Who really knows!!!

[Millardo]

I bought some used, and lo and behold....my bumper is not drilled and tapped to mount the bumperettes. What size metric bolt is used?

Can't remember if it was 8 or 10mm... Will have to check tonight if someone else doesn't chime in.

Really? No holes? What the...

 

[John McVicker]

Going on memory only...but I think it is 10x1.25.

John

 

[thecrazygreek]

They use 8mm x 1.25 and the curvy side goes on the outside. duh...

 

[KOOTENAY KRUZER]

I suspect that the employees who were responsible for installing the bumperettes were given a pair per vehicle and were only told to make sure they were right side up. They were never intended to be an access into the vehicle, there was an actual step for that, and it fits no matter which way you orient the bumperettes.

 

[FJsnoozer]

Link to step?

 

[Fast Eddy]

Bump.

Curved side inwards would not fit with the step in place...

 

[ccasteel]

This is from a '76 with 40,000 miles. I am the second owner and the first was a family friend. At this point it had been untouched. Wish I had aimed the camera a little lower. But the curved side is to the outside. To Fast Eddy's point, curved side in would likely interfere with the step.

 

[lostmarbles]

Bump....
Curved side inwards would not fit with the step in place...

This is from a '76 with 40,000 miles. I am the second owner and the first was a family friend. At this point it had been untouched. Wish I had aimed the camera a little lower. But the curved side is to the outside. To Fast Eddy's point, curved side in would likely interfere with the step.

Thanks for the pics.

Well that seems to me to be the most solid evidence yet for which way around they should be.

Shame it goes against how they are presently mounted on my cruiser (and against the views I expressed in my earlier post).

This has now triggered me to go back over pics I took when my cruiser was almost new to check whether or not I may have accidentally swapped them when I took them off for hot-dip galvanising somewhere around 2007/2008.

40-series cruisers are more photogenic when viewed from the front so I don't have many early rear-view pics. And those that I took are inconclusive .... Like this one taken at Lake Moore in Western Australia back in 1981/82:





PS. I think I had already become the anal person that I am now by 2007/8 so I find it hard to believe that I accidentally swapped them then. Knowing how anal I've become, they probably now actually have "L" or "R" stamped onto some inconspicous surface such as one that mates with the crossmember.

So I'm probably wrong about the Toyota engineers wanting just one particular orientation. I'm now leaning towards the opinion that They only wanted "flat edges up".

 

[miker]

Just a point of reference:
http://www.ih8mud.com/tech/framedims/cruiser_frame.pdf.

 

[Fast Eddy]

So you're pointing out that the diagram is wrong? I'll bet if you get out the ruler they're not in the right place on the back frame member either; too much space between them.

 

[lostmarbles]

Just a point of reference:
http://www.ih8mud.com/tech/framedims/cruiser_frame.pdf.

Well that clinches it Mike.

Obviously Toyota mounted them either way.



Ps. And because I'm always a suspicious bastard I looked up my FSMs and found the same thing drawn in a 1973 Chassis & Body FSM

 

[miker]

So you're pointing out that the diagram is wrong?

No, I said "just a point of reference" meaning you should make your own judgement as to the accuracy of the drawing.

I'll bet if you get out the ruler they're not in the right place on the back frame member either; too much space between them.

Agreed, I did notice on that drawing they are too far apart for a 40. So again, make your own judgement on the accuracy of the orientation.

 

[Outdoor707]

Donuts

What is the deal with the rubber donuts on the bumperettes? Were those standard or are those an aftermarket product? What years were they on?