Why is ford's GVWR so much higher?

[DPelletier]

Luke,

Good post, but in OTD's defense, you still only have a fourth party contention that ther were "some frame cracks in Quadcab LWB trucks". This is far from definative proof that there is a frame problem with 3rd gen hydroformed frames IMO. The new frame is stronger and stiffer than the old C-Channel frame. The only POTENTIAL weaknesses would be if the frame was more brittle or prone to "work hardening" OR degradation of strength due to corrosion.

As far as the brittle/work hardening issue goes, I'm afraid I'll need a little more proof other than "somebody talked to so and so who said that..... " considering the complete lack of frame issues on this site.

The corrosion issue MAY become an issue in the future, but there is more to a frame's corrosion resistance potential than thickness. Metal type and quality, coatings and number and location of drain holes are among the variables. Many frames in the past were simply raw steel and started to rust immediately. In addition most cars these days don't even have frames and the unibody construction is orders of magnitude thinner than our hydroformed frames, yet you don't see 7 or 8 year old Civics and such with rust caused structural failures (yes I know they don't haul 5ers!)



Anybody remember the 1980 Ford "swiss cheese" frame fiasco? I remember several F-250's owned by local logging companies that had frame damage (bent).



Anyway Luke, I am not trying to be argumentative or question you honesty or intelligence by any means, but I have yet to be convinced that there is a frame issue on my '03 or 04. 5 Dodge.



Good luck with your Ford. You did your research and purchased accordingly.



Cheers,

Dave

 

[LFalconer]

Dave,



I concur with your statement on "no definitive proof" - I personally did not see the frames, but relied on D/C & suppliers to be correct in their info.



I'd be interested to see the Finite Element Analysis supporting the info that the new frame is stronger - especially when coupled with torsional stresses, corrison and the uncertainty of the welding. Dodge welds to their frames, whereas Ford uses bolts and rivits to attach all components [especially high load areas of the rear spring mounts etc].



I concur there are many frameless vehicles on the road today, 10+ years old.



I might be dead wrong on this issue - regarding aging / corrision and ultimate conclusion. However - I'm convinced for some folks, it will be problematic, and living on a gravel road, in a snow area was enough for me.



Good luck,



Luke

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

"Anyway Luke, I am not trying to be argumentative or question you honesty or intelligence by any means, but I have yet to be convinced that there is a frame issue on my '03 or 04. 5 Dodge. "



UNFORTUNATELY, before current owners are eventually "convinced" of potential issues, the horse is outta the barn and water under the bridge - so the more timid/investigative of us must fall back on informed or gut feelings.



Some buyers of the latest Dodges shrugged off concerns about the new 6-speed going into their trucks as well - but now we have a pretty full-blown fiasco on our hands that has LOTS of guys wishing for the old NV-5600...



YET, in spite of actual KNOWN delivery stoppage of the new manual transmission Dodges, how many ACTUAL failures have been reported HERE from first-hand experience?



But lacking that, do any here REALLY doubt the problem actually exists?

 

[DPelletier]

"Anyway Luke, I am not trying to be argumentative or question you honesty or intelligence by any means, but I have yet to be convinced that there is a frame issue on my '03 or 04. 5 Dodge. "



UNFORTUNATELY, before current owners are eventually "convinced" of potential issues, the horse is outta the barn and water under the bridge - so the more timid/investigative of us must fall back on informed or gut feelings.



Some buyers of the latest Dodges shrugged off concerns about the new 6-speed going into their trucks as well - but now we have a pretty full-blown fiasco on our hands that has LOTS of guys wishing for the old NV-5600...



YET, in spite of actual KNOWN delivery stoppage of the new manual transmission Dodges, how many ACTUAL failures have been reported HERE from first-hand experience?



Gary, I hear what your trying to say, yet I believe there are a couple of differences:



- The hydroformed frame has been in service for over two years compared to a few months at best for the G56.



- We have a member (dealer) who has stated that he's had a couple of G-56's in for repair already. So, only second hand info!



- DC thought the transmission issue was important enough to stop shipment of ordered vehicles. The same thing didn't happen with the frames.



