hawairish

Mind detailing the failure? I run them, and they've done well for me, but I know they're not a premium option so I'm curious about potential failure points.

I think he was just saying we've not done an install with this method on a pre-facelift truck. It should be exactly the same because the carriers are coming from pre-facelift trucks. It should also "fit" QX4 trucks but the issue there is that the liftgate contour is different and the reverse lights are on the liftgate, not the tail lights. @malacandro If you want to make it happen here, I'd be up for that. I'll be doing @Astrorami's setup in the near future, though I'd like to let @TowndawgR50's continued R&D occur and apply those methods here when ready. They're a definite improvement on my original approach. Also, this is all great info! Be sure to add some stuff to the Tire Carrier thread (linked in my signature) if you've not already.

Torque alone (even with thread locker) is insufficient for that application, especially with the incorrect fastener arrangement you've got. You've put a standard nut over a hole without a lock and flat washer; you have no locking method and have significantly reduced contact area on a fastener that demands it. Expect subframe shift, the edges of the nuts wallowing out the spacer holes, and a loose contact area over time. Proper—and properly installed—hardware is cheap insurance for safety. I'd be worried about it.

Kudos for giving it a go. However, it looks like you're using standard hex nuts without lock washers and flat washers, except on the head-side of the bolt. The nut will likely loosen in that scenario, causing potential for the bolt to fall out because of its upward orientation. Looks like you're also missing a washer on the front spacer. You won't be able to fix the bolt orientation without completely loosening the spacers from the chassis, but you can address the other hardware issue without much effort. Bad: bolt - lock washer - flat washer - <steel> - nut Better: bolt - flat washer - <steel> - flat washer - lock washer - thread locker - nut Even the "better" is bare minimum for this application. I don't even recommend standard nuts here. This is a high-torque (>110 ft lbs) application; your entire suspension, steering, and front axle are tied to this and will be twisting this every time you drive. Play it safe.

Thanks! Stories wise...well, nothing's caught fire and all fingers are still attached, so that's a good start. The fun part is probably when we're tossing ideas around then trying to "construct" an idea on the fly with any crap we happen to have laying around us. But honestly, we've been back-and-forth on numerous ideas, seemingly CADing them up for weeks, and maybe months for the strut spacers. Nothing was really tangible until just the other day. The motor mount spacers were the first thing to get cut, and it was probably more of an experiment for the bend process. They turned out well, needing only a minor tweak or two. The ones shown in the picture are our 2nd attempt, and that's looking like a winner for the final design. The strut spacers...man, we've iterated on so many ideas. They've already seen a slight redesign since our announcement today. All the strut spacer parts in that pic (not shown was another bent piece for the 3" spacer) are actually the very first prototypes for each part, and they turned out great for a first pass! The assembly process that day led to other simple improvements, mainly for manufacturing and installation. Beyond tweaks here and there, it's awesome see things come out as expected.

Thanks for the shout out! Unfortunately, bumpers from us won't become a reality as soon as we'd like (surely not within the timeframe you're looking), but they are on the long term road map. The Coastal bumper appears to be a great alternative, so we won't hold a grudge if you do go that direction, lol.

Yes, in static and adjustable options.

Thanks everyone for the continued support and patience! I know this thread has tangented off a few directions so far, and that was ok since I think it spawned a little excitement in everyone (including ourselves) to get more products out there. Going forward, though, we'd love it if the discussion stay centered on some of the ideas we're working on and any related questions. We're aware that competing products do, or may soon, exist. But, that doesn't phase us, impress us, nor change our goals here. What we've been working on is far more dynamic than anything out there. We're due for another update, no doubt. We've got a big one coming very very soon (hint: tonight?). Let's just say that yesterday was a major R&D and prototype day for us. Stay tuned!

