See also: http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/ome_1.gif http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/ome_2.gif http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/ome_3.gif http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/ome_4.gif From: "Willem-Jan Markerink" To: landcruisers@tlca.org Date sent: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 21:26:49 +0100 Subject: Re: OME/TIRES Send reply to: landcruisers@tlca.org On 31 May 99 at 12:33, jake.degroot.hdrq@statefarm.c wrote: > Hello list, > > I am planning a suspension upgrade to OME and a corresponding wheel/tire > change. After searching the archives I have come up with a plan and some > questions. > > First a description of my vehicle: 84 FJ60 all stock, weight changing future > plans include ARB or Stout front bumper with winch. The vehicle is generally > driven unloaded, but it is fully loaded 10-12 times a year. It spends 90% of > the time on road. > > I have not seen any OME literature but my understanding from the list is that > OME springs are a composite design meaning that leaves can be added or taken > away to change stiffness. Several posts indicated that it is cost effective > to buy a heavy spring to start and remove a leaf if necessary instead of > buying leaves later. I am thinking of starting with Medium front and rear > springs. The heavy springs require a 400kg load over GVW to begin to flex, I > think this is more than I will ever need. Hoooo there. First: medium is 113, heavy is 1131, and super-heavy is 11311, and the modularity comes from the additional leaves "113AXL" or "113BXL" (different driver/passenger-side). Second: AFAIK, you can only buy medium and heavy, super-heavy still requires a special order for that extra leaf....it is not listed in the normal table, only in the single-leaf-upgrade table. Third: while 113 requires no minimum load, 1131 requires 200kg, which leads to my conclusion that 11311 requires 400kg. Note that logic tell us that this is *sufficient* to respectively GVW, GVW+200 and GVW+400 (probably more, since 'light', code 221, should still cope with GVW, but 221 is only sold in the USA AFAIK). So do not confuse *minimum* load with *maximum* load! > Anyone running this set up? what > are your opinions? The medium springs should handle full cruiser loads > occasionally and be up to the task of a custom bumper/winch. A bumper+winch (50-110kg) requires heavy, but *both* light-load and heavy-load are designated as '11' for gasoline models, with the instruction to remove the 4th leaf from above, in case bump stop height exceeds 110mm. For diesels they are '11' and '111' respectively, differing one leaf ('11XL').... Note that '110' is a common designation for USA packs I believe....it might be that they already removed that leaf before shipping. > Tire choice is of course subjective, the archives indicate that 33x12.5 will > fit with some rubbing under full stuff is this true? Were 16inch rims ever > developed to run 33x9.5? I am concerned about the 12.5inch width causing > "wander" on dry pavement and poor rain/snow performance. Would 32x11.5 be a > good compromise? > I am considering using Rancho RS9000's to gain adjustability. MAF does not > recomend this as the OME set up was designed as a system with the shocks. Is > this true? Any experience with RS9000's and OME? Don't think the RS9000 have the best of reputation here. -- Bye, Willem-Jan Markerink The desire to understand is sometimes far less intelligent than the inability to understand [note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!] Cc: JOSHANDDAZZA@bigpond.com Subject: Re: OME alternatives From: Morgan Fletcher Date: 15 Dec 1999 13:31:25 -0800 Reply-To: landcruisers@tlca.org "Marc Czapla" writes: > Okay, we all know that OME suspension kits are the best, but what about > those of us who can't afford the 1800 bill? Even the smokey mountain kit is > 1200! Are there any solutions to a rough riding FJ60 that might be a bit > more reasonable? The TLC site, states that their rebuilds include stock > springs and Monroe Gas Matic shocks. How does this set up work on the road? > As my main priority at this point is to have a FJ60 that rides nicely on the > paved roads, I am not concerned about off-road performance (this will change > when my wallet size increases). What do you guys think? I have the Pinnacle Engineering Suspension for the FJ55, advertised as a 4" lift. I like it off-road, but to be honest it's kinda harsh so far on-road. (I run 33x12.4 generic AT tires at 35psi.) I've driven Jackie Kardum's (Mudrak's wife's) FJ60 with OME, and it's much smoother on-road. The Pinnacle suspension is available for FJ60/FJ62. One difference between the OME springs and the Pinnacle springs are the clamps - OME clamps are U-shaped and open on top, with limiter pins. The Pinnacles are closed. I'm going to try opening them up myself. The Pinnacle spring leaves look thicker than OME, although I'm not sure about that. Also, I'm not sure the Heckethorn Nitro shocks I got are right - I think they may be too short. I'm going to take off the shocks, measure for the right fit and if the Heckethorns are wrong I'll probably go with Rancho RS9000, and I'll play with the setting on-road. I spoke with Josh Browne - designer of the OME springs for ARB - about the steel in OME springs. He said that OME springs use steel from a plant in Australia that offers greater elasticity with plastic deformation. I think that's the right way to say it - they don't deform as easily as most spring steel, so they can make flexier spring packs that last a long time. He said their goal was to make a spring pack with as few leaves as possible that still carried the load well and flexed well. He said springs made in America and China and Japan used steel with less 'springiness', such that the packs and leaves have to be thicker and higher-count. Perhaps Pinnacle Engineering suspension could be made to be as comfortable on-road as OME, is what I'm getting at. It's certainly a good price! See http://www.jtoutfitters.com/Part/suspension/pe/index.html. morgan -- VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV >> Morgan Fletcher, list admin 63 FJ40, 76 FJ55, TLCA #5973, Oakland, CA << >> http://lists.off-road.com/~tlca http://www.off-road.com/~morgan << To: landcruisers@tlca.org Subject: Re: OME alternatives From: Morgan Fletcher Date: 15 Dec 1999 13:52:22 -0800 Reply-To: landcruisers@tlca.org Morgan Fletcher writes: > Australia that offers greater elasticity with plastic deformation. I should have written "...without plastic deformation." morgan -- VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV >> Morgan Fletcher, list admin 63 FJ40, 76 FJ55, TLCA #5973, Oakland, CA << >> http://lists.off-road.com/~tlca http://www.off-road.com/~morgan << From: "Willem-Jan Markerink" To: dtlc@helios.net Date sent: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 15:08:18 +0100 Subject: [DTLC] OME 1131 in overload mode Send reply to: w.j.markerink@a1.nl Dear Group, Had to pick up a batch of floor tiles this weekend, 320 pieces of 36x36x1.2cm (Edimax, Italy, any Italian listmembers nearby?....;)) To estimate weight beforehand, I put the sample I had at home on a scale; about 2kg....hmm, 320x2kg=640kg, shouldn't be a problem in the rear of the 60 (OME front 111 heavy, rear 1131 heavy). So off I went, picking the tiles up 125km from home. Forklift driver gave me a few strange looks.... "Are you sure?" 