Forum Discussion
DakotaDad
Aug 03, 2015Explorer
itguy08 wrote:
You are forgetting the one possible explanation - the basic design sucks. I have a feeling that the reason the non supercrew models did poorly is because of that lack of B pillar. Especially since GM and Ram did away with that design. I'd bet that design has lots of weaknesses and that's why everyone else moved on.
That's a better explanation? That Ford's engineering is so inherently flawed on their brand new truck that even additional safety equipment is unable to improve safety on this crash test beyond "marginal"? Ford saw the other brands change designs, and persisted with building and selling this one anyway, knowing it was weaker?
I'm not sure "incompetent engineering" is an improvement over "unethical beancounting". At least the unethical option would mean a solution is only a year or two away, a simple parts add to new models. The incompetent option would mean a solution is much farther out, as the body will need to be re-engineered, with many more trucks on the roads with unfixable safety issues.
I'll stick by my original hope that the core body/frame design is fine, and they just got caught saving a few dollars on models they didn't think would be tested. That wouldn't be unusual among automakers. At least that one is a simple solution, and could help trucks already on the road.
About Travel Trailer Group
44,060 PostsLatest Activity: Jul 17, 2025