This topic went way off topic. But, @Astrorami is just pulling legs here. I'll leave my opinion about what I think of that Russian kit out of this discussion (it'll come up elsewhere I'm sure). @MTGunner, I don't have any experience with Nexen tires or those Rodians, but as a general perspective, we're quickly becoming a consumer base where once-thought "off-brand" tires are becoming "new-brand" tires that are probably worth a shot. Consider that automakers have already begun making them OE, and that top retailers like Walmart and Tire Rack are willing to buy enough of them to push the brand. I generally take that acceptance (and any underlying quality-assurance and certification processes) as a good sign that tire is of reasonable quality. Tires are what I consider another totally subjective purchase item. People love Duratracs, though I tend to hate them because I had a set that failed in ways that I don't think it should have. Does it seem like a good tire? Yes, and I liked them up until they failed on me. Should that stop you from buying them? No, not all. But, I honestly feel anyone could have had the same experience with any set of tires. That all said, if it reads like a good deal, meets your needs, carries a good warranty, and the majority of reviews are good, I'd totally give them a try.

OE rears are 120 lbs/in, OME 140 lbs/in. That additional 40 lbs of load handling (2 springs x 20 lbs) isn't much for a spring that had about the same free height. The 9448s at 225 lbs/in are still a reasonable jump over OE, though we don't know what AC rates are. Other LR springs had different rates and lengths, though.

If that's a valid number, that's awfully stiff...150% more than an OE spring (150 lbs/in), and 90% more than OME (200 lbs/in). That seems exceptionally harsh. Two front bumpers and two winches with steel rope would only compress the front end 0.5". I'm for a "truck" like feel, but that's "semi-truck" feel. Still, I've not tried them (and likely won't), so it's just an impression.

Mostly correct. For rear, 2" spacers and LR9448s. I'd say that if you plan to go with a bumper and winch, the AC's could be a good choice. They seem to have a much higher spring rate than OMEs judging by complaints of stiffness, but with enough weight to help compress them, it might work out well. Otherwise, if you'll be without bumper and or winch, I'd still consider the MD or HD springs and a spacer for ride quality. Also, heads up that the $167 springs that AC sells are OMEs (description includes their duty rating); the $180 springs are their house springs.

Something I've found myself reminding others about is that OME springs and shocks are intended for increased load handling, not lift. I don't consider them lift springs at all; it's not what they're meant for (that's not to say they don't provide lift). For R50s, all their springs have an estimated lift of 15mm when used according to their loading specs, which are standardized for all their springs: Light duty: no accessories Medium duty: bumper or winch, up to 50kg or 110lbs Heavy duty: bumper and winch, up to 100kg, or 220lbs I get about an 1.25" of lift from them because my winch and bumper setup is towards the low/mid range of the HD application, maybe around 140 lbs. Still, I rely on my strut spacers for lift, and the springs for handling, and they don't disappoint.

Stalled is the right word, but not forgotten. The collaboration between @TowndawgR50 and I is still underway, and I think once we've gotten off the ground, then we'll be exploring bumper and skid options. For now, we've tabled the bumper brackets, though. Next step in that regard is expanding my plasma table to get some larger stuff going. I'm really hoping we get there soon! Too true!

You could, but you wouldn't want to. Water drainage is one thing, but you'll also collect dirt and such. Best bet is to avoid the shocks with metal covers if planning to invert, or plan on swapping the bushings.

Might want to check the continuity of the switch that’s on the shifter, on the solenoid circuit. I had intermittent issues with my shifter a while ago. The previous owner bypassed it by wedging a short piece of hose in the shifter release. I didn’t like that, but found out the real issue was that switch. Cost me a maybe a buck from Digikey, before shipping, but was an exact fit. Soldered it in, no problems since.

What RainGoat said. They can be had for pretty cheap, but replicating would be a pretty tall task anyway. However, if we get around to producing some bumpers, we'll definitely be exploring carrier options.

Something that @Astrorami noticed is that the newer carrier is also aluminum, instead of steel on the older ones. It's also slightly different than the Terrano version, which was a little shorter and didn't center the tire on the liftgate.

