mmarshall

Yes, it's an interesting test, but you want to have SOME frame flex. If you don't, you have premature metal fatigue and stress cracks. That's why building engineers design steel-reinforced structures with frame flex.....so they can stand the pressures nature will give them.

Toyota, in their testing, with the tow package, has rated the Tundra's C-Rail frame for 10,800 lbs. That's not a pittance.

Threxx

Until we start seeing failed F-150 frames due to cracks and fatigue, I'm pretty doubtful that this is an issue with the F-150's frame. I give Ford's engineers more credit than to design a frame so stiff that it induces some form of critical failure under high load situations. If Toyota had to design in more flex to avoid such failures, then fine, but again, until you can find some examples of failed F150 frames... I just really doubt that this is an issue at all.


Generally half ton trucks are not limited by their frame when it comes to towing. They're limited by their motor, transmission, and emergency handling under load (braking and suspension characteristics under max load)

I can't provide proof that this is the case with the Tundra because they don't have anything 'above' the half-ton, but as an example, the 1/2 ton Silverado with the 6.0 has effectively the same tow ratings as the 2500HD (a 1 ton frame packaged in 3/4 ton dimensions) when they're both equipped with the same 6.0L V8.

The heavier duty frame makes no difference, as it is not the limiting factor for the GM trucks, as it probably isn't the limiting factor for the tow ratings of the Tundra, either.

GSteg

iTrader: (15)

You want some flexing, but not a whole 3.23" of flexing. I haven't seen a Ford frame fail because of towing, payload, etc.

I'll be the Tundra's advocate right now and say "But 90% of the buyer wont tow heavy duty so they wont have to worry much about the frame flexing"

But at least Toyota is attempting something. Can't say the same for Honda.

Threxx

High frame flex also tends to make the ride quality less 'solid' - more reverberation and undulations when traveling over rough parts of the road, off road, etc...

Same reason why manufacturers are constantly bragging about the next generation of their cars having torsional and bending rigidity improved by xx% and whatnot... they don't intend for that to mean "you can tow more with your new camry"... they mean it will tend to ride in a more controlled and solidified manner.

ff_

It'll also result in an interior that rattles and squeeks itself apart. I test drove the last generation Tundra when we were looking at something bigger to haul all 3 kids (when gas prices were still low). Between the ultra-flexible frame and the Toyo-soft suspension, I never got further than 2 blocks on the test drive. No thanks. Turned around and parked back in the dealer lot, and proceeded to the Nissan dealer to look at an Armada.

Threxx

The last gen Tundra frame looked absolutely sad next to the competition. I saw a section on something like horsepower TV where they literally cut sections of each frame (Ford, GM, Dodge, and Toyota) off and put them side by side with each other.

The Tundra's frame was almost entirely consisting of tiny and very thin c-channel rails and bolted through (instead of welded) cross-members. The cutouts looked like the midget malformed brother of all three of the other frames.

Watch out - now somebody is going to tell me that Japanese steel is higher strength than American steel which allows the frame to be about 1/3rd the size, not boxed at all, completely devoid of hydroforming, and that bolted-through cross members are less susceptible to traumatic failure (because again, we all know seeing failed frames on domestic trucks due to them being built too rigidly is just as common as seeing white on rice, right?)

ff_

LOL, yup! Rule #1 is that Toyota can do no wrong.

IS_Mine

I would hope people that are actually looking to purchase a work truck choose a GM product.

I think we all know that the Toyota Tundra/Toyota Tacoma are pretty boy trucks. I even told my ex boy friend this, he drove a Tacoma, maybe thats why I'm single now!

But that is great that Toyota caught this early and is basically replacing the motor. Kudos to Toyota. Now build a truck that can actually compete with the Silverado..and while you're at it make a twin turbo diesel that will destroy the Duramax.

mmarshall

An Armada? That's like jumping from the frying pan into the fire. Despite being big and full-sized like the domestics, It is perhaps the most poorly-built pickup in the American market, having stolen that title away from the mid-size Dodge Dakota.

That's one of the reasons why I haven't done a formal write-up on the Armada. No matter how good it drives, performs, or hauls things, its repair record is bad enough that, IMO, domestic trucks and the Tundra are both better buys....but of course, unlike past Toyota trucks, this Tundra seems to have a few teething problems.....and its sheet metal, hardware, and trim are not very impressive.

ff_

(You're thinking of the Titan)

The Armada's interior is pretty cheap, but that's literally the only complaint I ever had with the vehicle. The price was right, the chassis was stout, the drivetrain was sublime, and the mileage was ridiculously good for what the vehicle was (consistently 18 MPG highway). In the 38,000 miles that we owned it, the only time it went in for repairs was for warped front rotors. Dealer replaced all four rotors and new pads, no charge, right before the warranty expired. The thing was dead-nuts reliable, and one of the best purchases I've made. If I could go back and do it all over again, I'd buy the same vehicle.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

It's only 1 anecdote but our 3 1/2 yr old 2004 F-150 has ZERO, nada, zip, squeaks, creaks, rattles. It has towed a horse trailer many times too. It's a wonderful truck. Looking forward to seeing the upcoming new model.

The new Tundra is certainly a giant leap forward for Toyota though.

Competition's a wonderful thing.

O. L. T.

iTrader: (17)

This is all that matters. It's called security and you don't get it with everyone, in fact very few, if any, others. You have to sue GM and Ford to get support on defects.

Mr. Jones

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...02/1148/AUTO01

Ford is suing Navistar for failing to cover warrenty costs related to Power Stroke diesel repairs.

Did a Ford spokesperson ever publically say that their diesels had a high-failure rate? Certainly not. Because Ford will only reveal quality problems under extreme circumstances like opening up a lawsuit

I'd rather see Toyota fess up to errors then pretend they never existed.

Mr. Jones

metal fatigue isn't limited to frames snapping apart.

fact is Ford used a fully boxed frame, while using an open C-channel on their Superduty trucks. The exact same design used on semi-trucks.

mmarshall

Yes. I'm sorry, ff...you're right. I had the Titan in mind. Occasionally I get a mild brain freeze.
The Armada, however is built off of the same platform....and has the same lousy reliability record (as do most of the Nissan/Infiniti designs coming out of the Canton, MS plant). ....so many of the same comments apply nontheless.