11-09-2017, 05:35 PM
|
#16
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: YouTah
Age: 55
Posts: 3,337
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: YouTah
Age: 55
Posts: 3,337
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by e60ral
wouldn't putting the fairlead higher give a bad angle on the fairlead? i thought it was low because of the winch location and the winch location was low because that's where it fits. if you want to raise the fairlead you need a bumper that sticks out more, not a hidden design.
|
I was surmising more about the angle of the fairlead as opposed to the actual height, so my bad for not clarifying. Yes, you're totally spot on, the fairlead should definitely be at the same height as the major force of the pull.
My hidden sits on top of and bolts to the alu bumper and crush pads, I haven't bothered to look at the 14+, I assume they replace the aluminum with a direct mount tray? Hence, coming out of the lower bumper cover valence instead of the grill.
__________________
2013 TE w/ KDSS Nav
=-> Get yer Custom "Trail" Edition Emblem/Badge 3d Print here! or maybe you just want to go "Pro"
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
11-09-2017, 09:23 PM
|
#17
|
|
Elite Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Utah
Posts: 5,019
|
|
Elite Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Utah
Posts: 5,019
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by e60ral
wouldn't putting the fairlead higher give a bad angle on the fairlead? i thought it was low because of the winch location and the winch location was low because that's where it fits. if you want to raise the fairlead you need a bumper that sticks out more, not a hidden design.
|
The winch could be in exactly the same space. Just face mounted or upside down. That would position the fairlead correctly at a higher spot. But you'd have to clock the control pack/motor to the correct position then. And that's not easy bolt in.
On mine - it was fine mounted normally with plenty of space mounted upright and the fairlead is flat in the center of the bumper. The problem is largely that they all want to, or need to? fit a Zeon in there without remote mounting the control pack. That means it's gotta sit way low in the bumper.
It's not a deal breaker by any means. Just something I've noticed that could be improved a bit. There are a dozen other reasons that the partial bumper would have been a better fit for what I do. But I went down the road of hidden winch mount already.
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
11-10-2017, 12:26 AM
|
#18
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Lewisville, NC
Posts: 127
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Lewisville, NC
Posts: 127
|
Looks like it's a total replacement for the front piece so no cutting. Just remove and install...
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
11-10-2017, 12:45 AM
|
#19
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Lewisville, NC
Posts: 127
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Lewisville, NC
Posts: 127
|
Looked back at the front. Thought the front piece were separate. Thanks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icantdrive55
the area these sit require cutting on all models. All models have a solid urethane bumper through that entire area, the Trail/TRDOR/TRDP all have material behind the valance pieces
|
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
11-11-2017, 06:37 AM
|
#20
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Stuart
Posts: 238
|
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Stuart
Posts: 238
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiz45
|
Ive looked on their site and can't find any reference to the airbag. Can anyone confirm this.
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
11-11-2017, 09:01 PM
|
#21
|
|
Elite Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Utah
Posts: 5,019
|
|
Elite Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Utah
Posts: 5,019
|
There are no airbag sensors up there. So IMO every bumper is airbag compatible. Other countries have more specific rules like having to actually crash test them to get the approval sticker.
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
11-11-2017, 09:56 PM
|
#22
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: La Quinta
Posts: 954
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: La Quinta
Posts: 954
|
Pricing!?
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
11-11-2017, 11:05 PM
|
#23
|
Junior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Daytona, FL
Posts: 17
Real Name: Ryan
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Daytona, FL
Posts: 17
Real Name: Ryan
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 83Mule
Pricing!?
|
Curious as well. Toyota needs some love from companies that don't have months-long lead time.
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
11-12-2017, 08:28 AM
|
#24
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: GA
Posts: 195
|
|
Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: GA
Posts: 195
|
I like it, wonder if it will be available without the goofy 2" tube.
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
11-12-2017, 11:52 AM
|
#25
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,709
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,709
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetboy
There are no airbag sensors up there. So IMO every bumper is airbag compatible. Other countries have more specific rules like having to actually crash test them to get the approval sticker.
|
Its not where the sensors are, its about energy absorption. ARB designs and tests for this, others do not due to the cost.
