It has only been two years since they went to the thin steel, not 14.


Being boxed doesn't mean you need to make it paper thin. My 2006 Jeep has a boxed frame, and the steel is more than twice as thick as my F150. And even those are known to rust out in the north, if you drive in salt and don't take the proper precautions (which most people don't).

 

I found this article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-s...ow-alloy_steel

I don't know if Ford uses a standard alloy or a proprietary one. Ford hasn't said much about it.

I can see why Northern or coastal truck owners would be concerned. Look at what happened with Toyota.

Toyota pays $3.4 billion in class-action suit over rusty truck frames - Autoblog

I would hope that Ford would have learned from Toyota's mistake and would have taken measures to ensure the same thing didn't happen their frames.

 

My LLV that I've been assigned to for about 12 years is a 1995 model and was one of the last ones produced. With 93245 miles on the clock, it's on it's 2nd engine, 2nd transmission and God only knows how many batteries, starters and brake replacements. The body though faded and scratched is in great shape. I've seen pics of burning LLV's and they burn fast.

I'm convinced that the aluminum bodies will be fine in Ford's future.

 

About 7-8 years ago, USPS in parts of Milwaukee (WI) started using Dodge Grand Caravans as replacements for the LLV. I noticed now that the vehicle lot once filled with LLVs, then Grand Caravans, is now once again filled with LLVs. It looks like a minivan wasn't up the the challenge of a mail route.

Yes, I'm sure Aluminum will be great for Ford. What are the odds of an Aluminum pickup burning to the ground or puncturing the bed (being used by a landscaper or construction worker without a bed liner) vs a Steel one rusting out?

 

Even as a fanboy I'd give thought to the frame before the body. I do believe Ford has done the most of any manufacture of trucks to ensure the frame is protected. it's not simply painted, but plated, so that's inside and out. Also, being boxed protects it from having many places for salt to sit. If you live in a high corrosion area, it's probably worthwhile to do a Krown type under-treatment. If you believe you should be able to drive for 30 years without any care yourself, well.... you're outta luck. I judge for AACA, which has a 25 year old minimum. The 25 year old cars that get point judged are never restored, they're all low mile survivors. Guess what, they look like crap next to both a showroom car, or a properly restored car. And these are 20,000 mile garage luxury cars generally. Age just does it's thing. They might seem perfect until you place them next to perfection. So a truck with 200k on it is going to have some weathering, regardless of what it's made out of.

 

Well, what about a vacuum-sealed vault in outer space, without gravity, UV, or atmosphere.

No takers? Didn't think so. An F150 might not be worth the trouble in 30 years anyway...

Still, the Aluminum F150s will be a blessing for collectors in the future. Imagine how many corrosion-hole free body panels there will be compared to a 1987 today. In fact, there probably won't be much of a need for spare panels. Plus, with the hundreds of patch panels Ford makes for the new panels, finding repro stuff or NOS panels shouldn't really be a problem!

 

These will never be collector vehicles. Plastics will break down and decent replacements will become unobtanium. Electronics will go beyond the age of update support. Corn based wiring insulation and seat cushions will decompose.

Sadly the only future value, after repairs are no longer practical, is to recycle them.

 

Sorry, I derailed this one a little, but I suppose it still ties together some.

Plastics have held up better than I would have expected. If they aren't out in the sun old cars tend to be in good shape and parts are available. Still most folks aren't restoring a majority of 1970s models. Here's my counter though JKBrad.... 3D printing and other technologies are making one off design much more affordable. It's not unrealistic for me to get a new interior for my 1982 Dodge Rampage if I really wanted to, and it would cost a small fraction of the die cost with traditional injection molding. Seats are pretty easy to reupholster if you can find the materials to do so, and given that I can still find bolts of materials from the 1950s... I bet stuff will survive. The survival rate of any old car is dismally low. The future is better than the past for restoration though... it's regulation that is a greater threat IMO.

 

To be fair, the same thing was said about vehicles equipped with EFI, that the electronic systems will fail or develop problems long before they will become collectible. The newer generation of technicians are equipped the work on the advanced electronic systems. They will be the ones that will want to restore these someday, and they will know how to deal with workarounds or finding/building replacement systems.

As for the plastics; you're thinking in terms of today's capabilities for making plastics. Imagine how easily it will be to print out a scan of an OEM plastic component in a few decades. The equipment is expensive, but we can do it now. It will be a whole lot cheaper in the future.

