Don't like the adverts?  Click here to remove them

The fallacy of 'rated' recovery hooks.

Nick Shepherd

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2010
Messages
170
I see on a lot of US and Australian cruiser forums people who insist that all recovery hooks must be 'rated' and that as Toyota don't 'rate' the pigtails it would be akin to suicide to use them for recovery purposes.

Does this strike anyone else as short-sighted and perhaps even foolhardy?

I'll explain. There's nothing wrong with using recovery points that have been tested and given a SWL or WLL by the manufacturer but if you then bolt that hook onto a 20 year old chassis using the captive nuts you have no longer got a rated system, you have a rated hook bolted to who knows what. My gripe is that these guys scoff at the very idea of using a pigtail that has no stamp but do not seem to see anything wrong with using a completely unstamped chassis member or nuts.

Following the logic of someone who insists against all evidence that a rated hook is the only possible safe point of recovery, I could presumably gaffer tape one to my wing mirror and be good to haul away on it.

I don't think I've ever heard of a pigtail or hook being the failure point when a recovery has gone wrong, I have seen video of lots of occasions where the chassis or the fasteners have been the issue. Almost all when the towing vehicle has done a terrible impression of a KERR snatch rescue, parking almost touching the stuck vehicle, unfurling 30m of elastic band and then taking off like a dragster - *TWANGcrash*. Never have I seen a recovery point fail in real life.

Instead of spending a heap on hooks all round I'd suggest buying new fasteners every couple of years instead.

Not much of a point, really but I was interested to hear the thoughts on here.
 
It's always what there bolted to I worry about, especially on rust buckets, I mean land rovers. Several years ago I saw a early 90 towing a boat do an odd maneuver and then hit the barrier, the reason was complete failure of the end of the chassis rail on one side and the rear cross member bending away and jamming one rear tyre :shock:
 
I was always quite happy using the pig tails on my 80 till I got something mounted on the bumper that was just at a more convenient height.
 
I use the Toyota pig tails and I'm very happy with them :D They are no light weight bit of kit you know :| Lets face it Toyota arn't known for their under engineering are they :D I've fitted an extra one on Fiery so I can spread the loads using a bridle :thumbup:

P9090437.jpg


PA010645.jpg

P3250425.jpg


P4070572.jpg


P4070594.jpg
 
Steven, I think the Toyota pig tails that Jon mentions are the "closed loop" ones welded onto a base plate and the base-plate bolts onto the chassis. Perhaps they weren't fitted to 90s?
 
Andrew Prince said:
Steven, I think the Toyota pig tails that Jon mentions are the "closed loop" ones welded onto a base plate and the base-plate bolts onto the chassis. Perhaps they weren't fitted to 90s?
Mine has those as well on both sides :)

P3250425.jpg
 
Don't like the adverts?  Click here to remove them
The ones on the HDJ81 (mine anyway) bolt to the top and bottom of the chassis rail, five bolts per side. I struggle to see how anyone could think a two or even three bolt hook that attaches to one face of the rail is at all safer. There does seem to be a blindness to seeing the system as a whole and an apparent belief that some of the rated strength will be absorbed by the chassis.
 
Here's a pic of the one I am referring to, Steven - a bit beefier than sheet section, which I think is a tie-down bracket rather than intended for towing/recovery.

IMG_2148.jpg
 
Nick, fantastic rant, mate. Nice one :clap: :clap:

With you all the way. :thumbup:

We should have a new area and call it Sunday afternoon rant. Kinda makes you feel better doesn't it?

Chris
 
My chassis went before the recovery point on my 70 did. Previous owner had cut the chassis back so the original captive nuts went with it. I thought I would drill and mount the points on thinking this would be strong anchor point but the chassis proved to be the weak point.

1 double line pull from another vehicle with a snatch block on my recovery point in heavy mud AND my winch onto a tree assisting resulted in this, not even sure how to fix and remedy for the future.