'Sure.' We removed the top (incomplete) layer of boxes from the pallet, to gain some height clearance, and off it went inside, and down went the rear, up went it's nose....:)) After loading the remaining boxes on the side and on top, I headed home, with a severly sagging 60....still a surprising good ride, as long as corners & higher bumps were not taken too fast (railroad crossings).... After returning home, I checked the weight of a full box (8 tiles)....22kg....hmmmm, previous scale was no good!....that's 40 x 22kg = 880kg....oh well....8-)) This is on top of an empty weight of 2300kg (originally 2090 I believe, weighed again officially after van-conversion), with at least another 150kg of stuff added (front bar, rear twin bar, tools)....total shifting towards 3500kg....8-)) Still had 5cm left between rubber blocks and frame. Height between floor and highest point of the wheelarch was 91cm unloaded, 79cm loaded (with 265/75x16 BFG-AT's). Since unloading would only be done on monday, I decided to relieve those poor OME springs by putting a hydraulic lift under the rear towbar, and lifted it back up to 87cm....nearly 3 days in that compressed state can't be good....the spring hangers were almost flat with the spring....8-)) (the last 5cm doesn't add much to spring extension, so it would probably never have made contact anyway). This also gave me a nice oppertunity to take some photo's from the 'load' and 'no-load' status: http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload1.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload2.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload3.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload4.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload5.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload6.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload7.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload8.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload9.jpg [now: http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/HJ60_OME-load ] 1, 4 and 7 show 'load'; 2, 5 and 8 show 'no load' (at least that's what I thought, jacking it up, and I couldn't get the jack higher anyway, without the block on top tipping over); 3, 6 and 9 show it a day later, really without weight this time, and 4cm taller (wheel arch height between the two is 87cm vs 91cm, load was 79cm). (if anyone knows how to animate .jpg's in a simple way, please let me know....I know animated gif's, but those tend to get large in decent photographic sizes, not? Bottom line (pun intended): Even adding a modular leaf would not have helped much here (defacto creating 11311, by adding the same leaf (113AXL/113BXL) that distinguishes 113 from 1131, assumed gain 200kg (113 is medium-to-GVW, 1131 is 200kg-minimum-to-GVW, so 11311 should be 400kg minimum weight....GVW reaching an inofficial/illegal +200 & +400kg respectively of course....GVW isn't changed oficially of course, authorities don't like this....;)) Anyway, to get this kinds of loads level again, if only for visual satisfaction, getting rid of that tired look (and bottoming out on both your tow hitch and headlight adjustment....8-)), I guess the only way is adding air springs....adding them to the heaviest configuration of OME that is, otherwise you're basically stuck if you get a leak in the system in the middle of nowhere....more common with air bellows inside coil springs (rubbing), but still.... Btw, below some old notes from Charly related to spring ratings.... (http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/ome_rate.htm) ....I assume the below rating for 113 vs overload means that 1131 and 11311 will get somewhere halfway, but never near overload....perhaps 325lbs/inch & 400lbs/inch.... Hmm, wait, lets do this the other way around: if 1131 & weight X+200kg stays on the same level as 113 & weight X, with 113 being 268lbs/inch (equals 48kg/cm), then the spring rating should behave proportional to the weight increase....let's assume equal weight distribution to begin with (1200kg), then the new spring ratio becomes 1400/1200 x 268, is 313lbs/inch....11311 would then become 1600/1200 x 268, or 357lbs/inch....indeed far away from the overload rating (it better be!).... XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxx Date sent: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 17:12:53 -0800 From: Aarons family <52m37@alaska.net> Organization: mpfc To: LClist Subject: OME spring rates Send reply to: landcruisers@tlca.org I sent ARB a e-mail and they quickly answered me. For 60 series: Front - heavy - OME111 - 305 lb/in Rear - medium - OME113 - 268/570 lb/in (second number is with overloads engaged) Now, if I can get all the specs for the whole series, 40/45/55/60/80/100, all variations, I'll print them. Charlie From: "Willem-Jan Markerink" To: landcruisers@tlca.org Date sent: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 16:16:21 +0100 Subject: Re: OME spring rates Send reply to: landcruisers@tlca.org On 28 Nov 99 at 17:12, Aarons family wrote: > I sent ARB a e-mail and they quickly answered me. > For 60 series: > Front - heavy - OME111 - 305 lb/in > Rear - medium - OME113 - 268/570 lb/in (second number is with overloads > engaged) > Now, if I can get all the specs for the whole series, > 40/45/55/60/80/100, all variations, I'll print them. > Charlie I have an overview of coil ratings....but I was under the impression that this was somewhat classified, not meant for the general public. Did you ask for the others for 60-series too (11/110 fronts, 211 and 1131/11311 rears)? -- Bye, Willem-Jan Markerink The desire to understand is sometimes far less intelligent than the inability to understand [note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!] XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx From: Self To: "Josh Browne" Subject: 60-series OME (was: [FJ55] FW: ol' 55 Send reply to: w.j.markerink@a1.nl Date sent: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 00:59:22 +0100 On 14 Jun 02 at 12:29, Josh Browne wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Josh Browne [mailto:jbrowne@ateco.com.au] > Sent: Thursday, 13 June 2002 9:53 > To: fj55@tica.org; w.j.markerink@a1.nl > Subject: ol' 55 > > > Hi guys! > I've been having some problems with my home email and have just about given up > trying to fix it. However, one of the emails did sneak through, dated 1st May, > but I only saw it yesterday. My computer is currently with my Granddaughter > who is using it for school work. I have been using my office computer for > emails for the past 12 months. Morgan, Great to hear from you, how is the > family? I have been extraordinarily busy for months. I left GT Suspension at > the end of 2000 and have been doing some contract work for Ateco Equipment, > the Warn distributor over here. Moved house recently to be a bit closer to my > daughter and grand children. My 3 sons are now