It is quite possible (IMO) that a Ford or 2nd gen Dodge frame MIGHT have a longer lifespan that the 3rd gen hydroformed frames. Maybe the new ones will only last 20 years instead of 30 for example. I'm just saying that I believe that DC's "no camper" statement has more to do with covering corporate butt that it has to do with some widespread hydroformed frame weakness.



I applaud everyone that is currently thinking of buying a new truck for their efforts to glean as much info as possible before making an informed purchase decision (like Luke did). There just hasn't been enough (any?) documented frame failures for me to declare it a real issue with these trucks.



FWIW, while I hoped the G-56 was going to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, I was leary enough that I would have bought the NV-5600 until any potential problems were known, just because the NV was KNOWN to be such a strong and reliable transmission.





Dave

 

[DPelletier]

Gary,

rereading your post, I have to agree that I'm in a different position than Luke or the others trying to buy a new truck. After all, I'm not about to sell my two 3rd gens and go buy something else even if it is eventually accepted that there is the odd frame cracking problem. Proof or no proof, I admit that I would more inclined to worry if I was about to commit to another purchase.



On comparing the frame issue to the G56 issue, I'll only say that if the G56 is out for 2 years and not one member has a failure, then I guess I'll view it the same way as I currently view the frame issue.



Cheers,

Dave

 

[LFalconer]

Issue of TDR

Dave, If I had not had the vibe issue that didn't work out - I likely would not have "sold" the truck as well. There are other tradeoffs between dodge and ford that one could like or not [Body panels, paint, seating comfort] but these are relatively small. The Cummins, NV5600 and Driveline are top notch, no compliants in the least.



I got on this frame issue from both this forum, and a friend of mine who owns a trucking firm, and has vehicles upfitted - hence the trail I went down in discovery of various facts and opinions.



I believe that if you don't weld to this frame, and use approved mounting methods [note in this months TDR issue a gooseneck hitch especially engineered for 3rd Gen frames, as to not "buckle" the frame] and have a pickup box on at all times, you will likely be OK. I would be sure to flush the frame regularly and use either marine fogging oil or WD40 to coat the interior bottom if possible. Particulary in the area of the rear wheels, as from my experience on older Jeeps with box frames, this is where the rust was most likely found [to the point of being able to stick a screwdriver through the bottom of some of these Jeeps].



Again, Good Luck, good thing you got the NV5600 versus the G-56... However it is good that D/C is holding them till a fix is out.



Luke

 

[DPelletier]

Dave, If I had not had the vibe issue that didn't work out - I likely would not have "sold" the truck as well. There are other tradeoffs between dodge and ford that one could like or not [Body panels, paint, seating comfort] but these are relatively small. The Cummins, NV5600 and Driveline are top notch, no compliants in the least.



I got on this frame issue from both this forum, and a friend of mine who owns a trucking firm, and has vehicles upfitted - hence the trail I went down in discovery of various facts and opinions.



I believe that if you don't weld to this frame, and use approved mounting methods [note in this months TDR issue a gooseneck hitch especially engineered for 3rd Gen frames, as to not "buckle" the frame] and have a pickup box on at all times, you will likely be OK. I would be sure to flush the frame regularly and use either marine fogging oil or WD40 to coat the interior bottom if possible. Particulary in the area of the rear wheels, as from my experience on older Jeeps with box frames, this is where the rust was most likely found [to the point of being able to stick a screwdriver through the bottom of some of these Jeeps].



Again, Good Luck, good thing you got the NV5600 versus the G-56... However it is good that D/C is holding them till a fix is out.



Luke

Luke,

Ya mean I hafta worry about my TJ as well? Just kidding! I just read the other post about the G56 issue being simply low on fluid. That sounds too easy, but who knows. I am very happy with the two NV-5600's though.

Good chatting with you and I wish you the best with your new truck.



Dave

 

[LFalconer]

Dave, Good chatting with you too. Actually the older Scramblers - they were hard to find, and 10 years ago I tried to find a good one to restore, 2 out of 3 had rotten rear frames.....