P1020677.jpg


P1020678.jpg


P1020679.jpg
 
That recovery point is quite offset from the mounting point for starters so lots of leverage. Is there a matching recovery point on the other chassis rail and did you use a bridle or just that single recovery point? I'm guessing just that recovery point and between that fact and the offset in the recovery point itself the result is no surprise but at least it didn't rip free.
 
Yes Jon, just the one was used as the other was well and truly buried in the mud at the time. These are off another 70 and mount in the same way (albeit into captive nuts in the chassis hollow).

I think my next plan is to go to my local fabricator and see how much it will be to maybe put a stretcher accross both chassis legs in something substantial and mount points to that, but I may have to live with it for now as I'm out of work.
 
maybe you can do something with your winch mount when funds permit, add some recovery points to that and beef up how it mounts to the chassis a little to account for the forces of a double line pull if the rope was hooking back onto the winch mount. I'm thinking a nice bit of thick plate with an eye on the end along the top of the chassis rail, welded to what I assume is the winch mount (?) on the inside edge and with a couple of bolts into the top of the chassis rail. You'd have the stiffness of the winch mount helping stop any future bending, load would be transferred into two faces of the chassis rail, easier to get at being higher up and minimal tidying of the distorted rail needed?
 
While we are on the subject of recovery points, what's the opinion on these;

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Swivel-recove ... 2c5b45ed86

I've got a pair of these mounted into my 5mm thick (could be 6mm :confusion-confused:) TJM winch bumper, with the holes cut in line with the chassis rails so hopefully the forces will be transmitted to them, they've not needed using yet, so I hope they are not going to 'pop' out when they are used :pray: with a bridle of course.
 
I've got a pair of those- tey are fitted to the rear behind a spreader plate, then the chassis, then the rear tyre carrier. That's about 8mm of steel. They were fitted through a 36mm hole (basically the same size hole of the width of the unit). I had to re-turn the circlip space line in order to get the circlip in.

Its difficult to imagine a situation where they might fail

BUT

i still use the properly fitter NATO hitch for snatch recoveries- mainly because i have one, and they are a darn sight stronger than anything else you are likely to see!
 
I see on a lot of US and Australian cruiser forums people who insist that all recovery hooks must be 'rated' and that as Toyota don't 'rate' the pigtails it would be akin to suicide to use them for recovery purposes.

Does this strike anyone else as short-sighted and perhaps even foolhardy?

I'll explain. There's nothing wrong with using recovery points that have been tested and given a SWL or WLL by the manufacturer but if you then bolt that hook onto a 20 year old chassis using the captive nuts you have no longer got a rated system, you have a rated hook bolted to who knows what. My gripe is that these guys scoff at the very idea of using a pigtail that has no stamp but do not seem to see anything wrong with using a completely unstamped chassis member or nuts.

Aside from arguments about the state of anyones chassis, the idea behind not using the loops or hooks provided by the factory is that they are only put there to provide a 'chain down' point for shipping purposes. As such its mainly a static load with the car being winched down to the boat deck etc so it doesn't get thrown about by wave action.
Those points have no rating value whatsoever and the shock loading from a snatch may well see them snap potentially killing people with flying lumps of steel.
Ask you vehicles manufacturer if they even rate it for standard highway towing. Bet they say no.
If they wanted you to use them for towing or snatching, they'd be a lot more substantial - like the tow bar.

The fact that you buy 'rated' recovery points for an unrated chassis is an insurance thing. They won't cover the manufacturer unless his product has been tested.
Use at your own risk but I wouldn't be connecting you to my tug!
 
I agree and disagree with the original OP. You should use rated recovery equipment. The manufacturer mounted points are for towing, not off road recovery, but a rated point is only as strong as what it's mounted to and the whole escapade becomes rather pointless if you then mount it to the front wings, as Top gear proved with their mini with a winch on!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caDuxElh2l0

4:45
 
Last edited:
Back
Top