far from home, 1 in Darwin, 1 > in Canberra and 1 in London, so it's pretty quiet around the house these days. > > I haven't gotten much further with the FJ28 although I now have a full set of > workshop manuals so that will help as I get going. Up to the stage of > stripping it down to remove the body (and throw away the Landrover series 1 > roof). Now that I have found a place to store it and work on it I will have a > chance to get serious. Money is the only issue. A lot of the mechanical stuff > is no longer available so it a matter of keeping eyes peeled for second hand > parts otherwise things have to made. It has most of the same mechanicals as > FJ25 and there are a few of them around if you look hard enough. I have > attached a pic, I finally figured out how to use a digital camera and to get > a pic into the computer. I haven't figured out how to compress a pic yet but I > will one day. > > Willem-Jan, > The FJ55 is a bit of a nightmare because there aren't that many of them > around over here. The people who own them don't want to spend the money on > them. Dobinsons do make springs for them and I have found the best package is > Dobinson springs and OME shocks. Dobinsons do have their own range of shocks > now but I don't know if they have shocks for 55 or if they do whether or not > they would be any good as far as ride and handling is concerned. Dobinsons > have been very active in Europe in recent times, I will find out for you if > they have a distributor in Holland and let you know. Not many companies have > bothered to make shocks for 55 because they are low volume. Koni didn't, OME > did, Gabriel did but I have the data on them and wouldn't even consider it, > other than to keep the car on the road. Ironman and 4Way over here use the > Gabriel product, re-badged, so don't go near them. One thing you could > consider is to grab a pair of Koni 82-5020 (40 series front) and have someone > remove the top eye and weld on a pin. The valving would be quit good and it is > adjustable. On the rear use 60 series 82-2297. The Koni distributors in > Australia do these mods for me from time to time. I don't know how Koni > operate in Holland. I may be a bit late getting in touch but if I can help, > don't hesitate to email me. I tried phoning Dobinsons this morning but no > answer, phone may be down there has been some stormy weather on our East coast > for the past few days. Kind Regards Josh Browne Hi Josh, May I pick your brain a bit on 60-series OME?....;)) I recently met a German fellow who wants to upgrade his rear OME 113 to 1131, just like I have....I know I need the 113A/BXL for this (I have the complete OME catalog, this German didn't, and his German distributor (Taubenreuther) wasn't very helpfull either (ever dealt with them back then?). Problem: my Dutch distributor (Tijsterman) only has 113AXL in stock; says he doesn't need any other for these upgrades, as they differ only a few mm's.... Knowing the aim for perfection in especially this 60-series kit, I can't help wondering if it isn't better to order a dual set, 113AXL and 113BXL, as intended. Please share your opinion!....:)) (this German guy has stripped the rear of his 60 pretty much, 150kg lighter total than stock, but does carry a 500L truck tank inside on longer trips....I tried talking him into 11311, but he is afraid it will be too stiff empty (yes, I know you considered it too stiff for mine too, despite twin-Kaymar and plans for an extra tank....;)) PS: why does my 111 front have enough space between the C-clamps to accept another 11 leaf, while neither my 1131 rear nor his 113 rear do? Just because you need more dangly bits anyway for any change on the rear (contrary to the front)? Thanx a bunch in advance!....:)) Send reply to: From: "Josh Browne" To: Subject: 60 series Date sent: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 10:51:53 +1000 Good morning Willem Jan, Thanks for your email last week. I have been out of circulation for a few weeks, following major surgery. On the way to a full recovery, now. Starting with 1131, does the guy in Germany know if he has 113A and B on his vehicle? some models use 113A on both sides. The difference between AXL and BXL will be about 25mm in camber. Fitting AXL on a B spring would have no significant effect on the height of that side, I would be surprised if it was as much as 5mm. Technically the only risk is that when the camber of an individual leaf is not in sequence with the rest of the pack, it can cause the leaf below it to be over-stressed and fail. This is pretty rare, but it has happened. The simple solution is to take an AXL to a local spring re-setter and have them knock 20mm out of it (not 25mm because they never get it right, so it is better to be above than below). I know Taubenreuther's very well and I'm a little surprised that the chap hasn't had any help from them. He should try again. If the sales people aren't helpful then he should ask to speak to Peter or Axel Taubenreuther and mention my name. I would have thought that Taubenreuther would have the extra leaves in stock, if not they could certainly get them included in their next shipment. If he still doesn't have any luck, I would be happy to email Axel and see if I can shake them up. 11311 is a spring that works fine if there is a permanent load, my argument when we first discussed this was that until the long range tank is in place, 11311 is likely not to deflect , under load, as much as I would like. 11311 is usually used on a vehicle with a total weight of 4 tonnes plus. On your vehicle: 11 and 111 use the same bolt clips as 75 series front and therefore they are longer than they need to be. I am not aware of anyone who hsa used 1111 on the front of a 60. In the case of 113, the bolt clips were designed to allow for 1 extra leaf to make 1131. no-one thought, at the time that we would need 11311. The procedure for 11311 is to delete the bolt and sleeve and bend the clips over, this then becomes a fold clip rather than a bolt clip. Not aesthetically appealing but a practical solution for that very small number of vehicles using 11311. Just for your interest, I thought I might refer your enquiry to ARB. This past weekend we had a 4 wheel drive show in Melbourne so I knew I would be seeing some of their people. Lo and behold I bumped into their US Sales Manager. He worked here at ARB for many years and is very familiar with 60s. I was staggered when he suggested you should phone one of his resellers in the US and have the leaves shipped from there. Why would anyone in Germany want to buy and Australian product from the US, when there is a distributor around the corner. Anyway, that is typical of ARB., once they have your money they lose interest in you. I hope this helps. Regards Josh Browne. From: "Rob Kuder" To: Subject: Re: 60-series rear OME, 113 -> 1131 Date sent: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 22:40:16 -0400 ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; Cc: <80scool@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 5:55 PM Subject: [DTLC] 60-series rear OME, 113 -> 1131 > Picking the brains of those with experience on 60-series rear OME > 113->1131 