[rpmwrx]

I'm in the market for a new front bar for project Emu but I'm undecided on either the run of the mill ARB bar or Uneek bar. I had ARB bars on my previous Sierra's and can't really fault them. In saying that, I wouldn't mind something different. If anyone has got any thoughts or previous experiences with either bars, that would be appreciated. I haven't really heard any feedback on the Uneek bar, but it looks good and I like the fact that I can fit a larger than 8000 pound winch.

If there are any other options, post the detail up. I wanna see them. Thanks...

https://www.arb.com.au/suzuki-sierra-sj ... 1982-1996/
http://www.uneek4x4.com.au/suzuki-sierr ... 1981-1998/

[suzukikid]

Saad runs the uneek bar Andy runs arb maybe we head bush and do some measurements put them up against different things!

I find with both I don't like how far they hang down and out...

[alien]

The real difference is whether you like/want/need the headlight surrounds and radiator uprights / light holders.

I'd make the decision based on that.

[rpmwrx]

Thanks Alien, i'm leaning towards the Uneek bar...

[evski]

I've got the Uneek bar and love it. You need to do a small amount of welding, but it is simple. It is lighter than the ARB bar too, and is holding up well. Not that it has been further than my backyard, stupid project cars.

[ZUZUKI]

Piranha / Seriously Suzi do a bar along the lines of the Uneek, ie low profile 'bumper replacement' type, with a central radiator protection hoop, but not headlight hoops.
A couple of issues for the ARB bar (not sure how the Uneek mounts) is that it uses the original outboard flat plates on the tubular crossmember that mount the stock bumper. Many cars have had these mounts cut off, to clear bigger tyres. This only leaves 2 bolts per side at the ends of the chassis rails for mounting - known to tear out with winching loads. Other thing is that they were designed for non body lifted cars, although plates are available to lift the bar up.
The Piranha bar uses the end of chassis holes, but also has 2 straps that run up the inside of the rails. Drilling a hole vertically through the chassis & using a crush tube with nut & bolt, picks up these straps & makes a secure mounting - a bit of a pain to do & not everyone likes the idea of drilling the chassis - in the top & bottom 'flanges' which is less structurally critical than the vertical surfaces.
Also have a tubular end style (indicators/parkers need to be catered for in a different way than the stock assemblies), for that 'comp truck' look. Available to suit 2" body lift & stock height.
Rgs, Michael

[got_bar_work]

Top and bottom is the most important part not the sides. The sides are only there to keep the top and bottom in place. Look at truck chassis. They have thousands of holes drilled along them.

[frak]

Agreed. Put a beam into bending stress eg support two ends and put a weight in the middle and you get tension on the bottom and compression at the top.

The very middle has neither tension not compression.

Hence a hole in the middle of the side will have almost no effect on stress handling.

Truss bridges deal with the same situation.

That doesn't mean there cant be holes on the top or bottom of a chassis rail..it means that if there are said parts designed for it eg will be thicker typically to deal with the strength loss.

[ZUZUKI]

Yes, my bad.
The chassis is dipping down at the front & it's obviously between the suspension load areas, and between the engine mount & front spring hanger.
There hasn't been an issue with bending / cracking at this introduced hole point that I am aware of, but as I say, not everyone is keen on the idea.
Rgs, Michael