Fino's 1970 Mini Build Thread

The bottom section I put in goes up about 2" as I wanted to cover all the holes in the frame rails with the patch section. Welded inside and out. Smoothed over for the 1/8" fish plate on the outside @ 2" wide. Inside is boxed with 1/8" as well. Front cross member is 2" X 3" X 1/4" - ran out of my normal C channel and went to this on the last couple ones I've done as I got it in a 20' chunk while picking up some other steel.

Hangers have a full perimeter weld on them.

 

Putting the bumper and tow brackets back on....as the tow bracket position moved inward a bit to mount using the new front tubing crossmember, I had to redrill the bumper, and of course, some of the old holes were just in the way of the new holes, so welded those up first. Everything is mostly nicely aligned with 1/2" bolts. Will look like this....4 bolts through the brackets, bumper and then the tubing:


So my question is...this 1/4" tubing is pretty darn burly - but should I weld in sleeves for where the bolts go through? After test fitting, I used the old 1.5"x2" backing plates for the tow bar brackets behind the tubing.


That seems way more solid than what was there before (mounted through the oem bumper with bumper bolted to frame rails), I would venture that unless the tow brackets were being used for recovery (which they currently do not fit typical 3/4" shackles), there would never be a problem. But as the sleeves are not so much about pulling strength, but rather to prevent inward collapsing of the tubing from squeezing the bolt, maybe I should drill them out bigger and put the sleeves in? From what I gather, the weld on the sleeve ends is more about holding the sleeve in place when sliding the bolt through and fastening etc....its strength against the squeezing isn't really determined by the weld in any way.

 

Chances of pulling through that with the tow bar are pretty small. I would sleeve them if your going to keep them out of habit myself.

 

ok - going to weld in the sleeves....




My initial plan is to weld around the sleeve tubing with some extra length sticking out (like in the pictures) so that the weld doesn't overflow into the hollow center. I did put a small bevel on the hole in the rectangular tubing to help create just a bit more space for the weld to fill. Then cut the excess off and grind flat. My main concern is that when I grind flat, most of the weld will grind away with that, and may not leave much weld left between the sleeve and the rectangular tubing. I could cut the the sleeves to fit in length, or just short of length, and then weld around the 'end' ring of the sleeve and grind flat. This would probably be a bit stronger, but I guess I could always drill out any weld that overflowed into the center.

 

As long as your bolting something to the face of the cross member and not using threads in the sleeves to hold against a pull, you don't have to worry too much about the penetration around the sleeves. You have small plates on the back side and a larger hing plate on the front. The sleeve is there to prevent crush first and tearing across the face second. If you were putting threaded sleeves to bolt too - that would need more/better penetration on the weld.

 

thanks guys - this is really about crush prevention as opposed to needing to resist pull along the long central axis, not threaded. Bolts go through and nuts on back side with small backing plates. I'll make sure to get good bevel all the way around and run it as hot as it goes....I did some practice ones yesterday at full heat and it seemed to work. I cut through them see how the weld looked, and yes, bevel seemed to be the way to go.

 

Suggesting i should use threaded sleeves? - that might be needed for the winch mount when it goes through the boxed frame rails

 

Guess it depends on your definition of 'substandard weld'... my point was that it does not have to have the same penetration and holding factor. If it does, I do something similar to Fireball's diagram where I bevel and remove points on the star to get full penetration and a better hold. I also use thicker walls for the threads and weld penetration on the Sleeves.

Never had one of mine come apart or 'fall out'... at least not in the past 40+ years I've been doing them that way.

 

that is exactly how I got the 'bevel'....

As has been mentioned above - just for flat towing the sleeves are probably not needed....but its kind of an interesting project for a noob like me to work on. I learn something from doing it, even its its not done as well as it could be by others. The good news for a project like this, if I am not perfect its not critical.

 

Well....its definitely not as ideal as I was hoping....after cutting off and grinding flat, most the 8 ends have some section of the sleeve end that is not welded (20-30%) - you can still see part of the circular end. As I was welding it, it definitely seemed the bead was too big for the bevel space, and I was struggling to make nice segments around the sleeve with the end sticking out - kind of a circular fillet weld all the way around. Its going to go as is for now - I do have time to grind out the welds and drive out the sleeve, and try again tomorrow as the replacement spring should arrive Friday now (UPS sent delay notification - arghhh), but I think that will wait until fall. Will be interesting to see if the sleeves have cracked loose. I will try welding them with the ends flush next time, and basically open up and deepen the space around the sleeve.

A quick spray paint is going on tonight, and then we'll squeeze the sleeves with the mounting bolts and plates so they aren't going anywhere even if they crack loose. Hope the leaf spring isn't delayed any longer - otherwise its out of time for the San Juans. I need to do something other than breath metal dust.....

 

Not cj related....We have 3 road trips coming up this Aug (including the upcoming ecj5 San Juan trip), and I am sure we'll add in a couple in the fall (Moab?), so I replaced the tires on DD tacoma. For the last 100k miles or so, I have run 2 sets of the Hankook Dynapro AT tire (P265/75/16) - absolutely no complaints as they have been a good mix of mostly on road and snow usage, and some easier off road stuff. One big advantage they had in snow over other more budget tires was the siping goes down through the entire tread block - so even as the tires wear down near the end of their life, the snow traction holds in pretty well (many tires are only siped half way down). I had been a BFG and Goodyear AT user for quite a long time, but the price savings of the Hankooks was significant so I tried them. I even found them on a good deal in LT30x9.5 for the 58 wagon.

Of course, now the price of the Hankook's has gotten a bit steep, as well as I was looking to get an LT rated tire instead of the P-series - starting to carry more load in the truck more often between the fully loaded raft gear and more landscaping dirt rock etc. So going to try these Nankang AT tires in an LT rating for a bit less than the Hankook P-series. The visual of the tread pattern seems a bit less aggressive for off-road use, but they also are supposedly really good in the snow (which is probably my biggest need, especially with another full winter in Montana coming up). Both the Hankook and the Nankang (and many others) are M+S rated, but the Nankang also has the severe snowflake symbol, and is designed to take studs - but I am going studless. Nankang is from Taiwan (was actually the state rubber company - so better quality than China) and they have developed a pretty good reputation among the front wheel and street racer crowds. They may not make the 50,000+ miles the Hankooks made if the rubber is really soft, but at some cost savings even with the LT rating, if they get close to 40,000 and provide good winter traction, then it will be worth it - The plan is for the truck to move on in another 1-1.5 years, so that is generally 20-30,000 miles (and put the it near 200,000 total).