upgrades....;)) > > I recently met a German fellow who wants to upgrade his rear OME 113 > to 1131, just like I have....I know I need the 113AXL+113BXL for this (I > have the complete OME catalog, this German didn't, and his German > distributor (Taubenreuther) wasn't very helpfull either. > Problem: my Dutch distributor only has 113AXL in stock; says he > doesn't need any other for these upgrades, as they differ only a few > mm's.... > Knowing the aim for perfection in especially this 60-series kit, I > can't help wondering if it isn't better to order a dual set, 113AXL > and 113BXL, as intended. > > (this German guy has stripped the rear of his 60 pretty much, 150kg > lighter total than stock, but does carry a 500L truck tank inside on > longer trips....I tried talking him into 11311, but he is afraid it > will be too stiff empty....I guess he needs air springs....:)) > > PS: why does my 111 front have enough space between the C-clamps to > accept another 11 leaf, while neither my 1131 rear nor his 113 rear > do? (or is a 1111 listed, either as factory package or as upgrade?) > Just because you need more dangly bits anyway for any change on the > rear (contrary to the front)? > > Thanx a bunch for any info....:)) W.J., I just looked at my 113AXL & 113BXL in the garage and they are very similar. About a spring thickness difference in height (camber?) when put side by side. It looks like OME just bent the flat centre section a little on the B spring to make it slightly flatter. I cannot see this making much difference on the truck. 500l of extra fuel!! About 400kg + 50kg tank weight? Plus expedition gear! You would need every leaf OME makes. And yes the ride will be intolerable when empty. Can you tell me any more about this tank? Dimensions? Location in truck? How is it secured and plumbed? I have 6 leafs plus the two overloads in the rear spring packs now. Is that 1131? This makes for a spine jarring ride with an empty stock truck rolling on 33x9.5s @ 40psi., however, suspension seats from a 70 make the ride acceptable. With a five person payload, the ride is OK. Put 400kg tongue weight on the hitch drops the back 8 cm. 4000kg sailboat :-) Not mine :-( But I get to borrow it :-)) This is where I need the additional XL leaf in the rear. I don't know what the 'PS:' is all about. I trimmed thread on all my U bolts when installing full OME package HTH Rob. From: Self To: jbrowne@ateco.com.au Subject: Re: 60 series Send reply to: w.j.markerink@a1.nl Date sent: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 15:37:10 +0100 On 7 Oct 02 at 10:51, Josh Browne wrote: > Good morning Willem Jan, > Thanks for your email last week. Thank you for replying, even though it's not your work/employer anymore!....:)) > I have been out of circulation for a few weeks, following major surgery. Sorry to hear that! (I recently lost a good (virtual) friend, a fellow Dutchman in Belarussia, a great Cruiserhead, even though we never met....still bugging me that we never did meet....see http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/pieter.htm) > On the way to a full recovery, now. Good!....:)) Stay with us knowledge-craving folks!....;)) I hope long mails like this don't wear you out right now....:)) > Starting with 1131, does the guy in Germany know if he has 113A and B on his > vehicle? some models use 113A on both sides. Hmm....mine didn't, mine was definately A+B....cost us some braincracking before the old ones came out, but after seeing the different height in the old ones, all was obvious (I just for the live of me can't remember which type went to what side....I *might* have written that down somewhere....8-)) > The difference between AXL and BXL will be about 25mm in camber. Fitting AXL > on a B spring would have no significant effect on the height of that side, I > would be surprised if it was as much as 5mm. Technically the only risk is that > when the camber of an individual leaf is not in sequence with the rest of the > pack, it can cause the leaf below it to be over-stressed and fail. This is > pretty rare, but it has happened. Hmm.... > The simple solution is to take an AXL to a local spring re-setter and have > them knock 20mm out of it (not 25mm because they never get it right, so it is > better to be above than below). Hmm....all this is interesting....so before making any decision, we need to check what type his current pack of 113 is....A/B, A/A or perhaps even B/B (probably no way to distinguish the latter two, not after some time under load, right?....general assumption: if equal, then A/A?) Anyway, I guess he should still be able to distinguish A from B when the spring-eye/shackle is unloaded? Btw, to falsify any possible alternatives: how can I distinguish the US-typical rear 221? We only counted my 1131 and his, concluding that the one leaf less on his made it 113.... Mine has 6+2(overload), his had 5+2....what is the number on 221? (no overloads I remember vaguely....correct?) > I know Taubenreuther's very well and I'm a little surprised that the chap > hasn't had any help from them. He should try again. If the sales people aren't > helpful then he should ask to speak to Peter or Axel Taubenreuther and mention > my name. Not sure when you last dealed with Taubenreuther, but they have grown quite a lot over the last couple of years....not the greasy shop with gearheads, but relatively flashy catalogs & stuff....I guess nowadays it is nearly impossible to sneak past the salesdroids in a polite manner, the risk of all growing businesses. Have heard similar complaints before....I guess it comes with the scale of the business; less custom-order support, more off-the-shelf. > I would have thought that Taubenreuther would have the > extra leaves in stock, if not they could certainly get them included in > their next shipment. If he still doesn't have any luck, I would be happy to > email Axel and see if I can shake them up. 11311 is a spring that works fine > if there is a permanent load, my argument when we first discussed this was > that until the long range tank is in place, 11311 is likely not to deflect , > under load, as much as I would like. 11311 is usually used on a vehicle with a > total weight of 4 tonnes plus. Hmm....I would love to believe that, but from the OME-spec's I conclude that the difference between 113, 1131 and 11311 is +200kg between each, starting with GVW....and GVW is only 2600kg. And our 1131, with twin-Kaymar, but no tires and no tank, looks and drives fine.... My current & official empty weight (before Kaymar) was 2320kg (this includes the overbuild cargo-barrier/roll-overbar that we need to comply with Dutch van-legislation. Yet with +900kg floor tiles, on a pallet, it sank quit sadly....here are some pix....;)) http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload1.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload2.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload3.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload4.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload5.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload6.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload7.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload8.