3500 frame problem???

[BILLUA]

Bill, (abdiver) Thanks, for all of the updates. I am in contact with all 3 dealers here in Las Vegas, they all have the deer in the headlights syndrome when asked about this. I have a pretty sharp fleet sales adviser at Chapman Dodge that seems to have taken this on as a personal vendetta for me. She is pretty cool! She thinks that this is a total load of horse manure.



On another angle: In my professional life, I am a airline pilot. 20 years of flying aircraft has gotten me pretty familiar with limits, restrictions and recommendations... Now, if I want to be literal, the wording "Not recommended" is not a true restriction. It is an advisory statement, not a limit. A limit or restriction must include the word "prohibited" or "Not authorized" or "Not Certified". Being as the camper wording is a recommendation, it IS NOT a true restriction. Now, if you roll over and kill a spotted owl, the government could sue you for having the camper on a truck that the manufacturer says it doesn't recommend. Maybe they would win... Now, taking the McDonald's didn't tell me the coffee was hot angle on law, you could turn right around and sue Daimler Chrysler for not telling you that there was a danger, restriction or prohibition on carrying a camper. You (we) would have a pretty strong argument.



My truck is not in yet. my hat is off to you waiting to find out more info. When I do, I will post it right here on this thread.



I drove a Chevy 1 ton today which, had a "camper certification" sticker right on the glove box... I would in NO Case buy the Chevrolet... .



I will be Driving a F350 on Thurs... If my impressions of that truck are similar to the impressions I got from driving the Chevy, I will take delivery of my truck which I know to be an incredible piece of machinery and I will put my camper on it since I WILL NOT be busting a weight rating limit, or any noted prohibition within the allowed operation of the vehicle.



If the other manufactures trucks were even close in comparison, I wouldn't be up at 1230 at night typing this



Cheers, Bill

 

[klenger]

abdiver:



See post #60. The Truck Camper Loading document is something that was with the delivery paperwork of the truck. The cargo weight rating of 1300 lbs is not marked anywhere else. The 1300 lb number is totally meaningless IMO as it is about 1/2 of what my truck's capacity really is.

 

[MFetzer]

My opinion. Get the truck haul whatever, put a camper in. A lot of things aren't recomended but we do it any way. I have a 3500 DRW and if it fits in the bed I haul it, 80,000 miles so far and no problems. Just looked under it and the frame looks fine. I don't see how what you are hauling is going to void any waranty. How is the dealer going to prove that is what caused the problems. Just my two cents.

 

[LFalconer]

All, I called Shade Equipment Company [authorized Upfitter in Winchester VA] spoke with Kelly there.



He confirmed that the 04/05's did have frame crack issues for trucks with pickup box off / specialty beds. However, Dodge has just released the 05's DRW with a different frame, that is suited to bed off applications.



He attended the show last month in Indiana, and found out that DC will release a chassis cab model in 06. Not sure if a 4500/5500 type variety, but chassis cab.



I asked about problems with pickups with the bed on. He indicated he didn't know of any frame issues with bed on.



Hopefully others on this thread can confirm / add to this issue.



Thanks, Luke

 

[XJSuperman]

Maybe part of the reason the utility bed companies, etc... don't have applications for the dodge is because of DC's no drill no weld policy deal on these hydroformed frames? They might not want to have the liability of voiding someones warranty by installing one of said products???



Now I'm not familiar enough with these types of beds to know if they are a bolt on (like the stock beds) or what... but if something didn't quite line up right with an install... I'm sure cutting, drilling, and/or welding is done to get it to fit. And in the case of the 3rd gens that means bye bye warranty... and then they might have a lawsuit from the customers... just a thought... but it is a big liability for an aftermarket company that might void the warranty on a customers $40K+ truck.



If I'm way off in my thinking just ignore my ignorance as I stated above I'm not familiar enough with the utility beds (or the slide in campers for that matter).

