custom rear bumpers?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • alaskajosh
    2nd Gear
    • Sep 2007
    • 208

    custom rear bumpers?

    I think a bumper could be fabbed that offers more protection and practicality. Has anyone done one or seen one? I'd love pictures for some ideas.

    The two shortcomings I see that need addressed are 1)no protection from rear impacts (backing into trees) and 2)no protection for the rear quarter panel of bodywork.

    What I'm really thinking of is something with a slim'ish profile, smooth departure angle, integrates a step or ledge (like conventional bumpers), and, most importantly, extends body protection forward to the rear wheel well (this is a LWB).

    My cross member is in good shape... but it's gotta' go.
  • galen216
    2nd Gear
    • Nov 2006
    • 236

    #2
    Are you talking about a Series or a Rangie?
    74 SIII
    96 Disco SE-7 5 Spd.

    Comment

    • LaneRover
      Overdrive
      • Oct 2006
      • 1743

      #3
      Since series Rovers have a 'bumper' (rear crossmember) that is an integral part of the chassis most people leave it as is. So, most likely you will not be replacing the rear crossmember but adding to it.

      Some folks have definitely enhanced their rear protection by fabricating items that bolt into the factory provided 'grab handle' holes. I believe that someone out there might even sell something that also goes forward and protects the body work behind the rear wheels.

      Brent
      1958 107 SW - Sold to a better home
      1965 109 SW - nearly running well
      1966 88 SW - running but needing attention
      1969 109 P-UP

      http://www.facebook.com/album.php?ai...2&l=64cfe23aa2

      Comment

      • alaskajosh
        2nd Gear
        • Sep 2007
        • 208

        #4
        Originally posted by alaskajosh
        My cross member is in good shape... but it's gotta' go.
        Yes, I'm talking about cutting out the RCM and putting a bumper as I described in it's place. Probably bolted, not welded, to the frame.

        Thanks

        Comment

        • LaneRover
          Overdrive
          • Oct 2006
          • 1743

          #5
          Well, I am sure that everyone else will agree with me about not cutting out the rear crossmember as it is part of the frame. In my opinion you would be much better off making modifications to the existing rear cross member.

          If you do cut it out and build something bigger and stronger it would have to be welded back on for the chassis to retain its strength. If you have experience with this sort of thing then go for it and let us know what you come up with. If you don't then start by building stuff that can be added to what is there and bolted on and off.

          Brent
          1958 107 SW - Sold to a better home
          1965 109 SW - nearly running well
          1966 88 SW - running but needing attention
          1969 109 P-UP

          http://www.facebook.com/album.php?ai...2&l=64cfe23aa2

          Comment

          • leafsprung
            Overdrive
            • Nov 2006
            • 1008

            #6
            Its been done. Rear bumper, custom rear cross and rear corner protectors. If your crossmember is in good shape, Id just make corner protectors or a bumper. What are you gaining by cutting it off? Just itching to back into trees. Its more work for no real benefit.

            Comment

            • jp-
              5th Gear
              • Oct 2006
              • 981

              #7
              I agree with the others, do not cut off the rear crossmember. You need it for the strength of the frame.

              There is a problem with the rear crossmember though, and that is the tendency of the ends to bend in when hit. Both my 88" and 109" SW had bent ends. My solution was to brace the two outer ends with strong angle (or C-channel) welded back to the frame. I did this on both frames before having them galvanized. Next, I made up some custom rear "bumperettes" out of old muffler pieces and 1/8" plate. These extend at least 6" from the frame ends where the original grab handles only come out maybe 3". My intention was to make them weak enough that they collapse when hit, thereby saving my frame ends.
              61 II 109" Pickup (Restomod, 350 small block, TR4050)
              66 IIA 88" Station Wagon (sold)
              66 IIA 109" Pickup (Restomod, 5MGE, R380)
              67 IIA 109" NADA Wagon (sold)
              88, 2.5TD 110 RHD non-hicap pickup

              -I used to know everything there was to know about Land Rovers; then I joined the RN Bulletin Board.

              Comment

              • jp-
                5th Gear
                • Oct 2006
                • 981

                #8
                Here's a photo.

                They are still strong enough to stand on though.
                61 II 109" Pickup (Restomod, 350 small block, TR4050)
                66 IIA 88" Station Wagon (sold)
                66 IIA 109" Pickup (Restomod, 5MGE, R380)
                67 IIA 109" NADA Wagon (sold)
                88, 2.5TD 110 RHD non-hicap pickup

                -I used to know everything there was to know about Land Rovers; then I joined the RN Bulletin Board.