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload9.jpg [now: http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/HJ60_OME-load ] > On your vehicle: > 11 and 111 use the same bolt clips as 75 series front and therefore they are > longer than they need to be. Aha, lovely detail for us Sherlocks, thanx! Do 75's get heavier front springs then? These didn't even come as TD....so the worst-case scenario should weigh less.... > I am not aware of anyone who hsa used 1111 on > the front of a 60. It's just that it drives fine now, with TJM T13+/Multifit, but without the Warn 8274 I have in mind (and perhaps even two small water tanks up front)....and for speed bumps I already would like a bit more....with a Warn, I most likely definately do. > In the case of 113, the bolt clips were designed to allow for 1 extra leaf to > make 1131. no-one thought, at the time that we would need 11311. Ah, okay....nice to know all these historical considerations, makes much more sense, also me explaining things to others....thanx! > The > procedure for 11311 is to delete the bolt and sleeve and bend the clips > over, this then becomes a fold clip rather than a bolt clip. Not > aesthetically appealing but a practical solution for that very small number of > vehicles using 11311. Yup, I just wasn't sure whether there wouldn't be any factory clamp for this purpose.... There probably are no aluminium 'fill' pieces (next to the spring packing, through which the U-bolt goes as well) for the 11311 pack as well, right? > Just for your interest, I thought I might refer your enquiry to ARB. This past > weekend we had a 4 wheel drive show in Melbourne so I knew I would be seeing > some of their people. Lo and behold I bumped into their US Sales Manager. He > worked here at ARB for many years and is very familiar with 60s. I was > staggered when he suggested you should phone one of his resellers in the US > and have the leaves shipped from there. Why would anyone in Germany want to > buy and Australian product from the US, when there is a distributor around the > corner. Anyway, that is typical of ARB., once they have your money they lose > interest in you. There are sick people anywhere....;)) > I hope this helps. It sure does; I love to know all these historical details, to understand the current product range....thanx an bunch!....:)) Btw, that GT-stuff for those mining-spec 75's still intrigues me....does GT have any similar catalogs as OME? Would love to get my hands on some of that, just in case I ever meet a fool who might want to load 3500kg on his troopie.... -- Bye, Willem-Jan Markerink The desire to understand is sometimes far less intelligent than the inability to understand [note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!] From: Self To: jbrowne@ateco.com.au Subject: lbs/inch ratings Send reply to: w.j.markerink@a1.nl Date sent: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 15:50:50 +0100 Hi Josh, one more time bugging you: I found this old message, listing *some* spring rates, but not all....it suddenly dawned on me that, by knowning the front rating (305lbs/inch), it would be easy to pick the correct rear configuration by simply weighing front and rear axle....but for that I need to know the rating of 1131 and 11311, or probably simply only the spring rating of the 113A/BXL leaf itself....have any of those spec's at hand still? Would help a lot of people choosing the right pack! Thanx a bunch in advance! xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: "Willem-Jan Markerink" To: landcruisers@tlca.org Date sent: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 16:16:21 +0100 Subject: Re: OME spring rates Send reply to: landcruisers@tlca.org On 28 Nov 99 at 17:12, Aarons family wrote: > I sent ARB a e-mail and they quickly answered me. > For 60 series: > Front - heavy - OME111 - 305 lb/in > Rear - medium - OME113 - 268/570 lb/in (second number is with overloads > engaged) > Now, if I can get all the specs for the whole series, > 40/45/55/60/80/100, all variations, I'll print them. > Charlie I have an overview of coil ratings....but I was under the impression that this was somewhat classified, not meant for the general public. Did you ask for the others for 60-series too (11/110 fronts, 211 and 1131/11311 rears)? xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Bye, Willem-Jan Markerink The desire to understand is sometimes far less intelligent than the inability to understand [note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!] Send reply to: From: "Josh Browne" To: Subject: RE: lbs/inch ratings Date sent: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 11:53:04 +1000 PUBLISHED INFO - CURRENT 113 268/570 (570 IS WITH SECOND STAGE ENGAGED) 1131 314/617 11311 WOULD BE ABOUT 365/650 - THIS IS NOT PUBLISHED. 221 255 Send reply to: From: "Josh Browne" To: Subject: RE: 60 series Date sent: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 11:46:12 +1000 HI, WILLEM JAN YOU WANT TO KNOW ALL OUR SECRETS, I THINK. THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE SO SOPHISTICATED THAT THE END USER CANNOT UNDERSTAND IT. IT'S ALL DONE WITH MIRRORS. -----Original Message----- From: Willem-Jan Markerink [mailto:w.j.markerink@a1.nl] Sent: Tuesday, 8 October 2002 0:37 To: jbrowne@ateco.com.au Subject: Re: 60 series On 7 Oct 02 at 10:51, Josh Browne wrote: > Good morning Willem Jan, > Thanks for your email last week. Thank you for replying, even though it's not your work/employer anymore!....:)) > I have been out of circulation for a few weeks, following major surgery. Sorry to hear that! (I recently lost a good (virtual) friend, a fellow Dutchman in Belarussia, a great Cruiserhead, even though we never met....still bugging me that we never did meet....see http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/pieter.htm) > On the way to a full recovery, now. Good!....:)) Stay with us knowledge-craving folks!....;)) I hope long mails like this don't wear you out right now....:)) NOT A PROBLEM, ALTHOUGH I MIGHT NOT GET BACK TO YOU STRAIGHT AWAY. > Starting with 1131, does the guy in Germany know if he has 113A and B on his > vehicle? some models use 113A on both sides. Hmm....mine didn't, mine was definately A+B....cost us some braincracking before the old ones came out, but after seeing the different height in the old ones, all was obvious (I just for the live of me can't remember which type went to what side....I *might* have written that down somewhere....8-)) GENERALLY SPEAKING, A BASE MODEL WITH BARN DOORS USES A/A OR B/B, MODELS WITH TAIL GATES USE A/B. HOWEVER, LOAD DISTRIBUTION HAS AN EFFECT, I HAVE USED B/A , THAT IS WITH THE SPRINGS ON THE OTHER SIDE. THE A SPRING NORMALLY FITS ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE (REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT IS LHD OR RHD) > The difference between AXL and BXL will be about 25mm in camber. Fitting AXL > on a B spring would have no significant effect on the height of that side, I > would be surprised if it was as much as 5mm. Technically the only risk is > that when the camber of an individual leaf is not in sequence with the rest > of the pack, it can cause the