Rear Bumper design Poll

[AddictedOffroad]

Okay, I am curious about your opinions on our rear bumper design.

We are trying to decide if releasing a standard non-carrier bumper is worth it. Because, if we do its going to eliminate the use of carrying the spare in the stock location. The issue we have is that the stock tire carrier looks AWFUL under the bumper. The original hitch design was so low that it helped hide the tire. However, In order to build a high clearance rear bumper, then the tire is going to hang below the bumper by around 5-6". Making it be the one thing that you will land on constantly when wheeling.

So, the options are
#1: I want a bumper that will retain the stock carrier.

#2: I want a bumper that will look and function better and don't care if my stock spare is re-used.

#3: I want a bumper that has a tire carrier on it.

#4: I want the option of adding the tire carrier to the bumper later, even if it requires fabrication on the buyer's part later.

So, what do you guys want?

 

[IdahoAngler]

#2 for me, but I carry my spare up top.

I like the AO rear bumper, but I would not be interested if it had a tire carrier.

 

[awdjunkies]

I voted for #3. I think eventually if we are going to lift it/take it off road, we'll definitely need a place to carry that spare. So yeah, do it right the first time around. :hatsoff:

 

[Hepar]

I've always leaned towards modular systems in most things I do, so I would vote #4.

 

[AddictedOffroad]

So, this is a similar design to what we had in mind:

 

[BigRogers]

WOW.....That looks perfect man! Love how tight it rides to rest of the truck. and not to bulky/over built! GOOD WORK!

 

[Hepar]

I think that looks awesome! However, I would prefer the wheel to be set off to the passenger side for visibility. Plus, it might help us out with our driver's side lean.

 

[AddictedOffroad]

I think that looks awesome! However, I would prefer the wheel to be set off to the passenger side for visibility. Plus, it might help us out with our driver's side lean.

Setting to the pass side would actually hurt visibility. Setting it to the driver's side would help, but puts way too much leverage on the spindle, which I won't do. It also keeps it from blocking the brake light on that side.

Also keep in mind that the tire pictured is a 37" tire. Not exactly the "Norm" for 99% of 4runners. So, it blocks a lot more than a 285 would.

 

[Carcrafter22]

Really liking the bumper in the pic! I've been looking for one to go with my new front bumper when it gets in and that one looks the best so far. Only change I'd like to see is provision for a fuel can on the passenger side near the spindle, could you fit one there with say a 33" tire? (seems to be a very popular size for 4 runners)

 

[AddictedOffroad]

Here are some better shots. We will be changing the center section and angling it for better departure angle and eliminating the tubes on the back. However, the tubes on the side will be the same along with the dimpled filler plate. This should be a bolt on version.

 

[Martinjmpr]

I know I'm in the minority...

But I voted #1.

Here's why:

I'm not a rock crawler, I'm more into overland-type travel (i.e. long distances and mild trails with a slightly modified vehicle.) I am running 265/75/16s and my spare is a 265/70, which is perfectly adequate and fits in the stock location just fine.

What I do need, though, is storage for fuel and water, which is why I am probably going to have something like what Tim (SOAZ) had built. He explains his build here:

SOAZ: 9/1/09 - 10/1/09

You have to scroll way down past the trip report but it shows his rear rack build. Pretty nice and it incorporates a drop-down metal tabletop, too, which is great for camping out.

Here's a photo for those who don't want to click on the link:

Note that the factory spare is retained and it even includes a 2" receiver (which I would also need as I have a small utility trailer I sometimes use to transport my motorcycle.)

Not in the market for a new bumper right now, I have a few other things on my list but probably by mid-2012 I'll be looking around the Denver area for a fabricator who can come up with something like this.

Scott: I know most people who get a new bumper probably want the spare tire but there are at least a few of us who would rather have a swing-out like this one. Don't know if it would be possible for you to offer this as an option but it would be nice.

 

[Hepar]

Setting to the pass side would actually hurt visibility. Setting it to the driver's side would help, but puts way too much leverage on the spindle, which I won't do. It also keeps it from blocking the brake light on that side.

Also keep in mind that the tire pictured is a 37" tire. Not exactly the "Norm" for 99% of 4runners. So, it blocks a lot more than a 285 would.

37"? Dang. That is a good point. My 265 would look like a lowrider wheel compared to that. I still vote for 4. I'm also not a crawler, so the need to have the spare in the back is not a huge deal, but having the option to have it down the road would definitely be a selling point for me.

I'd also be curious to see it on a color that isn't black. Like on a white or silver.

 

[cj80cruiser]

Scotty, that tire carrier looks really nice. I love the design...would go well with a plate or tube front bumper.

 

[IdahoAngler]

If I recall, didn't your original rear bumper have dual rounded tubes vs. this new design with a rounded tube on top and a square (plate-like) bottom? Why the change in design?

I think I prefer the dual-tube look, but that's just me.

 

[Dagobah]

I want a bumper that doesn't toss affordability out the window when you add a tire carrier...
(the tire carrier is the main reason why I want a rear bumper)

 

[AddictedOffroad]

I want a bumper that doesn't toss affordability out the window when you add a tire carrier...
(the tire carrier is the main reason why I want a rear bumper)

Its extremely hard to do that. The easiest response to this is that "you can't have your cake and eat it too".

Let me explain. A tire carrier requires the entire setup to be built to the point of overkill. I, as a company, will over build everything since its my name on it, and my liability at risk. So, I would only use the strongest setup for the steel, spindle, and latching mechanism. Unfortunately, cheap and quality don't mix. And, therefore, a bumper/carrier like this would be priced based on quality.

I don't want to speculate on pricing, but I would expect it to be priced accordingly with the other setups like this on the market.

One more thing of note just so everyone is aware of this ahead of time. I refuse to build a carrier with fuel cans on it. So, there is absolutely no way I would ever build a carrier to house fuel cans. I don't want the liability of someone strapping a BOMB to the back of their car. If you get rear ended, it can literally explode. I also do not want the extra 45lbs of weight per fuel can hanging off of the spindle. Its not safe, and I will never put my name on it.

If you need more than 18 gallons of fuel, then you need to look into an auxiliary fuel tank. In fact, an auxiliary fuel tank can be installed in place of the stock tire carrier under the back.

 

[AddictedOffroad]

If I recall, didn't your original rear bumper have dual rounded tubes vs. this new design with a rounded tube on top and a square (plate-like) bottom? Why the change in design?

I think I prefer the dual-tube look, but that's just me.

The original bumper used 2x4 square tubing through the center section.

 

[IdahoAngler]

The original bumper used 2x4 square tubing through the center section.

Why the change in design?

 

[AddictedOffroad]

Why the change in design?

Mainly because it appeals to the masses more, and it will help with the design. Don't worry, the aesthetics of the bumper itself will still look very similar. But, the function is what we are trying to improve.

 

[IdahoAngler]

Mainly because it appeals to the masses more, and it will help with the design. Don't worry, the aesthetics of the bumper itself will still look very similar. But, the function is what we are trying to improve.

I like the new one very much...kind of splits the difference between plate/tube.