[jonwood]

Im not say's theres anything wrong with securing it down by the chassis, just say's your going to give a little and take a little either way. The body doesn't roll even half as bad as chassis people say it does when secured by the axles, and I prefer to not put excess where on my suspension by chassis securing.

****EDIT****

I think my friend has it right (read even better than me LOL) when he secures his rig by the axles then runs a strap from the front stinger to keep the body on his rig from rolling.(I have even had to do this on his flexy rig when I have towed him)

[jonwood]

I dream of a world when chassis and axle load securing people can get along, and I think WE can make this dream a reality as soon as we get rid of those strap using people and they realize CHAIN is the way to go


Are ya with me on this wilson 1010? together we can make a difference

[wilson1010]

Originally Posted by jonwood

I dream of a world when chassis and axle load securing people can get along, and I think WE can make this dream a reality as soon as we get rid of those strap using people and they realize CHAIN is the way to go


Are ya with me on this wilson 1010? together we can make a difference

I am 100% with you on this. Although the strap may be rated at 10k, it will stretch up to 25% as it reaches that limit. And, the little ratchet is has got to give long before that.

Grade 70 3/8" chain won't budge at 10k.

On axle strapping, chain is the way to go.

On chassis strapping, I think a combination of chain and strap may be best. Although probably no one will agree with that approach. As a lazy guy, I would hook the chain up to my rear tow points, crisscrossed, drive forward until the rear suspension compresses. Stop, get out and hook up my winch to the front of the trailer, pull the front down, then hook the straps crisscrossed in the front and let the winch out. You couldn't even begin to move the ratchet handle there was already so much force on the straps in front.

Back to Jonwood's point, I think your suggestion about chaining the axles and securing the chassis is a great solution. Other have posted before that they secure the axles then pull the suspension down a little with the straps.

I am no longer using a conventional trailer and so I use chains in the rear and welded on commercial cargo strap winches in the front on my flatbed Volvo. They use a 4" strap and a 36" winch bar mounted at hip level so the force is about 2000 lb. - still not anything compared to a chain binder, but adequate for what I am doing.

[FunkSkunk]

that unimog just made my jeep crap it's pants! geez!!

[Silver_Hilton]

Originally Posted by FunkSkunk

that unimog just made my jeep crap it's pants! geez!!

What's your beef with Trout Unlimited?

[wilson1010]

Originally Posted by FunkSkunk

that unimog just made my jeep crap it's pants! geez!!

Hey, thanks. Its the official Terrain Stompers Jeep Club recovery vehicle. It doesn't take much for me to post a photos of that rig, but this is Jeep Forum after all.

[11RUBICON]

Originally Posted by wilson1010

Not so. The rig is well secured long before the suspension is fully compressed. While I accept axle tie down as a legitimate alternative, the majority of trail rigs that have chassis tie down points are secured by the chassis, unfortunately with little yellow ratchet straps. But, putting the straps aside, the chassis tie down is the technical preference. That's why military vehicles are tied down from the chassis.

However, some people are nervous about seeing a little flex in the straps in the rear view mirror. This comes with the territory of chassis strapping.


And, the rig does not bounce around because of "bad driving." Actually rough road is what causes bouncing. Bad driving causes inversion of the trailer and rig.

Ok so i was reading this thread and i was not going to say anything......but i couldnt not say anything.

My 2 cents on this issue is, I belive that every load should be rigged accordingly. that being said if i were to load my offroad vehicle with FLEXY suspension to a flat bed i would use chain and binders on each end ATTACHED TO THE AXLES.

Lets take a look at what kind of vehicles the military uses..... h1, scorpions, 2.5 tons.....ect all of which have either independant suspension or ZERO suspension travel. With that being said how could u rig an H1 to the axle if it has no live axle...... your only option is to chassis rig it.


JUST BECAUSE THE MILITARY DOES IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT ITS THE RIGHT WAY TO DO IT.


like i said just my 2 cents

[gkainz]

Originally Posted by 09RUBICON

JUST BECAUSE THE MILITARY DOES IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT ITS THE RIGHT WAY TO DO IT.

Blasphemer! There's the right way, the wrong way, and then there's the NAVY way! We tied everything down with chains to chassis. The more chains the better! Normal tiedown config was 8 chains, heavy weather was 12 (or more) ... granted, it was airplanes on the deck of an aircraft carrier, not jeeps on trailers, but hey!