leaf below it to be over-stressed and fail. > This is pretty rare, but it has happened. Hmm.... > The simple solution is to take an AXL to a local spring re-setter and have > them knock 20mm out of it (not 25mm because they never get it right, so it is > better to be above than below). Hmm....all this is interesting....so before making any decision, we need to check what type his current pack of 113 is....A/B, A/A or perhaps even B/B (probably no way to distinguish the latter two, not after some time under load, right?....general assumption: if equal, then A/A?) Anyway, I guess he should still be able to distinguish A from B when the spring-eye/shackle is unloaded? I DOUBT IT. YOU SHOULD STILL BE ABLE TO READ THE PART NUMBER PAINTED ON THE SPRING. Btw, to falsify any possible alternatives: how can I distinguish the US-typical rear 221? We only counted my 1131 and his, concluding that the one leaf less on his made it 113.... Mine has 6+2(overload), his had 5+2....what is the number on 221? (no overloads I remember vaguely....correct?) ALL OF THIS IS A BIT ODD. 113 HAS 6+2 AND 1131 HAS 7+2. I DON'T THINK THERE IS A 5+2. 221 IS A SINGLE STAGE SPRING WITH 8 LEAVES. IF YOURS IS 6+2 THAT WOULD EXPLAIN WHY WE HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION ON RIDE QUALITY AND LOAD CARRYING. > I know Taubenreuther's very well and I'm a little surprised that the chap > hasn't had any help from them. He should try again. If the sales people aren't > helpful then he should ask to speak to Peter or Axel Taubenreuther and mention > my name. Not sure when you last dealed with Taubenreuther, but they have grown quite a lot over the last couple of years....not the greasy shop with gearheads, but relatively flashy catalogs & stuff....I guess nowadays it is nearly impossible to sneak past the salesdroids in a polite manner, the risk of all growing businesses. Have heard similar complaints before....I guess it comes with the scale of the business; less custom-order support, more off-the-shelf. I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT AXEL TAUBENREUTHER WILL TALK TO ME. I HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO HIM FOR ABOUT 3 YEARS, BUT HE AND PETER ARE VERY NICE PEOPLE. WE DO NEED TO HAVE ALL THE FACTS BEFORE I CONTACT THEM THOUGH. MAYBE YOUR GERMAN FRIEND CAN GET INTO THIS LOOP AND READ ALL OF OUR EMAILS, THEN SEE WHERE WE CAN GO. > I would have thought that Taubenreuther would have the > extra leaves in stock, if not they could certainly get them included in > their next shipment. If he still doesn't have any luck, I would be happy to > email Axel and see if I can shake them up. > 11311 is a spring that works fine if there is a permanent load, my argument > when we first discussed this was that until the long range tank is in place, > 11311 is likely not to deflect , under load, as much as I would like. 11311 > is usually used on a vehicle with a total weight of 4 tonnes plus. Hmm....I would love to believe that, but from the OME-spec's I conclude that the difference between 113, 1131 and 11311 is +200kg between each, starting with GVW....and GVW is only 2600kg. And our 1131, with twin-Kaymar, but no tires and no tank, looks and drives fine.... My current & official empty weight (before Kaymar) was 2320kg (this includes the overbuild cargo-barrier/roll-overbar that we need to comply with Dutch van-legislation. Yet with +900kg floor tiles, on a pallet, it sank quit sadly....here are some pix....;)) http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload1.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload2.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload3.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload4.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload5.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload6.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload7.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload8.jpg http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/omeload9.jpg [now: http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/HJ60_OME-load ] > On your vehicle: > 11 and 111 use the same bolt clips as 75 series front and therefore they are > longer than they need to be. Aha, lovely detail for us Sherlocks, thanx! Do 75's get heavier front springs then? SOMETIMES. These didn't even come as TD....so the worst-case scenario should weigh less.... > I am not aware of anyone who hsa used 1111 on > the front of a 60. It's just that it drives fine now, with TJM T13+/Multifit, but without the Warn 8274 I have in mind (and perhaps even two small water tanks up front)....and for speed bumps I already would like a bit more....with a Warn, I most likely definately do. THE ONLY WAY I CAN COMMENT ON THIS IS IF YOU MEASURE THE BUMP STOP CLEARANCE ALL ROUND. > In the case of 113, the bolt clips were designed to allow for 1 extra leaf > to make 1131. no-one thought, at the time that we would need 11311. Ah, okay....nice to know all these historical considerations, makes much more sense, also me explaining things to others....thanx! > The > procedure for 11311 is to delete the bolt and sleeve and bend the clips > over, this then becomes a fold clip rather than a bolt clip. Not > aesthetically appealing but a practical solution for that very small number > of vehicles using 11311. Yup, I just wasn't sure whether there wouldn't be any factory clamp for this purpose.... There probably are no aluminium 'fill' pieces (next to the spring packing, through which the U-bolt goes as well) for the 11311 pack as well, right? WRONG. OME HAVE A 7MM PACKER WHICH YOU ADD TO THE ALUM BLOCKS AS YOU ADD LEAVES. IN YOUR CASE HOWEVER, IF IT IS 6+2 YOU NEED 11MM ALUM BLOCKS. FOR 1131 YOU NEED 18MM BLOCKS AND THEN ADD 7MM PACKERS. YOU COULD MAKE YOUR OWN. MILD STEEL 140MM X 70MM X 7MM. > Just for your interest, I thought I might refer your enquiry to ARB. This past > weekend we had a 4 wheel drive show in Melbourne so I knew I would be seeing > some of their people. Lo and behold I bumped into their US Sales Manager. He > worked here at ARB for many years and is very familiar with 60s. > I was staggered when he suggested you should phone one of his resellers in the > US and have the leaves shipped from there. Why would anyone in Germany want to > buy and Australian product from the US, when there is a distributor > around the corner. Anyway, that is typical of ARB., once they have your > money they lose interest in you. There are sick people anywhere....;)) > I hope this helps. It sure does; I love to know all these historical details, to understand the current product range....thanx an bunch!....:)) Btw, that GT-stuff for those mining-spec 75's still intrigues me....does GT have any similar catalogs as OME? Would love to get my hands on some of that, just in case I ever meet a fool who might want to load 3500kg on his troopie.... FOR THE GT INFO ON 75 YOU ONLY NEED TO SEE A DOBINSON'S CATALOGUE, SINCE THAT IS WHAT THEY USE ON 75s. WE WILL BE RELEASING OUR NEW PRODUCT RANGE (RIDEPRO SUSPENSION) NEXT MONTH. AS SOON AS I HAVE FINALISED THE CATALOGUE I WILL EMAIL SOME INFO TO YOU. I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE EXTRA