Soft vs. Hard Shackles

[Regcabguy]

We were driving a '78 F-250 4x4 into a very remote Baja point break. There's some salt flats that go on for miles and miles. My friend veered off the track for a second and buried the two right wheels in the muck. A Mexican with a old Chevy shortbed with bald tires boinged us out with a couple of attempts. I had to convince him to haul ass. Those straps are amazing.

 

[Metcalf]

How is margin bad? I know your point is always you want to reduce mass but that only matters if you've exceeded your known WLL and are expecting the piece will break. If a rigging system is all within capacity, in good condition and has margin there's no reason you must assume it'll fail. The chance a 4.75 ton shackle is going to fail is exceptionally rare.

So there's always the possibility that an unknown will fail and that's probably the connection on the vehicle. But if that fails with all the rigging still attached then there's nothing more you could have done to reduce that risk. But if a receiver hitch or bumper comes loose of it's truck its inertia is working for you, not against. High inertia means slow acceleration. A 100 lbs bumper isn't going to readily accelerate and as a result can't travel far before digging into the dirt.

Connecting to a sketchy clevis is risky regardless if it's a hard or soft shackle. If a couple of pound clevis tears its crap welds from a bumper it's still a violent projectile even if you used a soft shackle. Maybe you then make the shackle a fuse by intentionally under sizing? That seems like a risk of having an uncontrolled failure point. And despite the popular belief even light weight stuff can be accelerated to dangerous velocity. There's plenty of Youtube videos of synthetic winch lines not just falling to the ground like everyone thinks it will.

This is where it feels we are heading.....



When was the last time you saw a catastrophic failure of a hard shackle....of any normal or even under-size unit?

For me, the amount of heavy steel gear people are throwing around is worrisome.

I think using larger recovery gear is giving people a false sense of security that is causing more damage to vehicles.....failed bumpers, bent recovery mounts, etc. It is just a general trend that I am seeing that I just don't like the feel of. You basically never know what your hooking onto. I see LOTS of big beefy shackles on some really sketch mounts. Maybe it is just the indicator I pick up on that is pointing to a larger issue.

 

[DaveInDenver]

This is where it feels we are heading.....

View attachment 642905

When was the last time you saw a catastrophic failure of a hard shackle....of any normal or even under-size unit?

For me, the amount of heavy steel gear people are throwing around is worrisome.

I think using larger recovery gear is giving people a false sense of security that is causing more damage to vehicles.....failed bumpers, bent recovery mounts, etc. It is just a general trend that I am seeing that I just don't like the feel of. You basically never know what your hooking onto. I see LOTS of big beefy shackles on some really sketch mounts. Maybe it is just the indicator I pick up on that is pointing to a larger issue.

I've never seen a hard shackle fail. I doubt anyone has seen one from an accepted rigging source (e.g. the usual suspects for overhead) fail nor even a non-rated but otherwise decent quality one from a legitimate 4x4 supplier. There's probably been cheap shackles that failed at some point, somewhere but that's not statistically important. Just like the coal rollers hanging 55 ton shackles on their trucks isn't demonstrative of anything. It's just absurd to compare that to someone using a 4.75 ton shackle correctly.

So I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying we shouldn't being using right sized stuff because it has no history of failing? What's the problem being solved?

I'd ask the same question about pulleys. Have you ever seen a tree strap, shackle and steel pulley fail and become a projectile such that the lower mass of an aluminum ring and soft shackle may have been critical?

I agree with you about terrible designed recovery points and bumpers. Something like this was purely cosmetic. But I don't understand how a failure such as this can be used to vilify the shackle nor how it would have been any safer had it launched if it was connected to a soft shackle.

 

[billiebob]

At what point are we over-rigging things? I can't see needing a 3/4-7/8 shackle on anything in my 3k-7k vehicle stable. I've been taking a hard look at if overhead lifting FoS factors are creating more issues than they are solving in the off-road recovery market. I haven't seen a single recovery point in recent memory that would come even be close to withstanding loads from shackles this size. I have to ask myself if we aren't creating a larger risk in potentially failing the recovery point ( adding it's mass ) to the larger heavy metal shackle. It seems like a dangerous evil circle.

I can see a 2-3:1 FoS in vehicle recovery being a safe margin....but ~6:1 seems to be getting ridiculous to me.

yep, I bought the smallest Epic shackles and use 1" webbing/tree savers. I'll be selling the 20K # pulley this summer. I have 2 8K # pulleys in case I want to redirect the pull.

This was my "rescue" inventory. Now much smaller.
Those battery cables I built in the 1970s.

Must admit internet forums like this lead to many useless purchases lol.

 

[billiebob]

I agree with you about terrible designed recovery points and bumpers. Something like this was purely cosmetic.

View attachment 642915

the most basic truth...... a shackle recovery point MUST bolt directly to the frame
guys who buy this crap should be neutered.

