2017 Ford Super Duty Review: First Drive
pickuptrucks.com Nice review of the new Ford Super Duty. I wish Ford used a heavier trailer for testing but overall this looks like a solid upgrade over the previous model. The looks are slowly g...
Forum Discussion
I find the video pretty weak argument wise, seems more like an internet expert (like most people on all these boards, myself included). His example of using a cereal box, why don't you take the same cereal box, cut out 1 tall side and double its thickness. The box would deform more readily despite being twice as thick and with enough twist, it fails. Also, the guy's video ignores all the advantages of a rigid frame. Namely, when you make a rigid frame, the engineers have an easier time "Tuning" the suspension to absorb the impacts as desired and disperse energy appropriately. No truck maker boxes their frame and stops right there, they engineer the suspension and other bits to work in harmony on the entire chassis. A rigid frame grants a better, more predictable foundation to base all your suspension travel, cab flex, and bed flex models on. You also don't disperse undesired stress to the cab and body work. Again, his video is very narrow in point of view and uses the typical forum arguments you see versus the stuff you read in SAE and other engineering rags where they go into far more depth about engineering these systems in vehicles.
Everyone keeps bringing the "Class-8" truck argument. In the case of class 8 vehicles, there's nowhere near enough volume for any one manufacturer to own the market and sell vehicles with your own proprietary frame design. The industry basically centered around the C-channel spread at 36 or so inches so that all of them can appeal to all the potential customers out there for class 8 trucks. The class-8 truck isn't really all that proprietary. Only things typically unique are the Canbus system, cab, interior ergonomics, and maybe a few power train choices (like Volvo and Mack). But almost all of them offer the same engines (Detroit, Cummins, International), transmissions (Eaton, Allison, Voith, ZF, etc...), axles (MAN, Meritor, Rockwell, etc...) and suspensions (Typically same as axle make) available. Then there's the up-fit portion made by vendors outside of the truck OEM's, such as the dump beds, 5th wheel hitches, flat beds, and all that other stuff that needs a predictable frame to mount everything to. Heck, this is the same reason why "ALL" of the big 3's chassis cab trucks sport a 36" wide C-channel frame aft of the cab. Since nobody is really complaining about the frame design, and it would take a momentous act of the "ENTIRE" industry to move to a new frame standard, it probably will never happen. The closest thing I've seen was some concepts of using Carbon Fiber or even Aluminum for the actual frame itself. That's why when certain trucks need more rigidity, they just "Double Frame" the C-channel instead of boxing it, so they can still use all the up-fit and aftermarket stuff out there for class-8's.
Everyone keeps bringing the "Class-8" truck argument. In the case of class 8 vehicles, there's nowhere near enough volume for any one manufacturer to own the market and sell vehicles with your own proprietary frame design. The industry basically centered around the C-channel spread at 36 or so inches so that all of them can appeal to all the potential customers out there for class 8 trucks. The class-8 truck isn't really all that proprietary. Only things typically unique are the Canbus system, cab, interior ergonomics, and maybe a few power train choices (like Volvo and Mack). But almost all of them offer the same engines (Detroit, Cummins, International), transmissions (Eaton, Allison, Voith, ZF, etc...), axles (MAN, Meritor, Rockwell, etc...) and suspensions (Typically same as axle make) available. Then there's the up-fit portion made by vendors outside of the truck OEM's, such as the dump beds, 5th wheel hitches, flat beds, and all that other stuff that needs a predictable frame to mount everything to. Heck, this is the same reason why "ALL" of the big 3's chassis cab trucks sport a 36" wide C-channel frame aft of the cab. Since nobody is really complaining about the frame design, and it would take a momentous act of the "ENTIRE" industry to move to a new frame standard, it probably will never happen. The closest thing I've seen was some concepts of using Carbon Fiber or even Aluminum for the actual frame itself. That's why when certain trucks need more rigidity, they just "Double Frame" the C-channel instead of boxing it, so they can still use all the up-fit and aftermarket stuff out there for class-8's.