HEAVY STUFF FOR 75 SERIES AS YET. From: Self To: jbrowne@ateco.com.au Subject: RE: lbs/inch ratings Send reply to: w.j.markerink@a1.nl Date sent: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 17:48:03 +0100 On 8 Oct 02 at 11:53, Josh Browne wrote: > Hi Josh, one more time bugging you: > > I found this old message, listing *some* spring rates, but not > all....it suddenly dawned on me that, by knowning the front rating > (305lbs/inch), it would be easy to pick the correct rear > configuration by simply weighing front and rear axle....but for that > I need to know the rating of 1131 and 11311, or probably simply only > the spring rating of the 113A/BXL leaf itself....have any of those > spec's at hand still? > Would help a lot of people choosing the right pack! > Thanx a bunch in advance! > > PUBLISHED INFO - CURRENT > 113 268/570 (570 IS WITH SECOND STAGE ENGAGED) > 1131 314/617 > 11311 WOULD BE ABOUT 365/650 - THIS IS NOT PUBLISHED. > 221 255 Brilliant!....:)) Only gap of info left is front 11 (111 is 305lbs/inch, as per below)....you have data from that one as well? Thanx a bunch! > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > From: "Willem-Jan Markerink" > To: landcruisers@tlca.org > Date sent: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 16:16:21 +0100 > Subject: Re: OME spring rates > Send reply to: landcruisers@tlca.org > > On 28 Nov 99 at 17:12, Aarons family wrote: > > > I sent ARB a e-mail and they quickly answered me. > > For 60 series: > > Front - heavy - OME111 - 305 lb/in > > Rear - medium - OME113 - 268/570 lb/in (second number is with overloads > > engaged) Now, if I can get all the specs for the whole series, > > 40/45/55/60/80/100, all variations, I'll print them. Charlie > > I have an overview of coil ratings....but I was under the impression > that this was somewhat classified, not meant for the general public. > > Did you ask for the others for 60-series too (11/110 fronts, 211 and > 1131/11311 rears)? > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Self To: jbrowne@ateco.com.au Subject: RE: 60 series Send reply to: w.j.markerink@a1.nl Date sent: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 18:10:24 +0100 On 8 Oct 02 at 11:46, Josh Browne wrote: > HI, WILLEM JAN > YOU WANT TO KNOW ALL OUR SECRETS, I THINK. THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE SO > SOPHISTICATED THAT THE END USER CANNOT UNDERSTAND IT. IT'S ALL DONE WITH > MIRRORS. :)) > -----Original Message----- > From: Willem-Jan Markerink [mailto:w.j.markerink@a1.nl] > Sent: Tuesday, 8 October 2002 0:37 > To: jbrowne@ateco.com.au > Subject: Re: 60 series > > > On 7 Oct 02 at 10:51, Josh Browne wrote: > > > Good morning Willem Jan, > > Thanks for your email last week. > > Thank you for replying, even though it's not your work/employer > anymore!....:)) > > > I have been out of circulation for a few weeks, following major surgery. > > Sorry to hear that! > (I recently lost a good (virtual) friend, a fellow Dutchman in > Belarussia, a great Cruiserhead, even though we never met....still > bugging me that we never did meet....see > http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/pieter.htm) > > > On the way to a full recovery, now. > > Good!....:)) > Stay with us knowledge-craving folks!....;)) > I hope long mails like this don't wear you out right now....:)) > > NOT A PROBLEM, ALTHOUGH I MIGHT NOT GET BACK TO YOU STRAIGHT AWAY. I have no complaints about the current turnaround times....:)) > > Starting with 1131, does the guy in Germany know if he has 113A and B on his > > vehicle? some models use 113A on both sides. > > Hmm....mine didn't, mine was definately A+B....cost us some > braincracking before the old ones came out, but after seeing the > different height in the old ones, all was obvious (I just for the > live of me can't remember which type went to what side....I *might* > have written that down somewhere....8-)) > > GENERALLY SPEAKING, A BASE MODEL WITH BARN DOORS USES A/A OR B/B, MODELS > WITH TAIL GATES USE A/B. HOWEVER, LOAD DISTRIBUTION HAS AN EFFECT, I HAVE USED > B/A , THAT IS WITH THE SPRINGS ON THE OTHER SIDE. THE A SPRING NORMALLY FITS > ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE (REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT IS LHD OR RHD) Aha....I keep on learning....:)) > > The difference between AXL and BXL will be about 25mm in camber. Fitting AXL > > on a B spring would have no significant effect on the height of that side, I > > would be surprised if it was as much as 5mm. Technically the only risk is > > that when the camber of an individual leaf is not in sequence with the rest > > of the pack, it can cause the leaf below it to be over-stressed and fail. > > This is pretty rare, but it has happened. > > Hmm.... > > > The simple solution is to take an AXL to a local spring re-setter and have > > them knock 20mm out of it (not 25mm because they never get it right, so it > > is better to be above than below). > > Hmm....all this is interesting....so before making any decision, we need > to check what type his current pack of 113 is....A/B, A/A or perhaps > even B/B (probably no way to distinguish the latter two, not after > some time under load, right?....general assumption: if equal, then > A/A?) > Anyway, I guess he should still be able to distinguish A from B when > the spring-eye/shackle is unloaded? > > I DOUBT IT. YOU SHOULD STILL BE ABLE TO READ THE PART NUMBER PAINTED ON THE > SPRING. Hmm....*where* exactly on the spring? Remember that the packs rust around here....;(( (Tijsterman proudly showered mine in a cloud of wax from his fancy rollerfeed barrels....but it hasn't helped anything, it rusts like the factory springs....;(( (I guess galvanizing spring-steel is impossible due to heat, right? > Btw, to falsify any possible alternatives: how can I distinguish the > US-typical rear 221? We only counted my 1131 and his, concluding that > the one leaf less on his made it 113.... > Mine has 6+2(overload), his had 5+2....what is the number on 221? > (no overloads I remember vaguely....correct?) > > ALL OF THIS IS A BIT ODD. 113 HAS 6+2 AND 1131 HAS 7+2. I DON'T THINK THERE IS > A 5+2. 