Jump to content

For Questions Regarding WOFs/CERTs/NUMBER PLATEs


si

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, cletus said:

As mentioned usually the plates are fitted on the floor which is probably the easiest way. I have done a couple where plates have been welded in to the bottom of the pillar, which looks neater, but you would need to talk to your certifier first to make sure hes happy with that, as it's not in the book . And it wrecks the paint 

 

There is a recipe in the ccm which allows for welding an upper pillar anch in the pillar

Less work and not ruining my paint sounds good.

He was happy with the upper mount point, but not the lower anchors. I'm capable of doing the work, just wanted to make sure I was doing it correctly first.

 

Cheers

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 8.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

4 hours ago, WhangareiKE70 said:

Cheers for the reply.

Caster correction is part of it, they also change from a pin to a radius bush on the chassis end so they allow more articulation. The bush goes between the 2 plates so could be why they don't look as strong? As they aren't boxed in between the plates. 

Will be keen to hear what Clint has to say.

I couldn't say from pics 100% they would be ok or not.  I'd have to look at it in person 

The bits that look like they 'may' be an issue are the radius just behind the second front bush to clear the steering is quite sharp, and the bracket at the chassis end isn't supported where the bush is, although the bracket does get clamped by the gbox member from memory? . But it all might be fine. 

I did have a customer who made his own arms for a landcruiser, and the radius for the steering arm was too big and it failed FEA testing compared to the factory arm

He redesigned them and then they were ok after that

 

How much are you lifting the suspension?  IMO a patrol starts to get a bit yuck with more than a 3" lift due to panhard bar angles  

 

 

Screenshot_20191011-185537_Samsung Internet.jpg

Screenshot_20191011-185559_Samsung Internet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cletus said:

I couldn't say from pics 100% they would be ok or not.  I'd have to look at it in person 

The bits that look like they 'may' be an issue are the radius just behind the second front bush to clear the steering is quite sharp, and the bracket at the chassis end isn't supported where the bush is, although the bracket does get clamped by the gbox member from memory? . But it all might be fine. 

I did have a customer who made his own arms for a landcruiser, and the radius for the steering arm was too big and it failed FEA testing compared to the factory arm

He redesigned them and then they were ok after that

 

How much are you lifting the suspension?  IMO a patrol starts to get a bit yuck with more than a 3" lift due to panhard bar angles  

 

 

Screenshot_20191011-185537_Samsung Internet.jpg

Screenshot_20191011-185559_Samsung Internet.jpg

Hmm. Is there any way to know whether or not they’ll be fine without buying them? As far as I am aware, nobody in NZ stocks them. 

From what I understand the back of the drop box is sandwiched between the chassis and gearbox crossmember, and the front end is supported by a bolt that bolts up to where the original pin from the end of the factory radius arm goes in.

4” is what I have gone for in terms of lift, I may live to regret it, but I am committed at this point, a lot of the components I have already purchased are for a 4” lift.

Is the problem with the “sharpness” of the radius in the arm that it creates a stress point? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, WhangareiKE70 said:

Hmm. Is there any way to know whether or not they’ll be fine without buying them? As far as I am aware, nobody in NZ stocks them. 

I never tell anyone that a part will be certifiable unless it's obviously ok or I've seen it before, 

because I've had someone threaten me with legal action over a part I said looked ok in pictures but when in person it had obvious issues. 

Try asking the guy you are using for cert, he may have seen them before 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NickJ said:

One would hope there is additional reporting behind those images to qualify the results?

I just added the pics for interests sake because it was relevant to the discussion, there was more to it than those pics, I left all the other bits out because that info is the property of someone else 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the seat belt anchors, I removed the seats carpet etc...and under all that are factory original mounting points on the floor. These go through an overlapping seam on a crossmember flange.

Can I just use these? Or do I still need to put in double plates?

20191012_134924.thumb.jpg.4b431274e74d98fd6c08ae0bb66fa09e.jpg

This rubber bung was in the threaded hole. Its behind the seat mounts, but at the very front of the B pillar.

Screenshot_20191012-144353_Drive.thumb.jpg.a0a9a4bf70e16b8afd531dfbf6d1445d.jpg

 

This section says it's okay...but man is this shit confusing for me. 50 pages on how to mount seatbelts! Surely 2 pages with drawings would explain it far better than 50 pages of words ever would?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Balls! I tried mounting the retractors on the factory holes...looks good, clearances are good, it's in the magic H zone...but they don't work on that angle. Mine are designed to be mounted straight up/down. So I think I'll need to do the double plate method after all.

 

Edit:

Is this a viable alternative?

20191012_173300.thumb.jpg.1abf19d401d7ff30eb957ecc011457bd.jpg

And imagine there's a double plate, mounted it would look like this - held vertical against a non vertical surface 

20191012_172812.thumb.jpg.bfa0c649f06a54fd686873ac5b302bb1.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, cletus said:

I never tell anyone that a part will be certifiable unless it's obviously ok or I've seen it before, 

because I've had someone threaten me with legal action over a part I said looked ok in pictures but when in person it had obvious issues. 

Try asking the guy you are using for cert, he may have seen them before 

That is absolutely understandable. 

He (Shane Speight) hasn’t seen them before, asked me to get more info, so I have emailed the company. Will wait to see what I get. 

If it comes to it I will just shell out for the Superior Engineering ones. Just trying to save money where I can, but not at the expense of safety/doing things twice. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, cletus said:

@Kimjon

Would this option work for you?

 

Screenshot_20191012-202523_Samsung Internet.jpg

I think the sill would prevent this option from being viable. I'll check it out tomorrow...after 15hrs working non stop on my car I'm a bit over it tonight.

20191012_172819.thumb.jpg.557ac2944ffcb8c4a9f005af413e9e7d.jpg

Where that paper with the x on it is the sill, so I cant drill in there as I wouldn't be able to access the other side. If I go any further inwards on the floor to find the flat area I'll likely be too far inwards and foul on the seat. But I'll check for sure tomorrow.

Thanks for the reply, much appreciated tho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...