 

[abdiver]

klenger Thanks to clearing that up



Bill

 

[hERKY130]

Billua,

You SHALL not take delivery of a Ford or Chevrolet, you WILL not cancel your order on the Dodge and you SHOULD be alright with the camper. How's that for tech manual speak :-laf

 

[BILLUA]

Roger that Herc!



)

 

[TFucili]

HERKY, is that, like, c130 transport?

 

[abdiver]

All, I called Shade Equipment Company [authorized Upfitter in Winchester VA] spoke with Kelly there.



He confirmed that the 04/05's did have frame crack issues for trucks with pickup box off / specialty beds. However, Dodge has just released the 05's DRW with a different frame, that is suited to bed off applications.



He attended the show last month in Indiana, and found out that DC will release a chassis cab model in 06. Not sure if a 4500/5500 type variety, but chassis cab.



I asked about problems with pickups with the bed on. He indicated he didn't know of any frame issues with bed on.



Hopefully others on this thread can confirm / add to this issue.



Thanks, Luke

This information would lead me to think that there is was a problem with the Frame, and now DC has corrected it for the DRW. When did this frame change start ? I am assuming it started sometime after the 05s came out. What about the 3500 SRW Frame < Lots of people chose to place utility boxs on SRW's

 

[LFalconer]

abdiver, I tend to have the same concern as you. The bed is certainly from an engineering view a structural member, and may provide enough additional rigidity to assist in the torsional rotation issues.



However - the trucks have been in service since Sept 03 at most, and this is 2. 5 years. What happens to trucks that tow / haul heavy, over unpaved roads / fields regularly? The hydroformed frame does stress the metal, and with the thin metal [compared to a Ford] and the box shape - which does not allow the same amount of deflection without a bending moment - where does the fatigue point set in?



There was a post in this thread that indicated there had not be a post on TDR about frame cracking, but - how many folks have looked? When does this issue go from concern to catastrophic failure? When might NTSB / NHSTA issue a mandantory recall? What would your 03 to 05 2500/3500 be worth then????



I'm not a hype type person, but an engineer with gray hair, so typically metal fatigue occurs after many cycles, remember the 727's that lost roofs landing?



The new frame release a couple weeks ago from DC is proof that there is an issue here, to what extent - We need to find out.



Thanks, Luke

 

[BILLUA]

Luke,



"remember the 727's that lost roofs landing? "



Those were 737's, not 727's Please do not malign my much loved 727



Cheers, bill

 

[LFalconer]

BillUA, Oops, you are correct, it was the 737... .



My point was the metal fatigue after [if I recall correctly... ] 80,000 + takeoff and landing cycles...



Luke

 

[DPelletier]

A couple of comments;



- The SRW is supposedly allowed to have a utility box. The DRW and SRW have the same frame, ergo: There is no problem with the frame.



- This is the 1st I've heard about an '05 DRW frame change. So the '05's have two different frames now? one for SRW's and one for DRW's? I think not.



- I would be interested if the "utility box" guy actually saw some frames that were cracked or just assumes that there is a cracking issue due to DC's refusal to certify them.



- I reiterate: Never heard of a cracked 3rd gen frame despite reading thousands of posts on both this site and others almost every day. If it was a real problem we would already know about it.



Signing off on this one,

Dave

 

[DPelletier]

Oh yeah, I forgot;

- did a quick search on "Frame + Crack" on this Forum. Read many posts and still couldn't find one that indicated a cracked frame anywhere. How many 3rd genners are there here? 5,000 - 10,000?



I'm sure the new Cab and Chassis will have a different frame (they did in the 2nd gens) and probably a higher GVWR as well.



Dave

 

[abdiver]

abdiver, I tend to have the same concern as you. The bed is certainly from an engineering view a structural member, and may provide enough additional rigidity to assist in the torsional rotation issues.



However - the trucks have been in service since Sept 03 at most, and this is 2. 5 years. What happens to trucks that tow / haul heavy, over unpaved roads / fields regularly? The hydroformed frame does stress the metal, and with the thin metal [compared to a Ford] and the box shape - which does not allow the same amount of deflection without a bending moment - where does the fatigue point set in?