                Comment

                • TSR53
                  5th Gear
                  • Mar 2006
                  • 733

                  #9
                  <off topic>

                  JP- you been doing burnouts lately? That rear tire is looking mighty slick...

                  <back on topic...>
                  Cheers, Thompson
                  Art & Creative Director, Rovers Magazine
                  Rovers North, Inc.

                  Comment

                  • jp-
                    5th Gear
                    • Oct 2006
                    • 981

                    #10
                    Originally posted by TSR53
                    <off topic>

                    JP- you been doing burnouts lately? That rear tire is looking mighty slick...

                    <back on topic...>
                    Those were the original tires on it when I got it. At that point, I just wanted to get it out into the sun and that was all I had. They have been replaced.

                    Interestingly, I did put 1000 miles on them with no problems at all. I gave them to another Rover owner who needed them for an 88" that had no rims. That got it off the cinder blocks, at least.
                    61 II 109" Pickup (Restomod, 350 small block, TR4050)
                    66 IIA 88" Station Wagon (sold)
                    66 IIA 109" Pickup (Restomod, 5MGE, R380)
                    67 IIA 109" NADA Wagon (sold)
                    88, 2.5TD 110 RHD non-hicap pickup

                    -I used to know everything there was to know about Land Rovers; then I joined the RN Bulletin Board.

                    Comment

                    • Jim-ME
                      Overdrive
                      • Oct 2006
                      • 1379

                      #11
                      In my opinion I totally agree with not removing the rear crossmember. Try Pangolin 4X4 http://www.pangolin4x4.com/pangolin4.../products.html
                      If Ike will make it then you will have a work of art that will more than do the job. Until then learn where your rear crossmember is and don't hit anything.
                      Jim

                      Comment

                      • alaskajosh
                        2nd Gear
                        • Sep 2007
                        • 208

                        #12
                        Speaking of Pangolin-- this picture shows almost exactly what I was thinking. And it's definately there in place of the RCM.


                        The only think I'd add (if this one doesn't have it.. it may and I can't see) is to wrap it forward to the wheel wells... tougher on a LWB of course.

                        Comment

                        • LaneRover
                          Overdrive
                          • Oct 2006
                          • 1743

                          #13
                          Exactly, it may be there in place of the RCM and if it is I will bet you $100 that it is welded in place and not bolted on.

                          If it is there IN ADDITION to the RCM then it may be bolted on.

                          I'm not saying that you shouldn't replace the RCM with something stouter. I am saying that you can't cut that off and then just bolt something else on because you will lose the strength. No matter what you have to weld some sort of strengthening piece to tie the frame rails together at the end.

                          Brent
                          1958 107 SW - Sold to a better home
                          1965 109 SW - nearly running well
                          1966 88 SW - running but needing attention
                          1969 109 P-UP

                          http://www.facebook.com/album.php?ai...2&l=64cfe23aa2

                          Comment

                          • LaneRover
                            Overdrive
                            • Oct 2006
                            • 1743

                            #14
                            If you scroll down on the page where you got the Pangolin bumper picture you will see an example of a piece they made that protects the bodywork, and also sticks out from further back from the RCM. Unless there is a strengthening piece that I don't see you may still have the problems with bending the ends of the RCM that JP mentioned.

                            Brent
                            1958 107 SW - Sold to a better home
                            1965 109 SW - nearly running well
                            1966 88 SW - running but needing attention
                            1969 109 P-UP

                            http://www.facebook.com/album.php?ai...2&l=64cfe23aa2

                            Comment

                            • alaskajosh
                              2nd Gear
                              • Sep 2007
                              • 208

                              #15
                              Well Lane, I guess wouldn't hesitate to take you up on that bet..

                              My curiousity (concerning the weld vs. bolt) got the better of me and I called a civil engineering friend. He said--first and foremost-- that in this application it wouldn't matter too much either way because the forces being generated in this area (the end of the frame rails) and in this application just aren't that great. Properly done (of course) a bolted on cross member could easily handle it.

                              I was satisfied with this response but academicly I wondered further about the strength of the Land Rover's welded connection to the RCM vs. a bolted on application... Could the same strength be achieved with bolts?

                              He said the same strength could certainly be achieved and exceeded and went on to describe how, also citing examples in the construction world where this applied.

                              I wouldn't be suprised if Pangolin reached some of the same conclusions and opted to bolt on that rear bumper pictured.

                              It's fun to talk about though.. this kind of stuff fascinates me.

                              Comment

                              Working...