Suposedly they have come up with a "fix" but they still warn their customers that the tailgate is rated to hold any amount of weight, and the best thing to do, when loading heavy stuff in the bed, would be to take the tailgate off and load directly in the bed, then remount the tailgate. Haven't heard any improvements after that.

 

Yep. Apparently, you're one of two people on this forum who can pay attention long enough to read an entire paragraph...

Llike I said, everyone's a fan of a specific make. Some like one truck, some like another. I drove a Tundra. It's nice, but not for me (if I wanted a truck that big, I'd get a 3/4 ton). My next truck will probably be a Dodge. Why? Lifetime warranty. Who cares what it's made out of if you can just take it back to the dealer when it breaks?

Regarding that video test, it's an unscientific bunch of garbage anyway. They've got a frame sitting on hard mounts (read: no suspension, no body, no nothing) and they're hanging weight off of one corner. What does this have to do with reality? Now, I don't know about you, but I'm generally not putting a bunch of weight like that focused in one corner of the truck bed anyway. Keep in mind that torsional strength, from an engineering standpoint, mainly comes into play for giving a smooth ride, and I thought the Tundra rode better when I test drove it. Plus, a structure meant to flex will last a lot longer than one that's unyielding.

Regarding the tailgate breaking, don't stick 800lbs on it -- are you guys driving cars into your truck beds? In addition, if you're really trying to throw half a ton in there, wouldn't it be prudent to take the unsupported sheetmetal tailgate off on any truck anyway? I don't care what truck it is, I'm not sticking 800+lbs cantilevered a couple of feet out on something made out of just sheetmetal and supported by two relatively thin steel chords...

In regards to the strength of the frame itself, if you guys were so hard on that, why aren't you driving Titans? They've got the strongest 1/2 ton frame...

The C-channel vs. hydroformed box argument is moot. If you don't trust the Tundra because it's C-channel, then you shouldn't trust any Superduty out there except the newest one. You also shouldn't trust almost every 18 wheeler out there.

So, once again, your friend got a Tundra and wants to tow 7500lbs with it. As long as he's under his weights on all axles and his GVWR and GCWR, who really cares? Do you stay up, unable to sleep, thinking about how much his bed is flexing? Must be nice to have so little to worry about...

 

I had a Dodge, it wasnt a bad truck. The lifetime warranty is a tempting deal. I heard a rumor though that they were only going to fix each problem once, have you heard anything about that?

What do you mean what does that have to do with reality? Trucks are not unibody, the bed and cab do not even touch and the frame is the ONLY thing keeping all these parts together. I have put alot of weight on my truck like that when I traverse a ditch and the suspension is pushed to the max on opposite ends. The frame on my 2004 Dodge Dakota was so pathetic when I did this it allowed the cab to touch my bed leaving as dent in my cab.

Have you heard of matal fatigue? How bending a metal makes it more prone to failure? Kinda goes a different direction than your thoughts on this

So I guess the Tundra owners are going to air lift an ATV into the bed so they dont stress thew tailgate? My ATV weighs in at almost 700 lbs and the only way to get it into the bed is over the tailgate. Taking the tailgate off is a pain in the ***, Dodge, Chevy and Ford owners dont need to do this so why should a Tundra owner have to? Also those with reverse cameras have wiring connecting the tailgate, what are they going to do? Fact is the only way to get items into a bed is by going over the tailgate, Toyota screwed up and made it too weak. Stop making it sound like the operators are the problem, it is the **** poor design


Really? Got anything to back that claim up?

The superduty, and most 3/4 & 1 tons) use a C channel frame because these trucks are used for a wide range of purposes and have many bed configurations OEM and aftermarket that need to be bolted up. Bolting up items to a fully boxed frame would require much much more work so Ford uses a stronger C channel to make installation of these items bolted to the frame. Ford engineers have said this numerous times.






A truck that is overloaded is a saftey issue. GVWR on 1/2 tons has gone out of control and these trucks cant pull loads this size in a safe manner. If you were more knowledgable about trucks & towing you would already know GVWR & GCWR are just numbers to help sell products.

 

You mean ACCEPT?


you know what tho, the sad part is even with the older "inferior" frame it still has higher crash test ratings

 

Nope. If they do, that sucks.


Yep. Not unit body, but the cab and bed still help hold things together, as does the axle, transmission, engine, suspension, etc, etc, etc. In addition, when you're traversing a ditch, you're putting load on the suspension mount, not the rear corner of the frame.

Sure have. What we don't know is the construction of that joint that's allowing the flex. If it's just riveted together, probably not an issue. If it's just welded, then you might. In addition, the type of steel used will come into play here. For example, spring steel has VERY high fatigue resistance. Now, obviously, it's not made out of spring steel, but I guarantee you something as glaring as this, if it were an actual fatigue problem, would've come up in their design studies.

Yay, the tailgate is stronger. I don't have an ATV. Problem solved for me. Don't buy one, but there's no need to call someone an idiot on a public forum because they bought one, now is there?

Same things these knuckleheads are basing the "the Tundra is a POS" rants on: Manufacturer proganda. Haven't seen the Titan commercial with the chains breaking when the train pulls the fram against some pillars?



