Who makes aluminum sliders?

For what it's worth I'm a weight weenie too, what I went with was weld-on DOM sliders.

The elephant in the room is that making bolt on sliders significantly increases the overall weight because you have to add a big ass plate to bolt through.
If you weld it on, there's no need for the plate and you can shave off a good 20 pounds-ish, depending on application.

I got mine from Avid offroad, they were welded on in an afternoon and I'm happy as hell and I paid about $200 less than most sliders on the market.

 

I've got a DOM set on mine with quite a few dents and scrapes. More than once I've come off a ledge faster than planned and had my truck drop on the sliders, that's what I bought them for, not as steps or shopping cart protection.


I would never run an aluminum set, but also wouldn't want a set that is so hard it won't dent. And after too much abuse they will hit the scrap pile having paid for themselves

 

This entire conversation is getting nowhere. Key facts:

• Aluminum is more brittle than steel, making it more likely to fracture in an impact.
• Aluminum is softer than steel, making it more susceptible to scratching.
• Aluminum requires a thicker wall on tube to have the same tensile strength, meaning more volume of aluminum relative to steel, negating a lot of weight savings.

You wouldn't make armor out of fiberglass or carbon fiber in the same way you wouldn't out of aluminum.

Even arguing aluminum is a good option if you really don't offroad much or hard, and only want it for an "oh shit" moment isn't a good argument -- the last thing you want in "oh shit" moment is an inferior product that is going to break or crack.


You can't offroad and camp lightweight in a truck, your base weight unloaded is already at 2 tons without adding ANYTHING. Another 40lbs more weight for steel sliders over aluminum isn't going to make a difference.


If you want to go lightweight, get a KTM250EXC, and go moto camping with backpacking gear. I had tons of fun doing that for years when I was younger. Me + bike + gear was well under 500lbs fully loaded with fuel.

 

Well....since we are being details oriented, you are technically wrong.

Many old and modern APCs and light fighting vehicles are armoured with aluminum, including the M113, Bradley etc.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M113_armored_personnel_carrier

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Fighting_Vehicle

 

Wrong type of armor. We're not talking about ballistic armor. The BFV has steel armor too, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

Aluminum is great for aerospace or race cars. It's not great for taking impacts.

 

It’s true. I don’t wheel this truck hard. I’ve never really gotten into real, bonafide wheeling. It looks fun and some of my friends have had some really nice builds but it’s not something I ever personally got into. I guess I would qualify as an overlander nowadays. Though that wasn’t even a term I remember hearing back in the 90s. I’m not wealthy enough to risk beating on a $50k (before mods) truck because it’s a fun thing to do. For me, getting as far as possible from humans and their retarded drama, and into beautiful, quiet places is my goal.

I def don’t “need” sliders. But I probably don’t “need” to carry two full-size spares either. Until my family I are stuck in the middle of nowhere with two flats.

Weight really does add up fast. I try to save it where ever possible because I already carry a lot. It makes a significant difference in fuel costs alone. Not to mention ride comfort and on-road handling. Both of which are important for my use case.

 

My views overlap with yours. Even about the drama queens. But, yet here we are.

 

An automobile isn't an investment....
An automobile that you are going to thrash on a trail is less of an investment...

Sometimes you don't need the best most expensive material to do the job. Sometimes you can select the right tool for the job at hand. 99.999% won't know the difference between the performance of either material.

 

Mobtown, for someone who is “not trying to bash another company’s product” you sure do put out some bad information in this thread, other threads and as well when speaking to potential customers about us and our products. Here are a few from this thread;

The SDHQ Built Rock Sliders are CAD designed, employ unique mounting solutions tailored specifically for each application. We utilize the best materials for the strongest bolt on design available, our Rock Sliders are built in house for a precise fit and finish, allowing us to utilize mounting solutions that do not require any cutting, welding or drilling for installation. Using this unique mounting design with 3/16” thick gusseted steel mounting plates, the SDHQ Built Rock Sliders support the entirety of the slider. We chose to use 4130 .120” wall chromoly tubing over DOM tubing for strength, rigidity, and hardness. The choice to go with 4130 over DOM had a $53.20 impact on our material cost.


4130 chromoly tubing is stronger, stiffer and harder than DOM tubing. There are a few properties of the materials we will compare to show the stronger material and why it matters. Ultimate strength is how much force is required for the part to fail. Yield strength is how much force is required for the part to deform permanently. Modulus of Elasticity is the material’s resistance to being deformed elastically (not permanent), a higher elastic modulus is a stiffer material. Brinell hardness is how hard the material is to indent. Using mechanical properties from online sources of AISI 4130(chromoly) and AISI 1020 (DOM), we have broken down the comparison to make it easier to understand using the table below.





As you can see from the table above, chromoly is overall a stronger choice. The ultimate strength of chromoly is 34% greater than DOM while the yield strength of chromoly is 28% stronger than DOM. This means chromoly can support 28% more force than DOM before permanently deforming. It also takes 34% more force before chromoly fails when compared to DOM. The elastic modulus of chromoly is 7% higher than DOM, giving chromoly a 7% increase in resistance to being deformed elastically. Lastly, chromoly is 44% more resistant to indentation compared to DOM. With the difference in strength, stiffness, and hardness when compared to DOM, and only about a 6.5% increase in total cost for chromoly, it is obvious to us at SDHQ which material is better suited for the strongest bolt on design available.