Not sure on the TJ's. . once they went to square headlights, It wasn't the same ;-)



Luke

 

[rbattelle]

I'd be interested to see the Finite Element Analysis supporting the info that the new frame is stronger - especially when coupled with torsional stresses, corrison and the uncertainty of the welding. Dodge welds to their frames, whereas Ford uses bolts and rivits to attach all components [especially high load areas of the rear spring mounts etc].

I am not a structural engineer, but I've always been under the impression that welding is much stronger than riveting, especially in terms of low-cycle fatigue. If rivets are better, why do they weld boats together (big boats)?



The corrosion issue is a very interesting topic, and for some reason I had never considered the possibility of the buildup of corrosive contaminants along the bottom of the frame.



I am of the opinion that the metal used to build the Dodge frames is plenty thick - perhaps even a little over-engineered. Maybe I'm wrong, as I only have channel frames to compare it to (never crawled over a new Ford).



Of course, that's all quite off-topic. On the subject of GVWR, I think the biggest single factor is the brakes. Bigger brakes, bigger GVWR. Am I wrong? How big are the Ford brakes?



-Ryan

 

[RustyJC]

I am not a structural engineer, but I've always been under the impression that welding is much stronger than riveting, especially in terms of low-cycle fatigue. If rivets are better, why do they weld boats together (big boats)?

If you've been around big rigs, buses, etc. , you've probably seen Huck bolts. It's worth a Google search to learn more about them.



Rusty

 

[Tim]

Welding is not necessarily stronger than riveting. More rigid? Most likely, yes. Stronger, not always.



Big boats ARE sometimes riveted together. The Titanic was. :-laf

 

[BHolm]

"I do not think it is an irrelavant point unless you choose to treat the ratings as the actual limits, which I do not believe is accurate. "





That's all well and good - UNTIL you find yourself in the situation, as a few here have, where you need to convince the Hiway Patrol, insurance company, or a judge that those clearly posted and advertised specs aren't really "accurate" - and can be ignored with impunity... [/QUOTE



Well Gary, My trucks are commercial vehicles. The drivers get to talk to the highway patrol many times a year at wiegh stations and roadside checkpoints. They are regualrly over the GCVWR and in ten years of doing this I have never seen a ticket, never even a warning. They do check tires and tags and ensure the brakes are working, thats it. A few years back I had a driver rear end somebody at a stoplight with my F-350 srw. Nobody ever questioned the load or the vehicles GCVWR. I understand your point BUT, in the real world, that isn't how it is happening.



As for Tims comment about how the load "feels" to the seat of my pants not being valid, yeah whatever buddy. I have hundreds of thousands of miles under my belt in class 8 rigs and more yet with these smaller trucks. I have years of experience running very fast cars or racetracks, road racing and drag racing and beyond that I have been professionally trained in off road driving. I am pretty sure my butt dyno is well calibrated. I do not run loads that "feel" dangerous because I know that if they feel bad, they probably are. The guys setting the numbers are setting them low based on lawyers, not actual capabilities. Seems to me the law enforcement folks, who do this stuff for a living agree with me as they have never tried to enforce a manufacturers rating in my experience.

 

[DPelletier]

BHolm,

I'm not trying to argue with you, but I would only say that one should keep in mind that enforcement will vary from place to place and may also change periodically. I also have a fleet of commercial licenced pick-up trucks and we have been ticketed for being over GCWR. Now, this may not matter to you operating a business far from here, but it might matter to an RV'er planing a future Alaskan trip. That having been said, the RCMP have the official position that they don't target overweight RV'ers unless there is an obviously unsafe condition. Of course, the definition of "obviously unsafe" is left to the individual officer, but I haven't heard of any recent problems in this area.

This represents a change in policy since at least one detachment was targeting overweight RV's and used a portable weigh station, but that was several years ago now.





