Hi-Lift accessory review on OT&T

[haven]

http://www.overlandexpo.com/overland-tech-travel/2012/12/15/transform-your-hi-lift-jack.html

If you have a High Lift jack, be sure to read Jonathan Hanson's review of the Bogart Manufacturing Safe Jack accessory.

The review is published on Jonathan's Overland Tech and Travel blog. OT&T has become a must-read site for overland travelers.

 

[LR Max]

Link to sellers webpage where this is for sale?

 

[takesiteasy]

Link to sellers webpage where this is for sale?

http://bmihydraulics.com/index.php?...ategory_id=12&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=23

 

[BigSwede]

Looks very nice...costs twice what I paid for the Hi-Lift, but still nice. I know a guy who wishes he would have had one of these, got severely injured when the vehicle he was working on fell on him.

 

[bfdiesel]

looks like an expensive board

 

[Jonathan Hanson]

looks like an expensive board

So have you tried it? Seen one in person? I'm curious to hear from other first-hand users.

 

[bfdiesel]

If they gave me one I might try it, but at $110.00 I don't forsee getting one. The times I have needed a larger foot print for deep mud and the such I used boards alittle bigger than the safe jack. A couple of those times I had to use more than just boards and the only thing to come back out of the mud was the high lift and the base, barely. I would consider building one if I needed my high lift to be more stable, but the beauty of a high lift is part instability and part lifting height.

I liked the review I just don't think much of the products price.

 

[bftank]

looks like it would only be useful on flat ground. i think i would rather carry plywood , than steel plate and cables.

 

[Jonathan Hanson]

Its usefulness - i.e. stability - actually increases when the ground isn't flat. A piece of plywood, or the red plastic bases, don't help at all in those situations.

 

[bftank]

can you explain this too me? because i am picturing being twisted up in the rocks and the only decent spot to put this jack is at an angle which puts this base on a corner. in my mind it seems like it would be less stable.

too clarify i would NOT (edit) be using the plywood in this example. i am just trying to understand how this base makes off camber jacking more stable having a hard time picturing it being more stable


reading how the price got jacked up in the comments doesn't help me want to buy it either

 

[bfdiesel]

Its usefulness - i.e. stability - actually increases when the ground isn't flat. A piece of plywood, or the red plastic bases, don't help at all in those situations.

?
Over just the jack on flat ground or over a jack with the safe jack accessory on flat ground?

Bases are just for soft surface not necessarily for uneven ground or in the rocks.

Is there a side loading spec I can't find one. Was just wondering about the cable rating mostly after I watched the video and the jack beam was flexing.

 

[Jonathan Hanson]

can you explain this too me? because i am picturing being twisted up in the rocks and the only decent spot to put this jack is at an angle which puts this base on a corner. in my mind it seems like it would be less stable.

Sure: Try to use a Hi-Lift to raise one end of a vehicle on anything but perfectly level ground, and it will try to tip off, especially if you're jacking the rear where a set parking brake is no help and you have to rely solely on blocking the wheels. Agreed? Even on level ground, you know it doesn't take much of a shove to tip the vehicle sideways off the jack. As I wrote in the review, sometimes you want that, but a lot of times you don't. The Safe Jack adds a huge amount of sideways stability on level ground, and gives you a good five degrees worth of tilt leeway either side if the ground is not level. Obviously it will not work in every situation, but it does significantly expand the situational capabilities of the jack, as well as its safety.

Regarding the cost, the unit I tested was a prototype and $69 was the price at that time. Apparently the company decided that production at that level wasn't feasible. I know that, even at $109, I wouldn't try to replicate it myself. And it's a better deal at that than $45 for the red plastic base. I did make a double-thickness piece of plywood with a simple perimeter for the jack base rather than pay that.

 

[bftank]

ok, i can see what you are saying now. in areas where the jack is slightly off camber 5 degrees or less it is more stable side to side. correct? i agree with this to a degree. if you don't have to lift very high absolutely, but as we all know the higher you go on a jack with it tilted base or no, the more likely it is to slip because it is no longer balanced.

i think for me this is where i don't feel this benefit is worth the added mass of this device in comparison to something flat like a good plywood base. just my opinion. any time i have two wheel off the ground with a hilift, i am trying to tip the vehicle off the jack to move the frontend over. if i need both tires off the ground for maintanence (sp?) it is obviously safer to do one side at a time and stack rocks or wood to support the axle like a jackstand. if the jack is tilted only five degrees it is very easy to level out the plywood with dirt, rocks, or toes as needed.

my opinion. not a necessity for the creative offroader. unless it is made of titanium and has a khaki carry bag of course!:sombrero:


now that you have read this please bear in mind that this response is coming from someone that is cheap out of necessity and not by choice. thank you for sharing the creative stuff people come up with.

 

[Jonathan Hanson]

now that you have read this please bear in mind that this response is coming from someone that is cheap out of necessity and not by choice. thank you for sharing the creative stuff people come up with.

No problem.

Interestingly, the inventor of the product approached Bloomfield, the maker of the Hi-lift, to see if they wanted to carry it, and they said no. I'm not surprised - to have said otherwise would have been to admit that the Hi-Lift is less than perfect, which they are reluctant to do. The rest of us know better.

 

[bfdiesel]

No problem.

Interestingly, the inventor of the product approached Bloomfield, the maker of the Hi-lift, to see if they wanted to carry it, and they said no. I'm not surprised - to have said otherwise would have been to admit that the Hi-Lift is less than perfect, which they are reluctant to do. The rest of us know better.

Could be they saw it side loads the beam of the jack and didn't want to be warrantying bent jacks or worse having a broken cable hurt some one. I watched the video of them testing it and just that relatively lite jeep was deflecting the beam four inches or more. That is a lot of energy, a cable coming loose is likely to do some serious damage.

These jacks are not the safest tool we have, but they do a job that is needed. The safe jack doesn't solve any problems I have with the high lift, if I am lifting more than one tyre at a time it is to shift the vehicle so increasing the stability does that no good.

The more I think about this thing the more I think it is a broken cable away from never being made again.