62 jack, WHY
Thread Starter
Safety Car
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,578
Likes: 334
62 jack, WHY
There have been several threads on the 62 jack but I would like to know what idiot engineer,designer came up with the design. The jack when placed in the rear tire will not sit flush due to the threaded shaft being to long. The spare tire board will not sit flush. The jack rocks back and forth. I at first thought maybe I had the wrong jack until I read about it in the NCRS guide that it is suppose to be like this. Why could they not make the shaft an inch shorter. And why did they find it necessary to change designs anyway.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,730
Likes: 92
From: Lakeland FL
Don't know about jack being too "big" but if you don't have a bias ply 6.70 by 15 original size tire, the replacements will all be too thick/wide to allow the spare cover to fit flush.
Which is why many people have switched to space saver spares....
Which is why many people have switched to space saver spares....
Team Owner
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 58,061
Likes: 7,146
Army
There have been several threads on the 62 jack but I would like to know what idiot engineer,designer came up with the design. The jack when placed in the rear tire will not sit flush due to the threaded shaft being to long. The spare tire board will not sit flush. The jack rocks back and forth. I at first thought maybe I had the wrong jack until I read about it in the NCRS guide that it is suppose to be like this. Why could they not make the shaft an inch shorter. And why did they find it necessary to change designs anyway.
Team Owner
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 26,118
Likes: 1,874
From: Greenville, Indiana
There have been several threads on the 62 jack but I would like to know what idiot engineer,designer came up with the design. The jack when placed in the rear tire will not sit flush due to the threaded shaft being to long. The spare tire board will not sit flush. The jack rocks back and forth. I at first thought maybe I had the wrong jack until I read about it in the NCRS guide that it is suppose to be like this. Why could they not make the shaft an inch shorter. And why did they find it necessary to change designs anyway.
I heard a guy I know bragging about buying one of them for $600, ten years ago!