Has anyone done a similar test as Ford did to these C channel Superduty frames? I think you'd be surprised how much those frames flex torsionally. Remember, no matter how strong the individual channels running the length of the truck are, their torsional ridgitiy is only as good as the crossbars that connect them. If you look underneath a Superduty or Semis, you'll see some pretty beefy C channels running the length of the truck, but the crossbars are comparatively tiny. The "new" F-150 (it is, after all, 4 years old now), in an effort to give it a more carlike ride, has a lot more in the way of crossbars. Does this increase its payload? Not by much. It does, however, help out with keeping bumps in the suspension, which is what your rear end feels in the seat.

Lol. Now you question my knoweledge on such things? Have you even read my post? I'm sure towing 7500lbs, as long as loaded correctly, will be perfectly fine with the Tundra as long as he drives properly. I never said he should tow 10k lbs with it. You're over reacting.

For the record: I wouldn't ever tow more than 7500lbs with a 1/2 ton, regardless of ratings.


Out of curiosity, do you have any education or experience in materials or structures?

 

You know, I meant to post something in regards to that, but there was so much in the way of unfounded opinions (likely straight out of someone's ***) that I forgot. Nothing says "I don't give a ****" like glaring grammatical errors.

Don't crash then...

Of course, this probably has to do with the monumental weight gains 1/2 ton trucks have been experiencing. Seriously, if you need to haul that much crap around, but a 3/4 ton...

And whatever happened to "compact trucks" that were actually compact?

 

Ummmm you totally didnt understand my post.... I was saying that even though the 97-03 has the "inferior" C channel frame, it still has higher crashtest ratings the the new crap box Tundra with its "superior" boxed frame.

You tell me which one you'd rather drive

 

What do you think the suspension mount is connected to? It does place stress on a frame and the spring hangers are mounted along the rear of the frame near the corner.




I seem to recall Toyota doing a huge buyback of Tacomas due to frame failure. No, wait that cant be as it would have shown up in these studies you speak of right?






You dont have an ATV, what about those who do? My point is that it IS a problem and Toyota should have never had this issue


Read the fine print on the bottom of the screen during the video, it wasnt much weight to snap those chains



I believe Ford was claiming a 10% increase in torsional rigidy and a 10% drop in weight with the new frame. Not much has changed though as Ford has a great starting point with the current frame



The trailer weighing in at 7500 once loaded and with passengers will be far too close to 10k to tow safely with a 1/2 IMO.


Yes, I have helped to reinforce 4 frames on offroad rigs. The stresses they see ofroad (flexing) would cause weaker frames to tear along the spring perches and where the steering box mounts. Not knowledge found in books, but life experience on what works under severe stress. Overbuilt has never failed me, underbuilt and allowed to flex has left me stranded more than once

 

Flexible frames that bend but don't break have their place.

Hauling heavy loads just happens to be one of those places.

Don't believe me? Just watch a heavily loaded 18 wheeler take off from a dead stop. You could measure the frame flex in inches. Yet that flexi frame will go millions of miles. Put a rigid frame on it, and it could snap in a few feet. Flexible and weak are two different things.

There is more than one way to get a load down the road. Toyota goes with a more flexible frame. Get over it.

As for offroading, I've seen an old underbuilt *****'s truck crawling up the Sluice Box on the Rubicon Trail. Not sure about how strong the frame was, but the axles were moving all side to side A LOT (just retained by the leaf springs). Seems like flexible can work offroad, too. I'll bet that sloppy old ****** would not corner well on dry asphalt (too flexible?), but I doubt many F150s will go up the Sluice Box. Overbuilt and rigid is not going to help everywhere.

 

I was joking, hence the smiley after the obviously idiotic statement of "don't crash."

It's also connected towards the front, with a shock mount in the middle. I addition, the springs aren't pulling downward on the frame, but pushing upwards. My whole point was the springs will not only add structure and support to that corner to fight downward force, but also allow some compliance to take up the weight. Trucks don't drive around on their bumpstops (well, most don't), so this test where the frame is taking up 100% of the weight is incredibly useless.

True, but the point of this thread was someone saying someone else wasn't making a wise decision because HE bought a Tundra. Does he have an ATV that he's going to load in the back?

Probably more than the promotional Ford video. Either way, Nissan makes the claim that they have the strongest 1/2 ton frame. Lying in an ad is illegal. Maybe they're testing just one small part of the frame that they found to be stronger than the competition like Ford did?

Wow, you're dense. Once again, if he's towing 7500lbs, I see no problem.

How much reinforcement have you done to make sure that when you hang a weight from a chain on the farthest corner of the frame, that it doesn't flex?

I agree 100%. Overbuilt bridges and buildings that don't flex at all crumble rather quickly. The same holds true for vehicles.

Besides, since there are no passengers back there, who really cares? Watch the 28mph offroad video. Note that the cab doesn't move at all? That's what's important.

 

I dont have the patience to go at it for another round.

 

Frame failure? The buyback recall is due to rust.

Don't make it sound like the frame randomly snaps during regular driving, just to help your arguement.

 

i tow a 6500lb tractor plus 18ft deck trailer (+ two big boys in the cab), i6 3.55 5spd, no problem, 70mph on highway, and steady 60 on regular roads

 

Damn... This thread got wordy...TMI to digest

 

FWIW, Nissan does NOT have the strongest 1/2 ton frame...that's an old commercial that aired before the 04 came out IIRC.