There was a post in this thread that indicated there had not be a post on TDR about frame cracking, but - how many folks have looked? When does this issue go from concern to catastrophic failure? When might NTSB / NHSTA issue a mandantory recall? What would your 03 to 05 2500/3500 be worth then????



I'm not a hype type person, but an engineer with gray hair, so typically metal fatigue occurs after many cycles, remember the 727's that lost roofs landing?



The new frame release a couple weeks ago from DC is proof that there is an issue here, to what extent - We need to find out.



Thanks, Luke

LFalconer, Thank you, Well said.

You explained it a lot better than I have so far been able to. I have more mechanical experience than expressing my thoughts clearly on paper or on the net.



Some on this thread who already have this frame say there is no problem which, I do hope is the case.

A few like myself are ready to buy, are waiting to see what comes of this issue.



I remember the Chrysler Corps Technical bulletins and videos featuring Mr. Stretch, It referred to the way metal acts or reacted to heat and fatigue.



Take a piece of wire bend it once no problem, try bending it a dozen or two times.



It would seem quite feasible to me that with this NEW frame, if their is a problem, it would more likely show up a few years later than immediately.



It does also seem reasonable that the weak spot would be in the area behind the cab and that Quad long beds would have a greater chance of having a problem if a problem does exist.



And a lot would depend on the load that a frame has carried and for what length of time. I would guess if there is anything to this frame issue it would first show up on these hydo formed frames that have carried a heavy load for the longest time first. ( Quad long beds w/ Large campers)



There are always exceptions,



Corporations are usually pretty slow to bring defects to the attention of the public. I am not one to bash corporations or cry the sky is falling. But I do like to do my research that is why I joined this Site.



It appears from one post that DC has made a change to its frame for the mid year Dually. If this is correct it would appear that that there may have been a problem.



Bill

 

[KCJackson]

abdiver:



See post #60. The Truck Camper Loading document is something that was with the delivery paperwork of the truck. The cargo weight rating of 1300 lbs is not marked anywhere else. The 1300 lb number is totally meaningless IMO as it is about 1/2 of what my truck's capacity really is.

The reduction from max payload to the cargo weight number on the camper sheet is an allowance of passengers, luggage, and water tanks of the camper. On my 96, the payload rating wqas 4615, but the camper sheet cargo rating was 3312. I always took that to mean an allowance of 1300 pounds for the driver, passengers, camping gear, supplies (food, etc. ), and full water tanks. What's left is available to the slide-in unit itself. That always made sense to me... if you bought a camper to the limit of your payload, THEN added the family and the gear, the truck would be WELL overweight.

 

[dpatt67]

DPelletier, thank you for one of the few intelligent posts. I sometimes can't believe the Chicken Little posts we have here. One person says something and it's "OMG, my truck is a POS and is falling apart"! While i truly understand someone checking into something because of a rumor, i don't see reacting to it until it is fact.

 

[rogerblind]

I am the one who started this thread, and I, like LFalconer, am a grey (white??)-haired engineer. Since I had over $30K of my company's money at stake here, I wanted to make sure I was buying a truck that was going to be capable of doing what I needed it to do. The original indication of the "problem" came to me from the infamous "utility body installer," who gave up a $5K installation contract by refusing to install the body on my new truck, so I felt that he was most likely a credible source. From this long thread, it is obvious that most people (including me) think/hope that there is not really a problem, but for me personally, that is not good enough. My company already owns 5 Dodge CTD's (one is a 2003 3500 DRW with a utiltity body, and yes, no frame problems), plus I own two myself as well. I was hoping to increase the CTD count to 6, but for now, I'll just be content with another Ford, which came from the dealer with a utility body already installed at a price very comparable to the Dodge. Hopefully by the time I need my next new truck, this issue will be sorted out and Ill buy another Dodge CTD.

 

[Lorenz]

4080 views so far.



This is getting rediculous.



you guys know the ford guys on the other forum are linking this to thier site and laughing right...