WTH? What's wrong with this Tundra Frame?

[Bent Bolt]

Yup, there's a bunch of washboard roads around here. Problem here is.........if you drive 'em at a high rate of speed, you'll slide off a cliff or into a wall of rock & dirt because they're really bad on tight turns. I usually encounter them on my way to run a trail so I air down once I hit the dirt road since I'd I'd do it at the trailhead anyway. After airing down to 10-12 psi, I can barely feel the washboards & the tires stay on the road surface.

About the video, I didn't post it as a bash on the Tundra, I posted it as an example of "There is no perfect truck". Where the F150 excells in the frame department over the Toyota, I'm pretty sure that there would be something else sub-par to the Toyota on a different part of the F150. It just struck me as very funny when I saw that video since the new Tundra is marketed as the best light duty truck...............EVER.

The "C" Channel frames on Rangers & previous F150's sure have a lot of bend to 'em kinda like the Tundra does. They may not wobble the hell out of the bed like the Tundra but they're not real strong either.

I'm not bashing Toyota. And I agree that there is no such thing as a perfect truck. Take it from me, the F-150 is far from a perfect truck. In fact, I prefer the 97-03 over the current model for driveability and reliability. But the current model is easier to work on.
Getting back to the frame, the current F-150 has certain vibration issues.There have been a few TSB's regarding this. One in particular is to mount a vibration damper on the frame near the rear bumper. I have also witnessed the cargo box wobble while driving down the highway at 100 kph. Not nearly as bad as the video but there nonetheless. I haven't come up with an explanation for it yet. It may be an optical illusion but it is there. A few people have complained, but not many.

 

[ZMan]

I'll bet the Ridgeline would be the best at that--no joke. Unit body and independent rear. No movement and the tires wouldn't leave the ground anywhere.

It seems like a stupid test. None of that movement will hurt any of those trucks.

But it isn't a stupid test really. All of those trucks failed it. They were all beating the shit out of the truck and driver though the F150 was doing the best. The reason I say it wasn't a stupid test is that when you live on a gravel road, the road gets like that a couple of times a year and the county has to keep them graded. The road out to my inlaws gets so bad that in an empty pickup you turn sideways on curves and have to make running starts on hills because the rear tires are on the ground--rarely. It gets bad.

With an independent suspension and not much unsprund mass to deal with, it's barely noticeable. Look at the front of those pickups--they are all independant. A straight axle front does abpout what the rear does--throws you side to side banging your head off the windows and makes it even harder to keep the truck straight.

actually Will the Ridgeline would most likely end up with fawked up quarter panels doing that.

Personally I would rather have the flexy c-channel frame under me. Toyota has already learned that box frames suck when it comes to lasting more than 10 years in the salt belt..

 

[Will]

No the Ridgline wouldn't. The suspension isn't stiff and it's extremely responsive.

This video is decent and shows how capable a Ridgeline is on a high speed course. It makes it look easier than it is.

 

[LearjetMinako]

Second linky don't work

So why is it that the Ridgeline has a transversed engine?

And that whole quater panel crimbling. Yes, it is true. But only if you abuse the truck.

After seeing that video. And trying to decide what possible upgrade truck I would want later in life. I choose the Ford F-150.

 

[jgrnot]

No the Ridgeline wouldn't. The suspension isn't stiff and it's extremely responsive.

This video is decent and shows how capable a Ridgeline is on a high speed course. It makes it look easier than it is.

Capable of what??

He couldn't make it up a not-so-steep hill without 4 wheel drive.

He's then shows off the water fording.......My Mustang can go through water that deep.


Who climb hills at top speed anyway? (In a stock vehicle at least) Anyone who does it is just asking for trouble.

 

[Simple_serf]

I really Really hope that ford did something about rust when they boxed in that frame. I had a truck snap in half because of a boxed frame rotting out. 10-15 years IS the limit on the old frames, due to rust issues.

 

[Will]

You think 28 degree hill isn't steep? Not to mention muddy, and that thing is wearing street rubber. Look at the out the back window shot after they get up the first one. A 28 degree hill is a 62% grade. After he stopped and turned the locker on it went right up. Pictures never do justice.

But that wasn't what i was talking about. That dude is flying all over the place and the guy in the passenger seat never has a problem with the camera. Look at about 7 minutes in the video and watch the keys and listen to the guys voice and the leaves flying by the window. And at about 8:30 there is a lot of ruts and stuff on the road and it sails right through it without a blip. It's got great suspension. It's also a boxed chassis welded to the body. It's 20X stiffer in torsion than the coventional frame trucks--which is what that video was showing with the Tundra VS F150. It's not going to wrinkle a fender. It's not the type of unit body with 2 short subframes welded or bolted to the body. It has a full frame from front to rear. It's just welded on.

I know you people hate the Ridgeline. But it's a very advanced and capable vehicle. Our Pilot has that same system and it's much more capable than a stock B2. Its 4wd system is smart, fully automatic and you would have to try hard to crash on a slick road. And for the times it doesn't work--like a 62% muddy grade, you push a button that turns of the system and locks the rear axle. I use it in the winter to get up my driveway when it's snowy.

It isn't a rock crawler and the guy says that over and over--it was developed right there at that ranch by Americans to do what a typical outdoorsman would need to do. Carry some bikes to a trailhead, find a remote campsite etc.. That it completed the stock class Baja 1000 says a lot about it.

Wrinkled fender? You're dreaming.

 

[soylent_green]

They weren't going fast in that test. 35MPH

 

[Jason]

I watched the tests and what did it prove? It proved that the Silverado and Tundra have thicker rubber mounts for the bed to isolate vibration from cargo. I also learned that driving 55 mph +/- over speed bumps is retarded. I can't say I learned that I prefer the F-150 because I already knew that.

