Why does Toyota say the frame is the WRONG spot to put jack stands in the rear?

[theesotericone]

Maybe I'm becoming jaded by all the unhelpful and patently obvious comments, but, I must respond to your "death" diatribe above.


That's you just making stuff up

Not making anything up. I'm still alive. It's a fact.

As far as you being jaded that's your issue. If you really want the answer to your question point your effort to getting it from Toyota.

 

[foo]

Not making anything up. I'm still alive. It's a fact.

While I enjoyed your trite remark stating that you survived placing your jack stands in the exact place Toyota clearly says not to, I only ask that you (or someone like you) snap a photo with measurements of the size of your jack stand head and the proximity to the fuel tank.

As far as you being jaded that's your issue. If you really want the answer to your question point your effort to getting it from Toyota.

I searched for the reasons BEFORE I posted, and I didn't find them in the record.

What we need is academic rigor here.

1. A description by Toyota why they say not to do what you do
2. A diagram by Toyota showing where to place rear jack stands on the frame
3. A photo with measurements to the fuel tank showing a conventional 6-ton jack stand in the conventional position

 

[IBallEngineer]

What we need is academic rigor here.

1. A description by Toyota why they say not to do what you do
2. A diagram by Toyota showing where to place rear jack stands on the frame
3. A photo with measurements to the fuel tank showing a conventional jack stand in the conventional position

The first answer is easy, CYA, attorney speak. The bottom line here mr. Foo is this is not a forum for what you are looking for. Academic rigor is for academia, not for the real world of working on cars. I'm sorry you feel compelled to elicit college prep responses to your banal diatribes. I have 37 years experience working on cars and NEVER once consulted a manual about, or questioned the reasoning for something as elementary as where to place jack stands. But as you say, your post was not asking what I do, but rather WHY, a manufacturer recommends what they do. So here is my attempt to answer THAT.

The diagram you posts does NOT say you can not support the vehicle from the frame, in fact it specifically shows lifting the vehicle from the frame when using a two post swing arm lift. Of course it DOES say you should place the jack stands under the axle. Which as many have stated here is simply a much more stable way of supporting the vehicle. It does not mean the alternative of the frame is prohibited, or even unstable. But as you have clearly noted, the rear suspension design creates a more forward position that works for jackstands, then most vehicles with full perimeter frames. My hypothesis is some lawyer reviewing manuals decided, it was potentially a hazard if the stands were inadvertently placed TOO far forward, so in order to COVER their a$$es they stated what they did.

Please, oh please do not respond to this. Please.

 

[csp]

Oh foo, you are so full of yourself that you can't even see past it. It's actually comical now to see how much of a diatribe you'll write, picking posts apart sentence by sentence to attempt to show us how much of an "academic" you are. lol

The guy who hadn't a clue what a lower control arm is calling others ignorant as to the engineering involved in Toyota recommending jackstand placement under the rear axle. That recommendation of the axle is not in and of itself an exclusion of using the frame.

Edit:
The below diagram is for those situations when using a two post lift. The lift pads are under the frame rail. How are you going to put jack stands (safety stands in the diagram) under the same position that the lift arms (swing arm type lift in the diagram) are already located under when it's four feet in the air? This isn't applicable to Joe Blow working in his two car garage with a floor jack, 6ton (or whatever ton) jackstands, and a creeper. You've misconstrued the meaning of the diagram and we're three pages into this silly thread as a result of your lack of automotive experience, yet others are labeled as ignorant.

This is as close of a picture as I can find showing the lift arm locations and safety stands relative to use with a two post lift. This is what's applicable to that which you're asking about.

 

[foo]

Oh foo, you are so full of yourself that you can't even see past it. It's actually comical now to see how much of a diatribe you'll write, picking posts apart sentence by sentence to attempt to show us how much of an "academic" you are. lol

What's comical is your consistent trolling, adding absolutely zero value in every post.
If you simply DELETE all your posts in this thread, that would ADD VALUE.
Think about that.

If you simply delete all your utterly useless drivel, I will delete my attempts at asking you to just go away to pollute some other thread.

The engineering? IT DOESN'T MATTER!!!

Your posts prove that you have no engineering ability whatsoever, so you don't really need to blatantly and repeatedly underscore your complete lack of engineering rigor.

It just embarrasses you further.

Again, you're just wasting everyone's time with your incessant trolling.

If you simply delete all your utterly useless drivel, I will delete my attempts at asking you to just go away to pollute some other thread.

 

[csp]

Look at the edits in my last post foo. You're making an ass of yourself assuming I care what you think of my replies.

Your posts prove that you have no engineering ability whatsoever, so you don't really need to blatantly and repeatedly underscore your complete lack of engineering rigor.

