The weight and tipping angle is triangulated over the splayed from wheels. Making it wider just makes it harder to work around. 10:26 and you need to adjust your welder by the sounds of it.
You’re right about the welder. It does fine for a bit then it starts acting weird. Probably a super short duty cycle. And for a follow up it’s much easier to use now. It lowered the hoist 1/2”. I’m confused on where I made it wider other than the back. The other 2 I have, have exactly what I added to this. Also another feature I found I love is the fact that I can lock the wheels and this thing is like stone. Won’t budge.
In my experience, when there is an engine on the hook, the wider and longer you can make the footprint of the picker, the greater stability and reduced chances of tipping over when the arm is fully extended to get the engine, or engine transmission combo high enough to clear the core support. The wider and longer the better. It's definitely more awkward to move and manipulate under load, but it's worth it for the increased stability during those times.
I think you unknowingly reduced the load capacity of your hoist considerably. The choice of castor looks nice assuming it's load capacity is matched to that of the hoist. The more common alteration to drop the height of the hoist would be to make a 45 degree cut at the end of the box steel castor mount, followed by fabbing a castor mount pad from a thick piece of steel 1/2"-5/8" thick. The pad is generally wide enough to exceed the footprint of the castor by at least 50 percent. That offset part of the pad is then welded to thd top of the box steel. Personally, I would not trust the alteration you made to the hoist to not fail with the hoist at it's full load capacity. The castor is probably not an issue, but the alteration to that mount almost certainly is. I hope for your sake you are right and i am wrong. Having a failure like that never happens under good circumstances either. Generally, legs are fully extended for width and length, the hoist boom is near full extension, and a fully dressed V-8 is dangling from the hook right over the radiator core support! Very bad time to have an "OH SHIT" moment. 😮
I appreciate your comment. I think you are putting a lot of faith in the engineering of a cheap Chinese hoist. I would put this up to a late model hoist any day. I have a much better hoist. I modified this to model that one with the exception of casters. The reason it’s lowered it to compensate for the larger wheels. No point in over engineering the legs to compensate the capacity of the wheels and hoist itself. The thing I didn’t do to the front was box the ends like I did the back. My use for this hoist would solely be for 400lbs and under. But I’m always careful. I move slow and out of the way and anticipate possible failures even with “unmodified” tools. What do you think will fail? Do you think the mounting pads will bend and tear?
I would have agreed with your design if the wall thickness of the tubing you used was at least 1/4" wall thickness. I think it will be prone to failure where the angle cut you made meets the flat. That is the weakest point in the design. Like I said, had you used 1/4" thick wall tubing, I would have said nothing. You nailed it, the altered castor mount I think would at least bend, and possibly tear, but bend for sure. My prediction is based on use as the manufacturer designed and intended the hoist to be used at its original capacity. As long as you are the only guy that ever uses the hoist and know you have drastically reduced the max load capacity and use it accordingly I guess you would be fine. But heaven help the guy trying to lift the weight load the hoist was originally designed for. Thank you for not lashing out at me for my criticism. My comments were not made with malice. Some things are better being over built, jack stands, jacks, engine stands, engine hoists. Overhead shop rail systems, trolleys and chain/cable hoists. More is ALWAYS better.
@@herbholmberg4474 Fair enough. But I’m very comfortable with its strength for what I’m using it for. I have used it. It rolls very well. I will do an update video on it and I will mention your concerns and points. Because there is one feature on the boom that I feel is unsafe and I’m going to “modify even more lol.” So like and subscribe and please comment. I value everyone’s opinion if they have something to back it up and I agree with you that the modification and its limitations. I do have two heavier engine hoist for larger jobs. Have a great day Herb.
"leading a drunk to church" lol
Perfect,just what I’d use if I needed them but I do like the fold up .mine wasn’t but is now.oh crap sounds like you’re not far from me
The weight and tipping angle is triangulated over the splayed from wheels. Making it wider just makes it harder to work around.
10:26 and you need to adjust your welder by the sounds of it.
You’re right about the welder. It does fine for a bit then it starts acting weird. Probably a super short duty cycle. And for a follow up it’s much easier to use now. It lowered the hoist 1/2”. I’m confused on where I made it wider other than the back. The other 2 I have, have exactly what I added to this. Also another feature I found I love is the fact that I can lock the wheels and this thing is like stone. Won’t budge.
In my experience, when there is an engine on the hook, the wider and longer you can make the footprint of the picker, the greater stability and reduced chances of tipping over when the arm is fully extended to get the engine, or engine transmission combo high enough to clear the core support. The wider and longer the better. It's definitely more awkward to move and manipulate under load, but it's worth it for the increased stability during those times.
I think you unknowingly reduced the load capacity of your hoist considerably.
The choice of castor looks nice assuming it's load capacity is matched to that of the hoist. The more common alteration to drop the height of the hoist would be to make a 45 degree cut at the end of the box steel castor mount, followed by fabbing a castor mount pad from a thick piece of steel 1/2"-5/8" thick. The pad is generally wide enough to exceed the footprint of the castor by at least 50 percent. That offset part of the pad is then welded to thd top of the box steel.
Personally, I would not trust the alteration you made to the hoist to not fail with the hoist at it's full load capacity. The castor is probably not an issue, but the alteration to that mount almost certainly is.
I hope for your sake you are right and i am wrong. Having a failure like that never happens under good circumstances either. Generally, legs are fully extended for width and length, the hoist boom is near full extension, and a fully dressed V-8 is dangling from the hook right over the radiator core support! Very bad time to have an "OH SHIT" moment. 😮
I appreciate your comment. I think you are putting a lot of faith in the engineering of a cheap Chinese hoist. I would put this up to a late model hoist any day. I have a much better hoist. I modified this to model that one with the exception of casters. The reason it’s lowered it to compensate for the larger wheels. No point in over engineering the legs to compensate the capacity of the wheels and hoist itself. The thing I didn’t do to the front was box the ends like I did the back. My use for this hoist would solely be for 400lbs and under. But I’m always careful. I move slow and out of the way and anticipate possible failures even with “unmodified” tools. What do you think will fail? Do you think the mounting pads will bend and tear?
I would have agreed with your design if the wall thickness of the tubing you used was at least 1/4" wall thickness. I think it will be prone to failure where the angle cut you made meets the flat. That is the weakest point in the design. Like I said, had you used 1/4" thick wall tubing, I would have said nothing. You nailed it, the altered castor mount I think would at least bend, and possibly tear, but bend for sure. My prediction is based on use as the manufacturer designed and intended the hoist to be used at its original capacity. As long as you are the only guy that ever uses the hoist and know you have drastically reduced the max load capacity and use it accordingly I guess you would be fine. But heaven help the guy trying to lift the weight load the hoist was originally designed for.
Thank you for not lashing out at me for my criticism. My comments were not made with malice.
Some things are better being over built, jack stands, jacks, engine stands, engine hoists. Overhead shop rail systems, trolleys and chain/cable hoists. More is ALWAYS better.
@@herbholmberg4474 Fair enough. But I’m very comfortable with its strength for what I’m using it for. I have used it. It rolls very well. I will do an update video on it and I will mention your concerns and points. Because there is one feature on the boom that I feel is unsafe and I’m going to “modify even more lol.” So like and subscribe and please comment. I value everyone’s opinion if they have something to back it up and I agree with you that the modification and its limitations. I do have two heavier engine hoist for larger jobs. Have a great day Herb.
Good dogs. 100% the reason for my upvote. Content was a bonus. Thanks.
Thanks. I try to include or “feature” i different dog each video. But Axle seems to have decided to steal the show lately.
Good work buddy!
Thanks kohl!