QuickJack 3500/5000 with 3.2 AND 981

[OldSpool87]

Originally Posted by Mark Salvetti

On my SC, I use the two points at each end of D, plus the corners that are not labeled between B and C.

Mark

Same used on my ‘82 SC.

[mxtx]

OldSpool87, and you are using a 3500 or a 5000 ?

[OldSpool87]

Originally Posted by mxtx

oldspool87, and you are using a 3500 or a 5000 ?

5000.

[911tracker85]

mxtx,
here is the pic I referenced in the PM of the 911 and one of the 944 on a 3500.

a note I forgot to mention in the PM. if the car is lowered, as both the 911 and my 951 track car are, I have to drive it up onto the rubber pads you can see in the pic to provide the clearance for the 2x8. unfortunately you cannot see the rubber blocks on the 2x8 the car sits on, but they are there. the 3500 is just a little short for our cars. when I realized this I also realized it was such a small amount I did not worry about the 2x8 breaking. even if they did the car would still be on the QJ. been using this way for several years now.

I did not take a pic, but one time after raising the car to the max on the QJ, placed jack stands at all 4 corners, lowered the QJ, and placed some big 6x6 block on the QJ and raised it again to provide even more clearance working under the car.

and when I am going to be under the car I place jack stands too for added protection.

hope this helps.






PS. here is my other assistant.....

[mxtx]

Nice setup, 911tracker85, helpful to see.

Using a 2x8 + rubber pads looks good to me as well. Can you pinpoint on the diagram where you are placing your rubber jacking pads? I know "correct locations" for these cars is highly debated so this would be helpful, too.

My other option would be to eat the shipping cost and return the 3500 for the 5000, however I understand there's a "slightly too long" issue there?

Thank you.

[911tracker85]

I mount the 911 pretty much where the 5000 jack points are shown using the 2x8.

as I had fully assembled the 3500 to realize it was too short, they would not accept a return. when posting about this the first reply I got was "you have made an expensive mistake." so had to improvise.

I have read the 'a little too long' comment about the 5000 and 911s.

good luck which ever way you go.

[Quasimoto]

Thought I would post some follow up to my experience with the 5000SLX thus far...

As mentioned earlier, it works very well with my 981 Cayman...zero issues. It also works fairly well with our 84 M491 (widebody) when the 16" Fuchs are installed. A little finicky to get the jacks placed just right without tire interference or crushing of AC lines.

When I have the wider 18" RH wheels installed it gets a little more problematic.

My solution has been to add a couple of 2x8 yellow pine stretchers that cross between the jacks. There are some blocks screwed to them that fit into the pockets on the Quickjacks. This serves to set the width of the jacks correctly and keep them from sliding while positioning.

Using this setup I can hit the inboard points mentioned by member @mxtx and others yet still keep the rubber blocks above the QJ rails. It also gains about 1-1/2 of height at max lift without resorting to another (wobbly) rubber block.

YMMV of course. Not recommending this, just passing along my solution of dealing with the 981 and 3.2 widebody.

Aside from all that, I have been really happy with the purchase. VERY handy in the shop and I've used it on numerous vehicles besides these two "hobby" cars.
Highly Recommend!

[JCGMS]

Originally Posted by JCGMS

Resurrecting a slightly old thread here.... I have an 87. If I use the factory lift points I don’t really have wheel rubbing issues but I don’t like the fact that the jacks are angled when they should be parallel to each other. Haven’t had any problems but it makes me uneasy. If I use the front pinch weld then the AC lines are in the way.



Is having them angled a problem? Has anyone come up with other solutions?

Resurrecting to highlight some new developments:

1. Quickjack now makes a crossbeam adapter that allows you to keep the quickjacks parallel even when the lift points are staggered, kinda like in the last post above. Pricey and not sure it solves the problem of rubbing on the front wheels.

2. While reading the link for #1 above it seems like the quickjacks can also be placed sideways (one across the front and one across the back). They caution that the weight distribution should be as close to 50/50 as possible. This is likely because one side will lift (or drop?) faster than the other. Anyone willing to try? Not sure if it will help with wheel clearance, and it also may obscure areas under the car-eg transmission mounts.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Mark Salvetti]

I've stacked a couple of 2x12's under each side of my 5000 SLX to gain an extra few inches (especially lifting our SUVs), but that's a pain because of course the wood doesn't slide well especially on asphalt.