221 IS A SINGLE STAGE SPRING WITH 8 LEAVES. IF YOURS IS 6+2 THAT WOULD > EXPLAIN WHY WE HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION ON RIDE QUALITY AND LOAD CARRYING. Sorry, my mistake, mine has indeed 7+2, his has 6+2....but 221 is now definately falsified on his then, good....:)) > > I know Taubenreuther's very well and I'm a little surprised that the chap > > hasn't had any help from them. He should try again. If the sales people > > aren't helpful then he should ask to speak to Peter or Axel Taubenreuther > > and mention my name. > > Not sure when you last dealed with Taubenreuther, but they have > grown quite a lot over the last couple of years....not the greasy > shop with gearheads, but relatively flashy catalogs & stuff....I > guess nowadays it is nearly impossible to sneak past the salesdroids > in a polite manner, the risk of all growing businesses. > Have heard similar complaints before....I guess it comes with the > scale of the business; less custom-order support, more off-the-shelf. > > I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT AXEL TAUBENREUTHER WILL TALK TO ME. I HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO > HIM FOR ABOUT 3 YEARS, BUT HE AND PETER ARE VERY NICE PEOPLE. WE DO NEED TO > HAVE ALL THE FACTS BEFORE I CONTACT THEM THOUGH. MAYBE YOUR GERMAN FRIEND CAN > GET INTO THIS LOOP AND READ ALL OF OUR EMAILS, THEN SEE WHERE WE CAN GO. Yes, sure will do....if he can sort it out himself after all this, all the better. > Aha, lovely detail for us Sherlocks, thanx! > Do 75's get heavier front springs then? > > SOMETIMES. They always get the good stuff....;)) (snow-plow duty comes to mind) > These didn't even come as TD....so the worst-case scenario should > weigh less.... > > > I am not aware of anyone who hsa used 1111 on > > the front of a 60. > > It's just that it drives fine now, with TJM T13+/Multifit, but > without the Warn 8274 I have in mind (and perhaps even two small > water tanks up front)....and for speed bumps I already would like a > bit more....with a Warn, I most likely definately do. > > THE ONLY WAY I CAN COMMENT ON THIS IS IF YOU MEASURE THE BUMP STOP CLEARANCE > ALL ROUND. Yes, know about that issue....mostly because of non-vibrating drive-shaft angles, right? Wrote an entire chapter on this (60-series) issue, this aspect is massively confusing, since there are differences between Aussie and European/USA models (2 joints vs 3 joints, slightly tilted gearbox etc): http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/d_cardan.txt Mine already vibrates slightly, but only in 4wd when coasting, not under load....even within bumpstop-spec. (hence I am looking for a 3-joing driveshaft in the near future) > > The > > procedure for 11311 is to delete the bolt and sleeve and bend the clips > > over, this then becomes a fold clip rather than a bolt clip. Not > > aesthetically appealing but a practical solution for that very small number > > of vehicles using 11311. > > Yup, I just wasn't sure whether there wouldn't be any factory clamp > for this purpose.... > There probably are no aluminium 'fill' pieces (next to the spring > packing, through which the U-bolt goes as well) for the 11311 pack as > well, right? > > WRONG. OME HAVE A 7MM PACKER WHICH YOU ADD TO THE ALUM BLOCKS AS YOU ADD > LEAVES. IN YOUR CASE HOWEVER, IF IT IS 6+2 YOU NEED 11MM ALUM BLOCKS. FOR 1131 > YOU NEED 18MM BLOCKS AND THEN ADD 7MM PACKERS. YOU COULD MAKE YOUR OWN. MILD > STEEL 140MM X 70MM X 7MM. Aha....my distributor never told me about these incremental packers....thanx again!....:)) Send reply to: From: "Josh Browne" To: "W. J. Markerink@A1. Nl" Subject: Your emails 9 Oct. Date sent: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 09:50:39 +1000 Hi, Current info on 11 257 111 305 (this is a 11 with an extra leaf) 110 220 (this is a different design) I have most of the up to date info on OME leaf and coil springs. The part no. is painted on the top leaf. If it is illegible then he needs the receipt from when he bought the springs. The only other option is to remove the springs and measure the camber. If you have a vibration when coasting you might like to try a castor wedge in the rear axle of 1 or 2 degrees. We often do that but mostly on 75 series. Regards Josh Send reply to: From: "Josh Browne" To: "W. J. Markerink@A1. Nl" Subject: double cardan joint Date sent: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 10:03:36 +1000 Willem Jan, In Australia the double cardan joint was dropped in '84. My guess is it was to save money, there can't have been any sensible technical reason. The double cardan joint was used on leaf front end Hilux for a long time, so you could get a second hand one of those and do some cutting and shutting. There are probably plenty of original 60 series joints at the wreckers here. Josh From: w.j.markerink@a1.nl To: dtlc@helios.net, landcruisers@birfield.com Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 23:52:07 +0200 Subject: [DTLC] OME leafs breaking: grease them! Reply-To: dtlc@helios.net Cc: jbrowne@ateco.com.au No, not me, but an interesting German thread about this subject nontheless....leaf packs rusting solid after long term non-use/road- use (winter/salt), glide-spacers apparently not (able to) doing their job, and leafs breaking without much load.... http://buschtaxi.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=12&topic=258 (no pix, German language only, sorry!) IOW: do not forget to grease those leafs too! It also makes 2-3 leaf parabolic springs with much larger spacers/spacing worth considering, like those made by a Dutch company TI-Consoles....still not sure how to rate the parabolic concept, apparently their J6 set is capable of 5.9 ton standard, 6.5 ton optional. Yes, 5900 & 6500kg, and at that level still 30-50mm bumpstop height left....8-)) Seems a much more progressive concept, somehow....but in that case it must restrict articulation at lesser weights....ya can't have the cake and eat it....8-)) CC to Josh Brown....any comments on the first part Josh? Could this explain leaf breakage in general? Only J6 has factory plastic gliders, J4/5/7(?) none at all, right? -- Bye, Willem-Jan Markerink The desire to understand is sometimes far less intelligent than the inability to understand [note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!] From: "Josh Browne" To: "W. J. Markerink@A1. Nl (E-mail)" Subject: Leaf springs Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 10:07:47 +1000 Hi Willem-Jan, Leaf springs break for a number reasons. The operating temperature should have nothing to do with it. However, in extreme conditions of snow and ice, where salt is used on the roads, then corrosion is much more rapid than it is in an environment like Australia. Here, the problem occurs mainly in underground mines where the water lying around is mostly alkaline. Alkaline conditions are actually much worse than acidic conditions. All sorts of things have been tried here, including galvanising and grease filled bags (similar to what they used to do in Japan) with a canvas bag wrapped around the spring and filled with grease. It is all too expensive, much cheaper to replace the springs every 6 or 12 months. Other possible causes are Decarburisation of the steel, that shows up as a cavity on the ends where the breakage occurred. A nice clean break indicates that decarburisation did not occur. Over-stressed design, in this case breakage usually occurs about 100mm from the eye in the top leaf, or within 50-75mm of the centre bolt on lower leaves in the pack. Incorrect spacing of the leaves, in that not enough support is provided for the main leaf, Hilux front is typical, the second leaf needs to come almost up to the centre line of the eye or the main leaf can fail. With heavily laden vehicles, overloading can also cause breakage, although sagging is a more common problem. Without having more info on the particular case I can't comment much more. Whilst OME claim their products to be "bullet proof", the realities are that they are not immune to failure, but in general any problems are usually beyond their control. The quality assurance processes are, in fact, much tighter than any of the motor companies, anywhere. Regards Josh