That does bring me to a point. The Tundra was built as a towing vehicle. If you want to carry large loads you need a bigger truck, period. If you are hauling many many bags of concrete or similar in a half-ton, you are a half-wit, and the truck fits you. Now, for towing, did anyone bother to watch the Tundra pulling the other half-tons around that parking lot in the other videos on the right?

 

[krugford]

You think 28 degree hill isn't steep? Not to mention muddy, and that thing is wearing street rubber. Look at the out the back window shot after they get up the first one. A 28 degree hill is a 62% grade. After he stopped and turned the locker on it went right up. Pictures never do justice.

But that wasn't what i was talking about. That dude is flying all over the place and the guy in the passenger seat never has a problem with the camera. Look at about 7 minutes in the video and watch the keys and listen to the guys voice and the leaves flying by the window. And at about 8:30 there is a lot of ruts and stuff on the road and it sails right through it without a blip. It's got great suspension. It's also a boxed chassis welded to the body. It's 20X stiffer in torsion than the coventional frame trucks--which is what that video was showing with the Tundra VS F150. It's not going to wrinkle a fender. It's not the type of unit body with 2 short subframes welded or bolted to the body. It has a full frame from front to rear. It's just welded on.

I know you people hate the Ridgeline. But it's a very advanced and capable vehicle. Our Pilot has that same system and it's much more capable than a stock B2. Its 4wd system is smart, fully automatic and you would have to try hard to crash on a slick road. And for the times it doesn't work--like a 62% muddy grade, you push a button that turns of the system and locks the rear axle. I use it in the winter to get up my driveway when it's snowy.

It isn't a rock crawler and the guy says that over and over--it was developed right there at that ranch by Americans to do what a typical outdoorsman would need to do. Carry some bikes to a trailhead, find a remote campsite etc.. That it completed the stock class Baja 1000 says a lot about it.

Wrinkled fender? You're dreaming.

Sorry to say, but that "bed" is too short to haul bikes without taking the front wheels off. The main thing is that the Ridgeline isn't a truck. It's an SUV that's trying to play with the full size trucks. My Ranger has more towing and cargo capability than the Ridgeline. Isn't the Ridgeline supposed to be a full size? I can tow, what, around 5,800 lbs? The Ridgeline is rated for 5,000. Try to put a ATV in the back of the Ridgeline and you'll be riding with half of it on the tailgate. I wonder how much weight that swing open/fold down tailgate can handle before it snaps and leaves your load cart-wheeling down the freeway.

Wanna talk about power? Sure, the Ridgeline has more power and torque than my Ranger, but I want to see WHERE it is making its torque. Anybody have torque curves for that 3.5L?

I also don't need a computer to tell me how to drive my TRUCK. If I need a computer to save my ass from a crash, then I was obviously doing something wrong to be put into that situation in the first place. And let me get this straight just to make sure I understood what you said. You're comparing a Honda Pilot to a short lived SUV that went out of production 15 years ago? That's a weak argument and you know it.

 

[Jason]

Motortrend car of the year! err I mean truck

The difference is Toyota WILL acknowledge a potential problem and issue this

I can tell you that even though the owner broke it, Toyota realized that it could have been made different to prevent the issue, so they make it right and fix it FREE. They even pay for a rental truck for you to drive in the meantime.

Now how long did it take Ford to fix those police cars?
How about Dodge and those wonderful transmissions in the Rams?
Maybe we can call someone at GM and ask when they are going to fix their ABS sensor issues and seal their headlamps up?

I am not a Toyota lover, for my money the F-150 wins every time. However, if you have the cash and use the truck for it's purpose the Tundra is a great truck. They hold their value better than anything (chevy claims the 2008 silverado does, but it hasn't been proven by any stretch) and they tow well. They cost more? YES! Until you trade it in or sell it.

 

[jgrnot]

You think 28 degree hill isn't steep? Not to mention muddy, and that thing is wearing street rubber. Look at the out the back window shot after they get up the first one. A 28 degree hill is a 62% grade. After he stopped and turned the locker on it went right up. Pictures never do justice.

But it's a very advanced and capable vehicle.

Carry some bikes to a trailhead, find a remote campsite etc..

That it completed the stock class Baja 1000 says a lot about it.

I could climb that hill in two wheel drive with my Ranger, I GUARANTEE that. Been through far steeper, muddier, longer, etc.

It may be very advanced, but think about it. It's just one more thing that will eventually BREAK. Why do you think Chevy haulted the rear-steer option? It sure wasn't because of customer demand.

Carry bikes to the trailhead........exactly what krugford said. I say......maybe BICYCLES.

I could take my Ranger, with 115,000 miles on it, and make it through the Baja 1000. Granted, I wouldn't be flying through the course at 100 miles per hour, but my truck, and myself, would end in one piece.

 

[soylent_green]

Didn't they have to do major modifications to the ridgeline to make it ready for baja? IIRC, they had to brace the hell out of the subframes to keep the truck from twisting up into a pretzel on the bumps and jumps.

If they ran it bone stock, I'd be impressed.

 

[Totalled]

It's not just the frame on the toy truck... the box itself is torsionally twisting...

Nice try, nice marketing.. still a wanabe truck...

 

[michowski]

What would make me spend 30 grand or more on a new 08 truck would be to see if raced in the baja 1000 completly stock with just like more lights added for the night driving. If I saw it race that and finish in 1 peice with no break downs I would start writing out a check. Thats how I would build a truck. Build it to do anything out there now. Find a way to duplicate this design in a cost effective way and reproduce them and sell it. I garuntee if you sold a truck in this fashion that it would have the higest demand out there.