I hate to break it to you, but this is common sense, not engineering. It's obvious to the rest of us.

 

[foo]

Edit:
The below diagram is for those situations when using a two post lift. The lift pads are under the frame rail. How are you going to put jack stands (safety stands in the diagram) under the same position that the lift arms (swing arm type lift in the diagram) are already located under when it's four feet in the air? This isn't applicable to Joe Blow working in his two car garage with a floor jack, 6ton (or whatever ton) jackstands, and a creeper. You've misconstrued the meaning of the diagram and we're three pages into this silly thread as a result of your lack of automotive experience, yet others are labeled as ignorant.

This is as close of a picture as I can find showing the lift arm locations and safety stands relative to use with a two post lift. This is what's applicable to that which you're asking about.

I see you've edited your post which I replied to after I made my reply, where you have made a sincere attempt to add on-topic value, which is appreciated, by all, I'm sure.

It seems (so I'm asking you to confirm) that you are interpreting the FSM diagram DIFFERENTLY than all the people did in all the threads that I researched, and differently from how I interpret the diagram.

Your interpretation seems to simultaneously include BOTH the jack stands and the lift arms.

My interpretation (and that of the people in the aforementioned reference threads) seems to be an EITHER/OR assumption.

In fact, if you look at the obviously crosshatched pattern of the front frame rail location, that supports the either/or interpretation, does it not?

So it is appreciated that you are attempting to answer the question, and, you certainly bring up a great point - which is that we may be interpreting the FSM diagram differently.

 

[foo]

Look at the edits in my last post foo. You're making an ass of yourself assuming I care what you think of my replies.

I was courteously responding to the technical details in your post.

It seems you are interpreting the FSM diagram differently than most people were (in the threads that I referenced).

Certainly it's impossible to interpret the diagram the way you are if you look at the details inherent in the crosshatched front placement location.

How do you reconcile that inconsistency with your interpretation of the FSM intent?

 

[Tyler James Inc]

Frankly, I'm mystified that this thread even exists. Put the jackstands on the frame rails (or under the axle if that suits whatever purpose you have) and be done with it. The OP is making waay too much of the factory "recommendation".

I wanted to say this in my original post, but wanted to encourage someone safely working on their rig.
I think I regret that decision.

 

[foo]

I wanted to say this in my original post, but wanted to encourage someone safely working on their rig.
I think I regret that decision.

I'm not sure what value you're adding by saying that since it's clear that Toyota does not recommend the location that you use.

Since that is a fact, the only question is why.

It seems that in a later edit, csp has provided a novel interpretation of the FSM, so, if his unique simultaneous-safetystand-and-lift-arm interpretation holds water, then we have to rethink the Toyota recommendations.

However, I'm waiting for him to respond to the inconsistency his interpretation causes, which is that, in either diagram, a lift arm in the forward-most position naturally precludes his interpretation of the FSM intent for two front jack stands (unless we replace them with only a single jack stand to the underside of the engine crossmember).

On the second diagram only, a lift arm in the penultimate position on the front frame doesn't preclude two jackstands in the forward most position, but then we'd have to entertain the thought that the first diagram is wrong (or that it employs vastly different assumptions than those that csp intimates).

I'm waiting for csp's response, since his interpretation seems different than mine and different from those of the people in the threads where the diagram came from.

His interpretation is valid if it's valid. I have no qualms with that, if it turns out to be the case.
In fact, given his novel interpretation, if it holds water, it could be a solution to the conundrum.

Which interpretation do you use for the FSM diagram?

1. The diagram is intended to depict simultaneous use of lift arms and jackstands, or,
2. The diagram is intended to depict an either/or use of lift arms or jackstands

 

[csp]

I didn't look at all of the threads you speak of foo. I don't care enough to look at them or feel the need.

Those FSMs are written first and foremost for the professional mechanics servicing Toyotas. They use two post lifts for such work and any two post lift work should also include the use of safety stands. That's why you see both separately annotated in the single diagram. This is where common sense and automobile experience plays into understanding. I have no idea what the experience is of those "most" people you're referencing.

And yes, a single safety stand under the front crossmember is used since the front lift arms are in position under the frame rails.

If you seek an absolute answer to what the correct interpretation should be, someone already mentioned that your efforts should be directed at asking Toyota.

In the end it still doesn't matter. Just because Toyota does or doesn't recommend a certain position for jackstands or specifiy whether it's on a lift or sitting on Joe Blow's concrete floor does not exclude one from using their own brain and putting jackstands in a place that's safe. That seems to be the point you're missing.

BTW, there's very little courtesy in your replies. You don't assume to know and then insult other people's intelligence and call it courtesy. That's like beating a woman and then telling her afterwards that you didn't mean to.