We never designed our sliders to simply save weight or for looks. From the beginning, our goal was to create the best slider on the market. The weight savings was a bonus after carefully engineering our design and material choices. There are several points of strength we implemented in our design. Our sliders are supported front to rear, leaving no unsupported dead tubes. The front mounting point on our sliders mounts directly to the vehicle’s body mount. This location was decided for two reasons, it is a very strong part of the frame, and it is the closest available mounting location to the front tire. With this mounting point so far forward, the main slider tube is well supported at the front tube union(where our outer tube meets the main tube). Our front mount is boxed to maximize and reinforce the strength of the body mount as well as the slider. The middle and rear mounts use a similar mounting design to the front.We utilize existing holes in the frame to bolt through and into our CNC machined reinforcements. The mounts also wrap around the bottom of the frame and attach to the inner lip where the frame is double plated and welded from the factory. The rear mount is at the very rear of the slider and extends farther to the rear as well upward, extending this mount creates a triangulated mounting point designed for optimal strength. At SDHQ, we have always strived to deliver a top quality product even if it means we are not the least expensive option available, we know not a single corner was cut, and we are giving the customer the strongest and lightest slider on the market.


Mamtown – Your above quote from this post have been disproven. Again, keep your incorrect information about our sliders to yourself and figure a different way to peddle your products.

Bottom line… Our shop has been open for twenty years and we plan on being around at least another twenty years. We have achieved that by offering quality products, making sure we are honest, straight forward and as well as standing behind what we say, and sell to our customers. We know that our sliders are the best on the market. The engineering, material, construction, weight, protection, our fit and finish and as well as our post-sale support tells us so. They are not the cheapest, but take a look at what you’re protecting and what you are getting for your hard earned money…

“The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten.”- Benjamin Franklin












And here are a few of our talanted family doing what they do -
https://youtu.be/NTnkZiF2UlQ

 

Can you provide source of your values? Unreferenced table you gave doesn't do the world much good if you are calling someone out on giving false data. We certainly don't know what alloy and spec and heat treat you are using or comparing. (That table you have shown has Ftu shown to a decimal place... come on really?)
Note, I own stock in neither of these companies.

Here is a GUESS of what materials the vendors MAY be using for comparison. I am referencing MMPDS-01 (same as Mil-hbdk-5j) because it is pretty easy for anybody to look up and contains the publicly reported metallic material properties accepted by the FAA for compliance with the Federal Aviation Regulations.
Modulus E for 'S' basis materials is 'typical', unlike the strength data given for most materials which will usually be specification minimums or statistical minimums.

per Table 2.2.1.0(b) 1025 Carbon Steel N tubing has E=29.0E6 psi
per Table 2.3.1.0(c1) 4130 N tubing has E=29.0E6 psi

 

This thread it wonderful, OP asks who makes alum. sliders, thread derails into engineering pissing contest, brand bashing and loyalist arguing, with a fake proxy account being made just to argue with some anonymity thrown in for the hell of it.

 

Heh. I only got about 3 pages into this thread, so apologies if I repeat stuff.

I guess it's like backpacking and you can make the argument that each little weight saving adds up to something significant (I have a titanium spoon lol), but... My sliders are about 65 pounds each, with that weight being distributed along the full length of the (double) cab. I barely passed algebra, so I'm not claiming that my knowledge of physics is awesome, but it seems like savings is so minor as to not be worth the effort. The difference is between having a skinny girl in your passenger seat vs an anorexic one.

And I do have aluminum skid plates, so I have made weight accommodations... definitely not one of those "everything-has-to-be-steel" guys... But hell, if you got the money and want what you want, get it fab'd.

 

Here is the above info written again, the modified chart since you were not a fan of our decimal use, and our reference data.



Chromoly is overall a stronger choice and represented a $53.20 price increase over DOM for us. The ultimate strength of chromoly is 34% greater than DOM while the yield strength of chromoly is 28% stronger than DOM. This means chromoly can support 28% more force than DOM before permanently deforming. It also takes 34% more force before chromoly fails when compared to DOM. The elastic modulus of chromoly is 7% higher than DOM, giving chromoly a 7% increase in resistance to being deformed elastically. Lastly, chromoly is 44% more resistant to indentation compared to DOM. With the difference in strength, stiffness, and hardness when compared to DOM, and only about a 6.5% increase in total cost for chromoly, it is obvious to us at SDHQ which material is better suited for the strongest bolt on design available.









References from Data collected above:


AISI 1020

http://www.matweb.com/search/DataSheet.aspx?MatGUID=10b74ebc27344380ab16b1b69f1cffbb&ckck=1

https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=6114


AISI 4130

http://www.matweb.com/search/DataSheet.aspx?MatGUID=e1ccebe90cf94502b35c2a4745f63593

https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=6742







As far as “calling someone out on giving false data”, read what he is claiming again;

What statement above was not covered in the response above?

 

I have only chimed in after multiple false statements about our product. This is not the first time that this particular vendor has given false information about our product and I figured this was a good time to put an end to it. There was no disrespect meant to the OP.

 

I'm just calling it as I see it for the thread overall, not intending to seem bias toward any person in particular, since I am not.

*edit I understand the need to defend your product though.

 

Below is an updated comparsion using the refrence you posted above -

Recalculated with 3rd reference; MMPDS-01

 

Cool story bro, and your product looks great. But do you make aluminum sliders?