First of all, the reason "big trucks" use C-channel frames is because they are much easier to bolt things onto. Do you know what all is bolted onto a semi's frame? Obviously not.

For what a 1/2 ton pickup does, a fully boxed frame is superior. And don't even try to justify your Toyota just because the Super Duty also has a C-channel frame. The steel is MUCH thicker than your weak *** Toyota frame.

The bottom line is Toyota comes into the truck market thinking they can win with horsepower, while ignoring everything else, and were shown just how hard it is to make a dependable truck.

 

Huh? Say again? Let's make this easy. Look up moment of inertia for an 8" deep channel (C8x11.5) and compare that to an tube section, say HSS8x4x1/4. Then compare the torsional properties of both. An open channel is less capable than a similar size tube both in flexure (bending) and torsion (twisting) for the same length.

 

Okay, okay your both kinda right ( I know that statement is going to get some spaming) and your both kinda wrong (that one will too).

Semi's use open C-channel for one key reason, flexability. If you combine 500+hp, 1000+ ft/lbs of torque and 80,000lbs with a fully-boxed frame all that rigidity is going to cause something to crack. C-frames allow all that torque and twist to be absorbed along the entire frame and so it bends and it doesn't break. But bear in mind a Semi C-channel is HUGE, 14-16" if memory serves me correctly. Now as far as the F150, since there is nowhere near the kinda of abuse, power, and weight being combined the boxed frame is superior because of the strength it emparts to the truck. Like MOFord said for what a 1/2-ton does the boxed frame is better. As far as the superduty is concerned the abuse and added torque of a diesel engine lends itself to a c-channel frame, but it is thicker than the Toyota.

 

Just watch the video of the Tundra negotiating the Ford Proving Ground Test road with all of the bumps.....The Bed actually hits the cab & is tossed around so much that it looks as if it will break off!!!......Case closed!!!..........

 

Hey. Funny how this came out today:

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/inve...50/detail.html

What do you think?

 

Who cares??? The Tundra has a more poweful engine. It's more important to have a quicker 0-60 that it is to have a quality built truck that dont rust away before the engine gets to 100k miles. You guys dont know what your talking about. Crappy Fords with their Realiable, Well built trucks. Ford must think we use these for working in or something.

 

The source has even worse pics:
http://www.thebostonchannel.com/inve...50/detail.html

 

Now i fully understand why i see hardly any Toyota trucks on the road more than 5 years old. They been having these problem with the hilux since it first came out and they clearly have no intention of fixing the problem.

 

Maximum payload numbers are shown on Ford's website or any reputable car comparison sites. While the website charts them by model, wheelbase, and engine size, I know the dealer brochure has a more detailed chart that sorts them by model, wheelbase, engine size, and gear ratio. Actual payloads on a certain truck can vary. Such as the Platinum 4x4 with all available options and 20" rims on P-rated tires has a door sticker that says it has an embarrassing max payload of 900 pounds, due to all the "stuff" on it (not sure the gearing on this particular truck, but I'm almost positive it's only 3.55). On the other hand, you can get a Supercrew XL 5.4L 4x4 with a 3.73 gearing with no extra options, and it will come with a respectable 1560lb payload, versus Tundra's Crewmax 5.7L 4x4 1590lb payload (on what I'm assuming is the lowest trim level, not the SR5 or the Limited). As far as max payloads on other model sizes, a 2wd supercrew can have a 1760lb payload, a 4x4 supercab can have a payload of 1680lbs (or the max payload package can bring that up to 2340lbs), and a 4x4 reg cab can have a payload of 1950lbs (or 2730lbs with the max payload package). For some dumb reason, the supercrew is not available with the max payload package.

Of course, one can never be sure what the actual payload is of any one truck without looking on the door sticker for load rating information. So I'm fairly positive if one could get a Crewmax Limited 4x4 5.7L with every available option, that it would have a low payload rating just like the example of the Platinum above. You definitely have to be careful what options you choose to put on your truck, because everything is deducted out of your GVWR to come up with your payload. On a side note, I wonder what the new Ram 1500's payload is like at top level trim with every possible option. Can't be good...