Dave

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

"Well Gary, My trucks are commercial vehicles. The drivers get to talk to the highway patrol many times a year at weigh stations and roadside checkpoints. They are regularly over the GCVWR and in ten years of doing this I have never seen a ticket, never even a warning. "



WELL, that might fly in your area and situation - but out in sunny California, being caught going across the scales overweight WILL get you cited - and if serious enough, MIGHT also get the truck locked down on the spot until steps are taken to reduce the load down to legal limits! Any of your overweight trucks ever rolled across the Cordelia scales on I-80 between Sacramento and San Francisco? :-laf :-laf

 

[klenger]

How does the DOT even know the GCWR of a truck? It is not a published number. The only published numbers that I know of are the GVWR and GAWR on the door frame and the tire rating marked on the tires.



There are plenty of posts on RV forums of members attempting to find the GCWR for their older vehicles, but they cannot find the numbers anywhere, including asking the dealers.

 

[DPelletier]

How does the DOT even know the GCWR of a truck? It is not a published number. The only published numbers that I know of are the GVWR and GAWR on the door frame and the tire rating marked on the tires.



There are plenty of posts on RV forums of members attempting to find the GCWR for their older vehicles, but they cannot find the numbers anywhere, including asking the dealers.

Sorry Ken, You're right (again!). It was actually the GVWR that we were cited for exceeding. I can't speak for Gary.



Dave

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

I think the recognized allowable weight rating for vehicles is connected with info included on the vehicles registration by DMV - in California, my '02 Dodge is listed as a "type 31" vehicle, 2 axles, and an unladen weight of 6007 lbs. That, along with other DMV and licensing is probably in essence what is used by law enforcement and insurance companies in recognizing allowable weight limits in actual use.



I would think that even older vehicles lacking specific tags attached to them would also follow conventions as defined with DMV registration where GVWR is concerned, and perhaps various Hiway Patrol operations do as well.

 

[XJSuperman]

I remember a few months ago when ford put out the new commercial with the 'tow boss' dually. It said it has a tow rating of 19,700 I believe... and everyone was all up in arms.



I never payed much attention to it BUT last night I saw it again and watched... and if I read it right the tow rating for the 'tow boss' dually was only 14,700# and the GCWR was 19,700#... so when the 'guy' says 19,700#... read the fine print below it (I'm pretty sure I read it right).



ALSO... the ford refrigderator commercial shows a dually towing with a TOW capacity of only 13,700#... . so if I did read right... the 'tow boss' just adds 1,000# of GVWR/GCWR to the 'flower poke' ferd.



Not sure if anyone covered this in the long post already or somewhere else... but I thought I'd shoot it out here anyhow.



So whilst the new ferd SRW 350 may have a larger GVWR than my 3500 SRW... I could give a rat crap... we have the better engine and as far as most of us are concerned the better truck (I know some of us are still debating this even though they drive the dodge... I'm sure you know who you are)

 

[Ol'TrailDog]

LFaconer, good response. Albeit, still shy specific frame failures. And that is my main point - providing specific incidents of frame failure.



I am convinced that since my flatbed attaches at the six stock attachment points it will function as well, if not better, then the box a frame component. Plus, a flatbed was not listed as one of the afterbody restrictions mentioned in the upfitter pdf. file linked earlier in this thread. In additon, apparently as mentioned there are factory frame additions which can be added if needed.



Also, for my purposes the more rigid hydoframe has more advantages that disadvantages. And I do not live in an area where salt is a concern, fortunately . Regarding the box frames and rust, I would also note that during that era vehicles had a substantial problem with body rust also. Manufacoring techniques have changed since then. Chances are, unless we have the Vega/Pinto factor going here, my truck will not be in my ownership before rust could become a serious threat. They all eventually rust. I am confident that if frame rusting is an issue I will hear about it from midwestern owners in sufficient time to purchase a replacement vehicle.



I hope you are satisfied with your Ford and it meets your needs. I have previously owned a Ford and was happy with it. However, for my money and purposes the engine and drive train are far more important factors in my decision to currently be a CTD owner.

 

[EMD-Run8]

A three-way shootout I read a while back showed that the Dodge was almost 1,000 lbs heavier than the Chibby and about 700 lbs heavier than the Ford. That narrows things up some------with all that heavy metal under the hood!