 

[vtsoundman]

At what point are we over-rigging things? I can't see needing a 3/4-7/8 shackle on anything in my 3k-7k vehicle stable. I've been taking a hard look at if overhead lifting FoS factors are creating more issues than they are solving in the off-road recovery market. I haven't seen a single recovery point in recent memory that would come even be close to withstanding loads from shackles this size. I have to ask myself if we aren't creating a larger risk in potentially failing the recovery point ( adding it's mass ) to the larger heavy metal shackle. It seems like a dangerous evil circle.

I can see a 2-3:1 FoS in vehicle recovery being a safe margin....but ~6:1 seems to be getting ridiculous to me.

OVERLANDING = OVERDOING Sheesh! Get with the program! hahah

 

[Old Tanker]

At what point are we over-rigging things? I can't see needing a 3/4-7/8 shackle on anything in my 3k-7k vehicle stable. I've been taking a hard look at if overhead lifting FoS factors are creating more issues than they are solving in the off-road recovery market. I haven't seen a single recovery point in recent memory that would come even be close to withstanding loads from shackles this size. I have to ask myself if we aren't creating a larger risk in potentially failing the recovery point ( adding it's mass ) to the larger heavy metal shackle. It seems like a dangerous evil circle.

I can see a 2-3:1 FoS in vehicle recovery being a safe margin....but ~6:1 seems to be getting ridiculous to me.

Maxtrax markets one of their soft shackles as a "fuse shackle", providing a known weakest point in the chain. You use that somewhere in the middle - inboard of any metal hardware - to minimize the likelihood of mass flying at you. I agree with your point in that if we try to make every part of the chain bulletproof we risk being surprised by the point of failure.

 

[Metcalf]

I've never seen a hard shackle fail. I doubt anyone has seen one from an accepted rigging source (e.g. the usual suspects for overhead) fail nor even a non-rated but otherwise decent quality one from a legitimate 4x4 supplier. There's probably been cheap shackles that failed at some point, somewhere but that's not statistically important. Just like the coal rollers hanging 55 ton shackles on their trucks isn't demonstrative of anything. It's just absurd to compare that to someone using a 4.75 ton shackle correctly.

So I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying we shouldn't being using right sized stuff because it has no history of failing? What's the problem being solved?

I am pondering if we are fundamentally over-rigging vehicle recoveries because of bleed over from overly stringent overhead lifting requirements.

What makes a "4.75 ton" shackle the correct answer?

The 'problems' being solved are weight, cost, storage volume, complexity, fatigue on the operator during recovery, etc.

I've been really happy to see synthetic soft light rigging being used more in all corners of industry, not just in the recreational 4wd market.

If we don't keep questioning what we are doing, we won't learn anything new.

 

[DaveInDenver]

Maxtrax markets one of their soft shackles as a "fuse shackle", providing a known weakest point in the chain. You use that somewhere in the middle - inboard of any metal hardware - to minimize the likelihood of mass flying at you. I agree with your point in that if we try to make every part of the chain bulletproof we risk being surprised by the point of failure.

MAXTRAX Fuse Shackle

The MAXTRAX FUSE SHACKLE has been designed and tested as part of the MAXTRAX RECOVERY SYSTEM. The MAXTRAX RECOVERY SYSTEM is comprised solely of MAXTRAX products and has not been tested with any third party branded products. Critically, if the MAXTRAX RECOVERY SYSTEM is overloaded the MAXTRAX...

www.maxtrax.com.au

Looks to be designed to fail at 7,000 kgs (15,432 lbs).

I'd like to see people's opinions about intentionally putting a weak point in a recovery chain. As a practical matter my ARB recovery point is rated for 17,500 lbs (margin unknown, must be some), which makes me wonder how precise a soft shackle failure can be engineered. It certainly can't be proof tested individually so it's rated by similarity but whether it actually fails at 7,000 kg seems completely determined on workmanship and condition of the rope. IOW, what is the tolerance for that value?

I also wonder if an engineered and designed point like an ARB with 5 bolts holding it to my frame is rated to 17,500 lbs what do you suppose is the failure point of sketchy points like that plate bumper? That could have happened at half that, which renders the fuse shackle as unhelpful.

So rather than going overboard convincing yourself you need a higher rated piece of gear the race becomes to the bottom to be the lightest thing and you'll never be able to generate enough force to actually recover anyone as you'll end up with a length of dental floss in the middle.

If you've sharpened your pencil and done your analysis why must a failure be assumed as imminent? As a project manager once asked in a critical design review meeting, "Are there any unknowns we don't know about?" Sure there are but we can't paralyze ourselves going down what-if rabbit holes. If the gear is all sized appropriately and is trustworthy and you take precautions with keeping the area clear then the risk is managed. It's what riggers and tow drivers do everyday.

It seems to me the fuse should be things like winches stalling and the surprise be bumpers pulled off or frames tweaking. If there's any question to the integrity of the connection you have to make a decision maybe not to use it.

 

[NORDFORD]

Most of the errors I see are human. You can give someone all the “right” stuff, but without training or knowledge it’s worthless.

 

[WOODY2]

Most of the errors I see are human. You can give someone all the “right” stuff, but without training or knowledge it’s worthless.

Somebody has to demonstrate Darwinism.