Anyway, good discussion ... something to learn every day. BTW, I do chains to axles when possible (Jeep, etc), chains to frame where it makes sense (backhoes, crawlers, dozers, etc) and usually chain short on the back, drive forward to tension and binders on the front. Grew up in a construction company, but haven't hauled heavy equipment in years.

Carry on, and have a fine NAVY day - a hand-salute to all my brother and sister vets on Veteran's Day - Thanks for your service!

[rivalarrival]

Originally Posted by 09RUBICON

My 2 cents on this issue is, I belive that every load should be rigged accordingly. that being said if i were to load my offroad vehicle with FLEXY suspension to a flat bed i would use chain and binders on each end ATTACHED TO THE AXLES.

Then you don't understand the purpose of securing at the chassis, ESPECIALLY with a flexy rig.

A vehicle or trailer is basically an overgrown bobblehead doll. The "head" of the vehicle is the heavy part. The bottom (tires, axles, etc) is relatively light. Securing at the axles, the heavy "head" is allowed to bounce around.

Look at it from the ground up: You have trailer wheels and axle, trailer suspension, trailer body, jeep wheels and axle, jeep suspension, jeep body. Securing from the chassis, you secure the entire jeep to the trailer body, creating a single live-load on a single suspension system - the trailer's. Securing at the axles, you have a suspended load on top of a suspended load. The suspension systems are allowed to interact. This can greatly increase the possibility and severity of sway. Ever rocked back and forth in a car? A hundred pounds of live-load can throw a small vehicle around pretty good; care to try the same thing with a couple thousand?

Sure, you CAN secure only to the axles - with a heavy trailer, a heavy tow vehicle, and a decent road, you're probably not going to have any issues. But why take the chance that your jeep's load will be shifting on the trailer in the wrong way at the wrong time? Like when you're maneuvering to avoid killing a family of 4 stopped partway in your lane?

Am I saying that securing to the axles is wrong? Of course not - the axles are a very strong tie-down point. I use chains and binders at the axles to make sure vehicles don't separate. I'm saying that one needs to consider the *possible* effects of the live-load, and take appropriate steps to mitigate these effects. Is it really that much extra effort to rig two straps to lockout the suspension?

[wilson1010]

As I posted from the beginning, rival has posted the technical answer to this age old question. Securing the axles is having your load on springs and securing the bottom of the springs instead of the load. Fortunately, it hardly ever matters because the load is only a couple of tons and we are so careful with the load. If the load was 10 times the weight of the trailer, it wouldn't work very well. Probably at the extremes, this makes a big difference. If your trailer bounces off the road surface, the kinetic energy of the live load is probably pretty unmanagable and the results may be dramatically worse.

But for almost every trailering experience, the axle tie down works just fine.

[FunkSkunk]

Originally Posted by Silver_Hilton

What's your beef with Trout Unlimited?

Beef = They closed the Tellico OHV area

----

now back on topic

[wilson1010]

Indeed, Trout Unlimited is the main bad actor in this sorry tale.

Here is but a snipet of the mountain of evidence against them:

Trout Unlimited, in particular, has been calling on the Forest Service for years to invest the resources needed to maintain water quality in the Tellico River. Squeak Smith, spokesman for the North Carolina Council of Trout Unlimited: “We believe it is critical that the Forest Service take an honest look at whether it can afford to maintain a ORV trail system in the Tellico watershed without undermining water quality. We believe the agency is right to be concerned about its ability to remediate and maintain this trail system in the long run.”

Southern Environmental Law Center Newsroom 03 19 09 Forest Service Closes Tellico Area

They were behind the closing of Tellico because a few of the binocular and walking shoe crowd noticed a few less trout in the Green River.

[Ross]

Originally Posted by gkainz

put 'er in gear and set the parking brake ... then don't look back! just kidding, of course. The above responses pretty much cover it all

Along as you put something behind the tires so they can't roll

[rivalarrival]

That's what the parking brake is for!

[WCoon]

I used to haul cars for a living. Pulled a Miller 7 car hauler with a Pete 389. There are holes in the frames that are designed specifically to tie down the vehicle. Here they are on a TJ:

We would use these hooks, but they were on chains, not straps:

IMO this is the best way to strap a vehicle down. On my hauler, those cars couldn't move an inch or else we could/would have roof damage from them bouncing around.