I'm not a fan of how narrow the upper rails are either...it looks like like a mohawk at times, but I've always loved the look of the rails from the side, which is one reason I've been hesitant to go higher than the rails. Basically, whatever rack I'd make would be flat vs. the slight arc on the rails. The reason I like the wider approach is because it provides an overhang for under-mounting light brackets, hooking tie-downs to it, having a few extra square feet, and not having to lean against the truck to bring stuff up and down from it. I want the over-rail mount because the space between rack and roof might be usable for other storage (flat water containers, folding table, etc.). All those reasons are what keep me on the bubble.

I guess we're due for an update, right @TowndawgR50? Things are moving along! Albeit, a little slower than we anticipated perhaps, but we're still at it. SFD designs and costs have been our primary focus, but we've not limited ourselves to discussions about other great ideas. We're making some initial hardware and material purchases over the next few days, as we're both anxious to get some prototypes made now that designs and numbers on paper (er, digital paper). We've given a significant amount of thought to the strut spacers in particular; I was tweaking the CADs for them tonight, actually. They're definitely a departure from what many are expecting. Behind the scenes, we've been in contact with several members who've expressed interest in kits already, and we're stoked about that and absolutely appreciate the support! We've also added a new tool to our arsenal (it arrived today actually!): a finger brake press. This will allow us to put some structural bends into plate, which opens the doors to a few additional design and product options. Lastly, we've been mulling over a company name since the end of December, but one particular name has grown on us and we've been informally using it. Can't share it yet, but I can tell you it's not HawDawgs.

Same boat here. I even just took measurements of the roof and rack over the weekend. Going above the rack frees up useful area by going wider, but with some other trade-offs. I'd suggest doing a Google image search for "DepHep racks". Personally one of my favorites. I did a recessed rack the other year (thread here) and that's the mounting style I'll likely stick with. I'm leaning towards a recessed rack again, but this time steel, full-length, and with integrated crossbars so that I can still haul longer items when needed. I've got some other features I'd like for it, in particular useful tie-down points, accessory mounts, camp lighting, and large slot for a folding table (this would require raising the rack surface and sliding a table between the rack and roof from above the liftgate).

Well, good point!

I think we need to start a SW chapter to rival the PNW chapter that's been growing steadily.

Thanks, guys. I'll give it another look eventually. I was kind of hoping the guy would just cave in and sell it for scrap (I'm not entirely convinced keeping it alive is justifiable), but the same could probably be said of the vehicles I keep. I'd absolutely hate to pull the covers off again to double check the timing. From the sound of it, the guy who did the previous work was very experienced, but also in his 70's I'm told. He probably just gave up. At the same time, it's not clear to me what prompted changing the belt in the first place. My neighbor isn't the preventive maintenance type (at all), and from what he says, prior to this issue, the van ran fine. I've got the previous timing belt and it looks fine to me, too. But yeah, it was a pain to work on. I'll see what I can try for the MAF or other intake/sensor items...anything to avoid pulling those covers. The fact that the engine almost instantly bogs down when I barely touch the TB cam just has me thinking it's intake related, but I'm still baffled why a code hasn't been tossed yet...but that alone might suggest a timing issue if all sensors register okay?

Chatted with my neighbor today. Confirmed that the last guy who worked on it pull the front cat and exhaust off to replace the rear cat, and he confirmed the system was still free flowing. Started it up today with similar symptoms as before, except the 2nd start today it idled closer to 700rpm. Same smoke, but I suspect it may just be heating up some oil/dirt build-up. An obvious hazard either way. Still no codes, though. Did notice that the temp gauge didn't budge and the radiator and hoses stayed cold. The slightest touch of the throttle body cam immediately bogged the engine initially, but I did get to one point where revved a tiny amount. The engine eventually stalled out right as I was about to try the throttle again. Still hoping someone's come across this issue before.