As far as what I would say if Ford had the higher horsepower engine. Well, I will be in the market for a new truck in the next year or so. I've been looking at both the F150 and the Tundra, and was considering the 2008 Ram if I decide I want to buy used. But I like the unique features available on the F150 and that's what I'm going to buy when I'm ready. Ford has a slew of new engines coming out soon, although no real concrete information as to what power outputs will be on them. There's the 6.2L Boss, then a new 5.0L V8, as well as a 3.5L twin-turbo Ecoboost V6. So far, most news seem to indicate that they will all be around the 400HP and 400TQ marks, which makes no sense. Also, it's been said that the 5.0L will be the base engine, with the Ecoboost V6 being a $700 upgrade. Depending on what payload ratings are going to be with the new Ecoboost V6, that will probably be the engine I go with. I'll miss out on the iconic V8 rumble, but if the truck will get 23MPG highway with it and provide a good torque curve for towing, that would be the engine I get. Bottom line, I'm concerned with having good tow ratings, yes. Having the fastest pickup? No, not really. The F150 with the 5.4L with a 3.73 ratio is holding its own with regards to payload ratings against the Tundra 5.7L with a 4.30 ratio.

By the way, I'd be towing an 18-22 ft enclosed trailer with three atvs and camping gear.

 

Dunesgirl, that's a nice write-up - especially seeing it's your second post here. You're obviously not a forum newbie, so where do you usually hang out?

 

Huh!? You really believe this? anyway, I'm not taking about semi's. You don't need to go that large in the Ford line to come across a c-channel frame.

Superior? I doubt that's a criteria for automotive design these days - at Ford or Toyota. What probably matters is will it do the job, at cost that will work, at lighter-weight, and won't hopefully come back and bite us on the ***.

I don't care which is superior. All that matters to me is that the Tundra design works for me. So far so good. Having said that, if Toyota comes out with a newer Tundra with a less flexible frame, I'll probably upgrade.

Justify my Toyota? Give it a break, big boy. I never said the Tundra frame was as strong as a Super Duty frame. So don't get your panties in a wad. What I said was:

See, you Ford guys always seem to attack the design. I'm wondering why - since most every Ford truck heavier than the F-150 uses a c-channel design frame. Guess it's not really the design after all, huh? If it is, than Ford is responsible for using a crap design on their trucks. Oh, No! That can't be it! Just the thickness of the steel, right?

You don't know the Tundra very well. And I'm sure Toyota had a pretty good idea of what they were, and are, up against before they ever started.

 

Well might as well throw my two cents in.

Well as far as the who cares part...it turns out a lot of Ford owners, being that a lot are buying programmers, cai, etc so they will not get their asses handed to them of the line from the tundra and dodge(also found in the I want more hp threads). But of course everyone buys that stuff just for cruising around town

Back to the original question though, I have rode in all of the new 09's and I thought the Toyota rode pretty good, real crisp, nice ride, but I can't stand how they look from the outside. The Ford rode great, didn't really care for the new 6 speed tranny(I know it would probably get better and grow on me over time)but I just dont like the exterior look of them now. So with that being said I will stick with my 06 and run it into the ground untill a better looking model comes out.

But also don't get me wrong I love my Ford, but I just dont get on the bandwagon to bash other brands.

 

Someone said earlier that the frame was more flexible to make it stronger like bridges ? Um. Wrong. If you were taking a Naval nuclear power test I would give you a "GCE" Gross conceptual error.

A metals strength, hardness, ductility, brittleness, and toughness are NOT the same thing. Each one is different.

To say a frame is more flexible (or ductile) adds strengh is very incorrect.

When a metal is stronger and harder, it is MORE brittle, LESS Ductile (less able to flex), and LESS tough (lower fracture toughness).

3/4 and 1 ton trucks as well as all or most 18 wheelers use open chanel frames. They have a higher gross weight and can use THICKER metal in the C frame. A 1/2 ton truck should use fully boxed to allow the use of thinnger metal and therefore lighter. There is a happy balance between ridgidity, weight, and cost.

 

Very good point!

It's amazing how many Gryphon and Edge programmers are being purchased. I don't believe for a second that the majority of the people buying them is just for a better towing setup either.
I know I bought my Gryphon because I wanted to wake up my engine; that and being beat by a stock Civic because his limiter was greater than mine.

 

I could care less about spankin Tundras....but showin a little 4 banger civic your taillights when you out weigh him by 2000lbs is the best feeling ever.

To me, this is not contest F150 all the way. First of all, theres the buy american thing. Support your local economy, not that of a foreign country.

Second, the interior on these new Tundra's are junk. Almost to the point where we are starting to tell customers to go someplace else if they want new door speakers because the panels are so flimsy and its not worth the possibility of a damage claim.

Keep in mind that Toyota's quality reputation is for their cars. Their trucks have had numerous quality issues...especially with the frame rotting out. Hell, the frame rails in my 67 Mustang look better then the frames on a 2001 Tundra. I mean, Toyota had to BUY BACK its trucks from its customers on a massive scale. That right there speaks for itself.