For everything else--we deal with the same problems on 40+ year old cars, with far fewer ways of producing the repro materials than we potentially will in the future.

Cars are also lasting far longer than they used to. 40 years ago, cars started to fall apart at 70,000 miles; today, that's barely broken in.

Just my two cents.

 

The frames are e-coated before painting, not "plated". Plating refers to a metal coating.


Like I said before, look under a 2015 that has been through 2 winters in a high-salt area. I don't know if the e-coat was too thin, but they already are rusting on the inside (which is only e-coated, no paint) and on the outside, especially around welds. This is not speculation; I have seen it on numerous trucks. We even had some pictures posted on this forum earlier this year, from a member who had a brand new truck that was already heavily rusted underneath. It was probably test driven in salt, and never washed afterwards. Ford really did a half-*** job on coating the frames, and if you want them to last in the salt belt, it's going to take some effort from the owner (more than other trucks).

 

Bravo!!!!!!! g

 

As I recall, it was Ford who first advertised the boxed frame showing a cross section of both theirs and GM side by side. Also, not that long ago GM found itself actually changing out frames on customers trucks when they sagged mid frame. I have never heard of a Ford frame failure.

As for the Aluminum? I agree with the posts above. Coming from the aviation industry, (steel hasn't penetrated that market yet! ) I can say with absolute confidence that Aluminum will hold it's paint well. These aircraft go from as high as 110 degree Phoenix heat to minus 60 below numerous times per day, 365 days per year. Nothing gets more exposure to the sun than a commercial aircraft flying at 40,000 feet for 10 to 15 hours per day. That being the number one enemy of any paint job. Next comes hail or dust. If you see chipped paint one a commercial jet, hail is usually the culprit. Most of this is not likely to be a factor with a F150 but it shows this is not something to worry about. And airlines don't load their equipment with bobcats like the goof ball in the Chevy commercial does. It will corrode however, especially where dis-similar metals meet. I would assume Ford did their homework on this as it's not that big of a deal to eliminate the issue. It may be when mechanics start wrenching on these things and installing steel fasteners in aluminum. As for fatigue? Again I refer to aircraft such as a 747 which lands day in and day weighing over 500,000 lbs. at speed around 160 MPH. Our airline had one of these with over 50,000 landing cycles before it was retired. A few repairable cracks here and there during it's life, but again it proves aluminum structures are up to the task.

Aluminum is something new to most and I certainly understand a bit of scientism. I couldn't wait to get one.

 

A steel pipe is equal in strength to a solid bar of equal diameter. Not all steel is created equal. Bolts are a good example. A grade 8 or 9 can be hundreds of times stronger than a low grade steel bolt. The thickness does not determine the ultimate strength of a metal.

The idea here was to get more mileage and more load carrying capability. My 16 gets a good strong 7 MPG better than my 04 F150 and it's GVW is well over 700 pounds more capable. What am I missing here?

As for the rust on frames? It's surface rust you're seeing in most cases. For example, many states do not bother to paint their bridges, they simply let them form a layer of surface rust which has little or no effect on the ultimate strength of the structure. Also, the higher the grade or carbon content the steel has the less it will corrode.

The real truth is, steel is CHEAPER than aluminum. But sooner or later GM and (whomever makes Rams) will have to move to aluminum.

 

I never questioned whether their thinner steel would be strong enough. I questioned whether it would hold up in the salt belt. If you are starting out with thinner steel, it won't take as long to rust through as thicker steel, regardless of how strong the alloy is (unless it's stainless).


You have never lived in the north, have you? If you think the thin steel on a vehicle will hold up like the very thick steel of a bridge, you are very mistaken. It is exposed to a bath of salt water almost daily for nearly half of the year, and it does not stop rusting after it gets a layer of surface rust. It is not "just surface rust". It will keep rusting deeper until it is either unsafe to drive, or just not worth fixing when it has an expensive mechanical problem. Did you even read every post in this thread? The Toyota problem was already discussed. They spent billions because of premature frame rust, that made their vehicles unsafe to drive, with many of them actually breaking while driving. But it's not exclusive to them; I've seen trucks from every brand that were unsafe to drive any further, due to frame rust (just not as prematurely as the Toyota problem).

 

For those who think that the frame coating is adequate, check out the pictures in this thread: https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...200-miles.html


Once it gets a good start like that, it grows fast, as the rust spreads under the remaining paint and causes it to fall off. Any time you see a spot of rust, it needs to be treated and sealed to keep it from spreading.