 

[amalik]

The internet is great. Just look at this thread, for example. A bunch of people arguing about what a vehicle manual from 20 years ago says.

 

[afg10000]

...well - this escalated quickly.
Don't think I've ever seen something on this forum get this far -:snacker::snacker:

 

[Road Bull]

Guys, guys, GUYS!

OK, I talked to my good friend Scooter. I put this question to him about "wrong jack stand points". He said that it's all good and just use something that doesn't move a lot and make sure that it's not too windy.

Now... Everyone take a few deep breaths, relax and be thankful that interwebs disagreements are your biggest issues you are facing today.

Happy New Year All!

 

[AntleredRuin]

So no one else has mentioned this yet;
The FSM is full of contradictory info; torque specs, nut/bolt sizes, etc. It would be neat (not to mention a hell of a lot more useful) if it were perfectly accurate, but it's not unfortunately.
If people were to follow the FSM to a 'T' and not make some basic common sense 'think for yourself' decisions then everyone who used the FSM would have stripped and over-torqued and broken nuts and bolts all over their 4runner and these things wouldn't last half as long as they do.

I think you may be correct with Toyota saying not to use the frame in the rear as it won't fit there 'safely' without damage to the gas tank skid. I think that it later mentions TO use the frame simply because the FSM had no real 'fact checker' or 'editor'.
Someone simply thought, "It's a BOF; lift it with the frame", and that was it. They did not read the section they didn't write and had no idea that it was contradictory.
I really think it's as simple as that.

Clearly no one is positive of the answer, and it's improbable that anyone alive is fully sure (even the techs at Toyota). These are 20 yo trucks, and the FSM is just as old. If it is just a grammatical error, the people who wrote it are probably already retired, and wouldn't recall anything, if they were ever even aware of the mistake in the first place.

I think this was a pertinent question, especially in case of some kind of 'God forbid' scenario, and I'll always encourage working safely, but this thread has been way off base for the past 2 pages. Nothing but internet trolling which is what the 'Off-Topic' section is for.

Also, not trying to threaten, and I'm not a mod, so I have no power whatsoever, but often when I see arguments like this take place in a non-'Off-Topic' thread, those members get banned/suspended pretty soon after.
FYI.

 

[1engineer]

Proving your infantile immaturity with your every post is not helpful in that it adds zero on-topic value to this thread, and, in fact, wastes everyone's time.



Toyota clearly says in the FSM diagrams shown in the OP that the rear rail is not a safe position to place the jack stands.
I came to the same conclusion, intuitively, just looking at the geometry involved with the proximity to the fuel tank.

I am simply asking an adult question - and all I ask in return are adult responses that don't waste everyone's time.

Can you do that for us?


Sean - look in the mirror.
I'm not the least hostile - however - I don't have time nor energy for your callow comments - and worse - you're just wasting everyone else's time by your naivete

It's fine that you don't know the answer to the question.
It's even fine that in your ignorant bliss, you never once considered why Toyota explicitly doesn't recommend the spot you've chosen to support your vehicle.

What's not fine are your puerile comments, to which I merely responded that they were not in the least helpful, and which waste everyone's time.


Given your girlishly immature emotional response above, I see you completely misunderstood my response to you which clearly stated that your prior comments were unhelpful.

You can't even seem to understand the least amount of detail, since nobody here ever complained of what you just complained about with respect to complaints about Toyota. In fact, that you even consider such a preposterously childish emotion simply states how your mind works - but not that of anyone who is mature here.

Maybe you should look in the mirror and just stop posting your unfledged unhelpful childish comments; they merely waste our time and add no value to the thread.


Your use of the word "dude" is a childishly condescending approach that I suspect you employ all the time when you are frustrated by facts, but your demeanor is completely out of place in an adult technical forum such as this one is.


You have already made everyone here completely aware of your blissful ignorance of why Toyota explicitly can't recommend using the frame near the fuel tank for common jack stands situated in the conventional crosswise configuration.

To repeat yourself is merely accentuating your ignorance - and - more importantly, assiduously repeating that you're completely uninformed is not helpful to further our combined tribal knowledge.


That's fine.

Nobody here ever questioned your lack of knowledge.

But the fact that you constantly stress that you are ignorant in such engineering matters isn't helping us to further our knowledge.


Oddly, you seem to take the simple question of why Toyota does not recommend the frame rail next to the fuel tank as a personal affront.

You were the one who made the unhelpful and wasteful comments, to which I merely pointed out that your comments were unhelpful.

Your ignorance is obvious but your repeated childish taunts simply describe how your thought process, not mine.

