OFFROADSUBARUS.com

Go Back   OFFROADSUBARUS.com > Offroad and Touring Central > Recovery Gear and Offroad Driving Tips

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #11  
Old 9th June 2017, 02:16 AM
MiddleAgeSubie MiddleAgeSubie is offline
Senior Member
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: AZ
Posts: 590
MiddleAgeSubie is on a distinguished road
Default

The Subaru eye bolt does not have sharp edges.

And 2/3 of 32,000lb, which is what mine are rated for, is still plenty enough anyway.

Also, these are made for use on heavy vehicles, not just for light ones. They vary in capacity just as metal shackles do.
__________________
2013 H6 5EAT OB with SubieLiftOZ kit, 2008 Tribeca
(2006 B9; 1995 Legacy wagon).

Last edited by MiddleAgeSubie; 9th June 2017 at 04:16 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 9th June 2017, 06:15 AM
duncanm's Avatar
duncanm duncanm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Sydney
Posts: 392
duncanm is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MiddleAgeSubie View Post
The Subaru eye bolt does not have sharp edges.

And 2/3 of 32,000lb, which is what mine are rated for, is still plenty enough anyway.

Also, these are made for use on heavy vehicles, not just for light ones. They vary in capacity just as metal shackles do.
yeh - I do get all of that. Sharp edges are easy to inspect/address/protect and damage can be inspected for.. but the published load ratings worry me.

32,000lb isn't really that much. use a minimum 3:1 safety factor and you're now down to 5T SWL. About right.

The other one I linked to above has a breaking strength of 9T -- so only 3T or less SWL with a decent safety factor - and that's brand new.

You're right in that you don't have a real concern for Subarus - given their relatively light weight, and I would have little concern using shackles I made myself with regular inspection; if you have any worry, then just up-size to 8mm dyneema.

My real concern is with the somewhat misleading published breaking loads (and therefore SWL) when used with inappropriately radiused recovery points. It just isn't mentioned on any of the manufacturers' websites. That seems like a very large oversight.

Inspection is a problem too. Its easy to check for chafe - as that's on the outside. If you have a chafe cover, then you can't see any damage to the core as you would get in the outer-most fibres when using a small radius, unless you pull the chafe cover back. There is no mention of that on any users guides, either.

The bubba shackles have no chafe guard -- so there's no problems with inspection, but you have more risk of abrasion and cut damage.

Compare that with load-rated shackles -- and its a commercial liability minefield, IMHO.

I cannot find any use and inspection guides on the commercially available shackles, other than generic 'inspect for wear' warnings.
__________________
TT Outback
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 9th June 2017, 01:58 PM
MiddleAgeSubie MiddleAgeSubie is offline
Senior Member
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: AZ
Posts: 590
MiddleAgeSubie is on a distinguished road
Default

Bubba rope is not a basement operation so I highly doubt that there are any issues with their ratings; on the contrary, I would expect their ropes to do better than the publicized numbers.

I am no engineer, but it seems to me that while it is true that metal shackles have high safety factors, this is because the good shackles are made for overhead lifting operations with tremendous liability potential and continuous, commercial use over prolonged periods of time. In the case of off-road recovery, the high safety factor of metal shackles is much more needed as a precaution for obvious reasons.

Finally, your snatch strap will break first anyway. After all, you are only using 12,000 lb straps in Australia so I do not see how a 32,000lb shackle will break first.

That's before accounting for potentially the weakest spot, the eye bolt. Subaru does not publish the eye bolt's specs and I have used it once successfully in a brutal, hard pull of the Tribeca where it bent but did not break, but from looking at whatever info I could find on the internet, I have a hard time believing that its 1/4 inch eye can match the strength of the bubba rope shackle.

Thus though I lack the expertise to make a provable claim, I consider the eye bolt the weakest spot and I am thus personally convinced that the bubba rope is much safer for Subaru use than a traditional shackle. I have the latter only for use with my hitch recovery insert, in which case it is also possible to spread the load between the rear eye bolt and the recovery insert.
__________________
2013 H6 5EAT OB with SubieLiftOZ kit, 2008 Tribeca
(2006 B9; 1995 Legacy wagon).
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 9th June 2017, 08:44 PM
duncanm's Avatar
duncanm duncanm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Sydney
Posts: 392
duncanm is on a distinguished road
Default

MAS -- maybe my language is being too harsh -- I actually agree that they're a much preferred solution for Subarus... and agree that the weakest point is probably the anchor point.

I also have no doubt they meet their published breaking strengths -- its actually pretty hard to make a soft shackle that doesn't meet approximately the line strength.

My real beef is with the apparent lassez-faire attitude to use & care instructions of the companies selling them.
__________________
TT Outback
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -3. The time now is 05:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.