King of the beasts test (RAM 3500 vs F450)

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:

transamz9 wrote:

RoyJ wrote:
Ford really needs to update their frame.

Both the RAM and Chevy are on hydroformed and fully boxed frames (the RAM is on 3rd gen, first one in 2007). While Ford's frame design dates back to the first "Superduty", still C-channel at the back.

As for the test, I hope they rate more than just the 0-40 / 60 times. Any chipped truck can run circles around these trucks, but that doesn't mean the weight can be controlled safely.

My '05 Ram is boxed front to rear from the factory.

Your Ram has a full hydroformed frame, Dodge went to them in 2002 on the 1500 and then 03 on the HD trucks.

Don

Yep. I remember when I got my 03, it was a "big deal" to get the fifthwheel hitch installed. Had to get special instructions approved by Dodge to not void the warranty.

transamz9 wrote:

RoyJ wrote:
Ford really needs to update their frame.

Both the RAM and Chevy are on hydroformed and fully boxed frames (the RAM is on 3rd gen, first one in 2007). While Ford's frame design dates back to the first "Superduty", still C-channel at the back.

As for the test, I hope they rate more than just the 0-40 / 60 times. Any chipped truck can run circles around these trucks, but that doesn't mean the weight can be controlled safely.

My '05 Ram is boxed front to rear from the factory.

Your Ram has a full hydroformed frame, Dodge went to them in 2002 on the 1500 and then 03 on the HD trucks.

Don

RoyJ wrote:
Ford really needs to update their frame.

Both the RAM and Chevy are on hydroformed and fully boxed frames (the RAM is on 3rd gen, first one in 2007). While Ford's frame design dates back to the first "Superduty", still C-channel at the back.

As for the test, I hope they rate more than just the 0-40 / 60 times. Any chipped truck can run circles around these trucks, but that doesn't mean the weight can be controlled safely.

My '05 Ram is boxed front to rear from the factory.

gmcsmoke wrote:

Wiley75 wrote:


Guess we better write a letter to KW, Peterbilt, Navistar, Caterpillar, and other Class 8 truck mfgs and tell them that they are doing it all

typical ford response.


Hydroforming creates a stronger, lighter frame that allows for increased payload and towing while not comprising structural integrity.

why do you think fords nearly always weigh the most when compared against the other big 2?

Re-read my post. I don't drive a Ford. I think they are great trucks though. Frames are tough as nails. We have about 80 of them in a fleet of service trucks at work. 250s thru 550s. All heavily loaded 100% of the time. Not a single frame issue to my knowledge. But hey, let's not let the facts get in the way of a good Ford bashing session. Carry on.

Wiley75 wrote:

RoyJ wrote:
Ford really needs to update their frame.

Both the RAM and Chevy are on hydroformed and fully boxed frames (the RAM is on 3rd gen, first one in 2007). While Ford's frame design dates back to the first "Superduty", still C-channel at the back.

Guess we better write a letter to KW, Peterbilt, Navistar, Caterpillar, and other Class 8 truck mfgs and tell them that they are doing it all wrong. :W

Seriously though. Who says a C channel is always inferior? I don't think it's that cut and dry.

A C frame can be inspected and painted to help deal with rust. On a box frame water and junk will collect inside and it will rust from the inside out with no simple means for prevention/detection until it's too late.

Once the inside starts to rust and flake, that rust will accumulate on the bottom of the frame and will help to retain water and increase the speed of the rotting process.


When mounting stuff on box frame you need to use blind fasteners, like rivnuts, or some internal support to keep from crushing the frame with a through bolt.

Once the inside of the frame starts to rot out, those blind fasteners will seize and removing bolts to service or replace parts becomes a huge PITA requiring drilling/cutting/sourcing fastners, etc.

Given the same weight rating, I would take a C frame over a boxed frame every time.

Those box frames are fun to put on the 5th wheel hitch and goose neck ball too.

Wiley75 wrote:


Guess we better write a letter to KW, Peterbilt, Navistar, Caterpillar, and other Class 8 truck mfgs and tell them that they are doing it all

typical ford response.


Hydroforming creates a stronger, lighter frame that allows for increased payload and towing while not comprising structural integrity.

why do you think fords nearly always weigh the most when compared against the other big 2?

Well, very thick c-channels make perfect sense for class 8 trucks. There are a million different reasons to build a class 8 vehicle, but there aren't so many sales (unlike light trucks) so it's difficult to really get any economies of scale for mass manufacturing. So the entire industry has coalesced around the 34" or 36" (I keep forgetting which) wide frame. They use C-channels for accessibility reasons as well. They need to be able to upfit all sorts of bodies, axles, mounting systems, suspensions, and other things that are not proprietary to a specific company. That's why all the Cab and Chassis trucks also adhere to a 34" or 36" wide frame from the cab rearwards. It also seems like RAM's chassis cab frame is C-channel as well, again to appease the up-fitters. I'm sure if the entire industry could agree to move to a boxed frame, they would. But there are issues with such a change, many of the body/chassis mod manufacturers would have to re-tool and re-engineer lots of components that they haven't had to really re-engineer for. Again there isn't a huge mass of these specialized items being sold to begin with as well, so it takes many years for them to make enough money off their capital investments. Then there's the whole standard on what to agree on for accessibility to running stuff inside the rails like wiring and access holes/panels. It'd just get messy so I believe the industry just stays c-channel to make life easier for the OEM's and upfitters.

Engineers love to stiffen the frame. The stiffer the frame, then the finer they can tweak the suspension to perform the way they intended.

RoyJ wrote:
Ford really needs to update their frame.

Both the RAM and Chevy are on hydroformed and fully boxed frames (the RAM is on 3rd gen, first one in 2007). While Ford's frame design dates back to the first "Superduty", still C-channel at the back.

Guess we better write a letter to KW, Peterbilt, Navistar, Caterpillar, and other Class 8 truck mfgs and tell them that they are doing it all wrong. :W

Seriously though. Who says a C channel is always inferior? I don't think it's that cut and dry.

BTW - I drive a Ram with boxed frame but have had several Fords too.

If it is a 450 pickup, it will have the same turbo and 400/800 tuning that 250-350 pickups have. If it is a 450 cab and chassis, it will have a different turbo and 300/660 rating. Nothing to try to fool anybody with there!