For some reason it never occurred to me to use a couple of 2x8's on top instead. That seems a lot easier, going to look at that.

Mark

[JCGMS]

Update...just saw this on a QJ online blog. They specifically refer to the 993 and the wheel rubbing issues when they talk about why you may want to place the jacks sideways.

https://www.quickjack.com/why-quickjack/quickjack-shows-off-its-versatility/




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Quasimoto]

I never got around to trying the sidesaddle method...probably should give it a shot.

[p911c]

Be very careful when using 5000 version on 911 3.2 1988. I made mistake of lifting, changed front rotors then for some reason could not get wheel back on, probably suspension dropped a little. Decided to jack front suspension up a little with another jack, whole car shifted on jacks to left, had to call for serious help while I held car up to stop it collapsing. Just be wary and careful when working alone. My fault I know but be careful.

[Ctopher]

Originally Posted by p911c

Be very careful when using 5000 version on 911 3.2 1988. I made mistake of lifting, changed front rotors then for some reason could not get wheel back on, probably suspension dropped a little. Decided to jack front suspension up a little with another jack, whole car shifted on jacks to left, had to call for serious help while I held car up to stop it collapsing. Just be wary and careful when working alone. My fault I know but be careful.

That is scary. Sounds like you didn’t have the quick jack inboard enough. I’ve had that issue after not being able to reinstall the wheels, had to turn from side to side and push against the quick jack to lower the car. Really the front mount point should be the inner pan curve and while using the rear jack pad on 87-89 cars. This is my method and I really like Quasi’s idea of template to secure the distances between jacks.

CTopher

[Mark Salvetti]

Originally Posted by p911c

Be very careful when using 5000 version on 911 3.2 1988. I made mistake of lifting, changed front rotors then for some reason could not get wheel back on, probably suspension dropped a little. Decided to jack front suspension up a little with another jack, whole car shifted on jacks to left, had to call for serious help while I held car up to stop it collapsing. Just be wary and careful when working alone. My fault I know but be careful.

Were you stacking the rubber blocks? QJ says you can do that, but when I tried I was very uncomfortable with the result, they tended to lean as the car lifted. So I never stack the blocks. I mentioned a couple of posts above that I was going to work on 2x8's stacked on top to gain some height. Here is the setup lifting my new CX-5. The wood isn't just sitting there, there is another piece screwed to the underside that you can't see. That fits into the trays on the frames, there is no way for the wood to slide out.



Mark

[p911c]

Originally Posted by Ctopher

That is scary. Sounds like you didn’t have the quick jack inboard enough. I’ve had that issue after not being able to reinstall the wheels, had to turn from side to side and push against the quick jack to lower the car. Really the front mount point should be the inner pan curve and while using the rear jack pad on 87-89 cars. This is my method and I really like Quasi’s idea of template to secure the distances between jacks.

CTopher

Thanks will try that method

[p911c]

Originally Posted by Mark Salvetti

Were you stacking the rubber blocks? QJ says you can do that, but when I tried I was very uncomfortable with the result, they tended to lean as the car lifted. So I never stack the blocks. I mentioned a couple of posts above that I was going to work on 2x8's stacked on top to gain some height. Here is the setup lifting my new CX-5. The wood isn't just sitting there, there is another piece screwed to the underside that you can't see. That fits into the trays on the frames, there is no way for the wood to slide out.



Mark

Yes was double stacked, really not keen on that so am making wood pieces this weekend

[JCGMS]

Originally Posted by p911c

Thanks will try that method

Has anyone tried the sideways method yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[ADDvanced]

Just pulled the trigger on a 5000. Geeked.

[ahoch]

Quickjackers, do you have a little bit of side to side sway when the jacks are locked in the high position? My first lift tonight. It feels otherwise very solid but the sway is a tad disconcerting.

[GothingNC]

Originally Posted by ahoch

Quickjackers, do you have a little bit of side to side sway when the jacks are locked in the high position? My first lift tonight. It feels otherwise very solid but the sway is a tad disconcerting.

It should be rock solid.
I had a little bit of sway when I first lifted my Targa and it was due to the the lifts being too far inward at the front.