I am simply asking an engineering question of why Toyota clearly states not to use the frame rail as a jackstand mount point.



Thank you for being mature in that this is simply a question, which has never been asked before on this forum (to my knowledge), of why Toyota clearly states in the FSM not to use the rear frame rail as a safety stand mount point.


You have to understand that I'm familiar with such trolls.

These trolls not only deprecate the intent of the thread, but they do exactly what they deprecate, which is waste everyone's time. I am simply pointing that out to them.

You can't always stop these trolls from ruining a thread & wasting everyone's time.
But sometimes you can.

If it was a thread where I didn't care to come to a mature engineering conclusion, I would simply follow the age-old maxim to not feed the trolls. Normally they'll also drop you to their level, but I don't think that's possible here as they repeatedly state they are ignorant, so, all I need to do is call out the fact that they're wasting everyone's time in the hopes that they'll just go away.



I have stated the following, which is a mature thing to do:

1. I considered the rear frame mount point
2. I discarded that location because it's inherently dangerous (IMHO)
3. I researched all the threads on the topic of rear safety stand location
4. I would now use the axle for all but suspension work'

What I found in my research was that:

• Toyota CLEARLY does not recommend the rear frame rail next to the fuel tank
• Most people seem to have never considered the problem in any detail
• So all I'm doing is asking a simple question of WHY Toyota says not to use the rear frame rail.

All I am doing is asking a simple question, which could be answered with a Toyota TSB or training manual, or even a reference in the FSM that shows WHERE Toyota suggests the rear rail be supported with jack stands placed in the conventional position crosswise on the frame rail.



Your constant sophomoric comments such as that patently ridiculous rant above merely reaffirm that your lack of maturity makes you utterly incapable of reasoning in an adult conversation. You just make this stuff up.

This thread is only asking for engineering details on Toyota's reasoning for clearly recommending people do NOT use the rear frame rails for jackstand locations.

Why that valid engineering question upsets you so much that you rant incessantly about the question being asked is a problem that you probably need professional help on.



After you having wasted everyone's time, I commend you on your first potentially mature contribution to the topic of this thread.

I'm not sure what you are talking about with "this rolling thing". I presume you are either talking about placing the jackstands in the conventional position under the rear LCA bushing bracket, or, perhaps you are discussing putting the jackstands in the unconventional (aka parallel) position under the rear frame (next to the fuel tank).

Which of those two configurations are you talking about in that last sentence of yours?

@foo geez. Thread closed.

-mod-

 

[ChildrenOfBodom]

mom is back with an alter ego

foo is shockingly reminiscent of mom

Let's see...

• Both using gmail email accounts.
• IP addresses both have multiple geological matches to the Los Gatos, Cupertino, and Palo Alto areas in the Northern CA bay area, before relocation to the Kirkland area in Washington. Mom's location - Cupertino.
• Posts are long, as are the titles.
• Shockingly similar posting methods, including bolding, pics from FSM, excessive pic posting, only posts in threads created by them, mental density, etc.
• Foo clearly goes out of their way to use photos from other rigs and avoid all exterior photos of their vehicle
• Multiple threads posted across multiple forums, sometimes identical posts, another trait of "mom" - A trait which mom received infractions for.
• Many threads about alignment which is an issue both users have apparently had a problem with.

Let's compare vehicles, shall we?

• mom: 1997 Toyota 4Runner, base 2WD 4cylinder 2.7L 3RZ, 5 speed, P235/75R15 6-spoke OEM wheels, 150K miles
• foo: USA 97 4Runner 2WD manual 150K miles 2.7L 3RZFE

Some oddly specific similarity here. How about quotes on the profile?

• mom: "I love to help others being part of a team."
• foo: "I wish I knew what you know about the 4-runner; since everyone knows more than I do, I try to team up with you to not only fix the problem better than OEM (if possible), but also to make it easier for the NEXT person to pick up where we left off. The goal is to solve each problem with a one-stop-shopping thread, that everyone improves, so that everyone benefits from the combined team effort."

Bullshit - the offending post in this thread, the reason I was led here, directly contradicts this.

Let's compare content of photographs:




Tires:
mom: Hankook Optimo P235/75R15 on stock 6 spoke steelies

foo: Hankook Optimo P235/75R15 on stock 6 spoke steelies

I've seen enough... these rules have been broken by foo just by a quick review of his posts:

2. No Personal Attacks

6. No excessive pic posting

7. No Multiple Registrations

8. No multiple postings




This is not acceptable. The main thing that accentuates ignorance is your behavior. There's no room for obsessively anal retentive PATHOLOGICAL LIARS like you.


It's been a long time coming. You are officially and permanently banned from Toyota-4Runner.org

- COB