carrier (i.e. more moment on the spindle in both directions) and thus potential for sag and yet they have very little reported issues with that setup and these have 1/3-1/2 the effective load on the spindle. The centerline of the stock tire carrier is ~17" from the centerline of the door hinges, the centerline of our carrier is the same distance from the spindle.
The tire side door plate was flexing a bit more than we liked when impacted by the bump stop, the door itself wasn't flexing but rather the plate that bridges the body line. We have a thicker door plate en route and expect that to be the final engineering change.
It would be naive to say that any tire/carrier mount (including stock) won't contribute to wear on the door hinges and latches. Fortunately those parts are still available and can be replaced if/when they do suffer wear.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2011
- Threads
- 238
- Messages
- 22,178
- Location
- Redding, California
- Website
- trail-tailor.com
Like I said, I like the design and glad you have it all figured out.
- Thread starter
- #148
I don't know that we have it all figured out just yet...
While we are one revision 3 of built units, we are on revision 30 of CAD versions. James and I are both ME's so we've spent a great deal of time talking over the material/structural details of the design and how we can make it better than the last rendition. While this last change will yield us a solid product, it's likely we'll make some changes down the road too?
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2011
- Threads
- 238
- Messages
- 22,178
- Location
- Redding, California
- Website
- trail-tailor.com
I don't know that we have it all figured out just yet...
Change is inevitable.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2004
- Threads
- 944
- Messages
- 6,041
Hey Kurt....ill take a proto type....
- Thread starter
- #151
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2004
- Threads
- 944
- Messages
- 6,041
Sure, it comes with a Cruiser
Survey says..........I already have "to many"...
seriously.....If you have anything that...just isnt just right....need something for my 75.....whats on there now is ???? Crap......
Yup, rattle free. I haven't wheeled it super hard but a couple of longer trips in the last month on difficult, slow going, rocky trails as well as higher speeds on graded, washboard forest service roads and it is holding up well. Still love it!
Now I only wish all the upgrades and recent R&D were part of my prototype. Perhaps @In2cuisers wants to buy a new one and trade me for my used one with some cash to boot
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2004
- Threads
- 944
- Messages
- 6,041
got $2.58 in my other pants and $9.22 in these along with a big pile of food stamps.....Deal ??
No, really If you decide to upgrade... Please let me know
No, really If you decide to upgrade... Please let me know
Last edited:
My 77 is starting to think that I hate it with all of the weight on the right rear hinges plus the addition of a sketchy bolt on hitch plate.
- Thread starter
- #156
Batch #1 is in production, some set aside for internal builds but stock will be available soon.
Just send your truck to him under some maintenance guise and slip in the need for the bumper..... That's what I did......
Will the front bumper be available as well?
My Landcruiser is in need of a face lift.
My Landcruiser is in need of a face lift.