Sent from my P00A using Tapatalk
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
11-12-2017, 08:22 PM
|
#26
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: West rural Louisiana
Age: 65
Posts: 2,458
Real Name: CJ
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: West rural Louisiana
Age: 65
Posts: 2,458
Real Name: CJ
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuB
So why couldn't this (or the other XYZ brands) work on the '10 - '13s? I'm assuming there are necessary modifications to the giant plastic "bumper skin" on either. Is the width of the "grill opening" so to speak different? I'm assuming the frame, and it's mount points are the same. Or is there a structural change behind the updated facade I'm not aware of? I've got a '10 Trail that is about to become an extra vehicle, and I'm putting a build plan together.
|
The best I can gather is there are subtle differences between the 3 lower nose covers (SR5, Limited, Trail) so a one size fits all wouldn't look correct except on one of them. The only prototype that was ever made was for a 2012 Trail IIRC. SSO found out about the differences during that build and since they have had several other more promising projects come up, that one has been put on the back burner.
__________________
2014 Trail Edition -
Build Thread
2015 Epic in my own mind trip
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
11-12-2017, 08:44 PM
|
#27
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: West rural Louisiana
Age: 65
Posts: 2,458
Real Name: CJ
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: West rural Louisiana
Age: 65
Posts: 2,458
Real Name: CJ
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetboy
The more pressing question for me: Why doesn't anyone design them to put the fairlead up higher? Most of these put it in a low spot where it's easy to damage the winch rope by pinching on a rock. I know most people don't use the winch ever anyway - but some do. I've beat the piss out of my front bumper. And it should be easy enough if you're creative with the design to simply build it so the winch mounts upside down in the exact same physical space, but then and the fairlead is about 4 inches higher and will fit on the flat face rather than cut into the lower face. That's how I'd design one.
|
The best answer I can give for this is the winch mounting plate is across the same axis as the frame horns and where the original bumper was located. Keeping the winch directly between the 2 frame hard points prevents undo torsional stress on those mounting points that a higher mounted winch might cause. The larger full size bumpers may have additional bracing to support the higher profile, allowing for a higher winch location. The lo-pro's are pretty much stuck with only the frame horns where the original bumper was mounted. At least that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Believe me I have the same concern as you ref damaging the rope. I have in fact stuffed mud into that fairlead more than once. But it is an acceptable trade off for me who wanted to keep the original nose profile as much as possible.
__________________
2014 Trail Edition -
Build Thread
2015 Epic in my own mind trip
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
12-22-2017, 11:31 AM
|
#28
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Fort Meade, MD
Posts: 244
|
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Fort Meade, MD
Posts: 244
|
__________________
2015 Trail Premium Super White
2018 TRD PRO Super White
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
12-22-2017, 11:56 AM
|
#29
|
|
Elite Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Utah
Posts: 5,019
|
|
Elite Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Utah
Posts: 5,019
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by e60ral
Its not where the sensors are, its about energy absorption. ARB designs and tests for this, others do not due to the cost.
Sent from my P00A using Tapatalk
|
Then why call it airbag compatible? It no relationship with the airbags.
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
12-22-2017, 12:06 PM
|
#30
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,709
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,709
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetboy
Then why call it airbag compatible? It no relationship with the airbags.
|
it's related to the airbag because when you have no energy absorption it makes the impact harder (higher g-force)
here is a good explanation:
https://www.arb.com.au/ask-arb-air-bag-compatibility/
Quote:
[...]
The air bag triggering system is designed to work in harmony with the frontal crush characteristics of a vehicle. These frontal crush characteristics include the design of the bumper assembly, its mounting system, and other components of the vehicle.
On 4×4 vehicles with independent ladder chassis, the manufacturers often also add ‘sacrificial crush sections’ to the front of the chassis members to ensure that minor impacts (such as hitting a kangaroo) are not read by air bag sensors as major impacts, prematurely deploying the air bag(s).
Such premature triggering of the air bag is potentially quite dangerous, and may in fact cause a more severe accident or an injury that would otherwise have not occurred. Likewise, an air bag deploying later than intended by the
manufacturer could also be dangerous.
[...]
|
Quote:
[...]
Monash University’s Department of Engineering was contracted by ARB on this project for some years, and their expertise and testing facilities have been used to evaluate, test and approve ARB bars for air bag vehicles.
The essential design criteria ARB uses to ensure compatibility, is to evaluate the standard vehicle’s frontal crush characteristics, and where necessary to duplicate these characteristics as part of the design of the bar and its mounting system. This results in a design which when correctly installed, ensures that there is no change made to the way the vehicle behaves in a collision, and hence there is no change made to the way the air bags deploy.
[...]
|
Last edited by e60ral; 12-22-2017 at 12:11 PM.
|
|
Reply With Quote
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|