Anything new?

 

I hear the next all new Super Duty will debut sometime in 2016 as a 2017 model. As for the boxed frame debate, I would not at all be surprised if Ford goes to a boxed frame rail on the next Super Duty pickup models. In no way am I saying that the current Super Duty frame is lacking, but the 2011-up GM HD's are quite a bit stronger and stiffer. Not only are they boxed, but GM is using a higher grade of steel as well.

Boxed frames do have 2 disadvantaged over C-channels. First, it is more complicated to mount aftermarket bodies to them, unless the truck manufacturer has engineered specific mounting provisions. GM and Ram overcome this by offering hybrid frames that are C-channel aft of the cab on some chassis-cab models. The other issue is corrosion protection. Most of you know Toyota has had problems with frame corrosion on some of their trucks. The box section needs to have adequate drainage and protection, otherwise it can rust on the inside. One effective way to protect a box section frame is with a wax dip coating

 

Still nothing concrete? Or will they just keep the design a little while longer?

@Troverman

Plz check your inbox

 

Full size,

Just measured the lr3 frame...0.15 inches wall thickness or 3.8mm. Keep in mind this is entirely boxed and hydroformed. Very sturdy.

 

Really? Damn that's quite a lot! But what about the outside dimensions (is that the correct term?) It's 185x80mm in case of the Defender, (mid section)which is the biggest frame rails in it's class (sadly with only 2mm thickness also the thinnest) So if the D3 also has nearly as big rails, it might have the same frame strnegh as the g-wagon. (which is only unsurpassed in terms of crossmembers, 6 of them, pipe shape, weldet trough inner and outside)

Thank you very much!

 

box frame is a bad idea.they crack ,break ,and rust out because they do not flex.if you are buying a pick up because of the ride maybe you should get a car?C channel for me all the way.

 

I forgot to measure the frame outside dimensions, but I can say it is large. Larger than my Range Rover Classic frame, which is pretty beefy except for relatively thin frame thickness . Sorry about the delay.

 

Ah ok, maybe i get the chance to measure the outside by myself, i know someone who owns a d3, but i rarely see him. To measure the thickness is the most difficult part i guess? Or are there open parts where you can get a good access to?

If the outside dimensions are in the area of 185x85 (which is quite possible, i looked under a d3 recently, but the defender frame might be a bit taller), it would be really a monster of a chassis. Definetly capable of taking 3.5 tons or more gvw. But of course you would need some modifications on the suspension for that.

 

I will have another opportunity to measure frame outside dimensions soon on my dad's. The Defender frame might be taller. I used a Mitutoyo digital micrometer with an adapter (I borrowed from work) to measure the thickness; there are plenty of holes and openings in the mid-section to measure but the openings are very small and thus the adapter is required. If there was any deviation it was a conservative measurement, but I think pretty spot on.

The LR3 is intriguingly strong - the frame itself is very robust yet the body is a full monocoque / unibody capable of being fully self-supportive. This combination makes for an incredibly strong unit. Even the EAS is fairly capable; able to support the weight of a Warn 9.5k winch, plus brush bar, etc...with either the diesel 6 or gas V8 (wonder which one weighs more?). I know people who mount a full 8' steel plow on the front without issue. Sadly, fuel economy, handling, and acceleration priorities will kill off this design (as has already happened on the similar RR Sport).

Its true the Super Duty frame is much thicker, yet I wonder how much thickness could be reduced if the frame were boxed and retain the same strength. Of course, the SD is designed to be a workhorse far more than the D3.

 

Thanks again for this effort!

Yeah i think such a comparsion is just not fair in terms of strengh, since the F-250/350 ist the way bigger vehicle in general. Even the F-150 is still bigger and i doubt it's frame is as strong.

Here in europe it's almost impossible to use one of those in the city while the D3 is no problem and of course the 140" wheelbase is a real downside for serious offroading.


Maybe the boxed frame on the GM 2500/3500 is what's going to be on the next Ford:

Frames - Specifications

With 205x90x4.5mm in Dimensions it is a really sturdy construction. But i like the solid front axle, so it would be good if ford would keep that. So far the Dodge Ram is the only one with two solid axles and a boxed frame, sadly the ram frame is not as big as the GM. (190x60x4) A fully boxed F-250 with two solid axles and maybe the option to get it with a 100" wheelbase would be every offroad enthusiats dream.


Yeah the era of sturdy small offroaders might seem over, maybe the jeep wrangler will survive. For the Defender, Discovery and the G-wagon only the military can ask for a really sturdy replacement.

 

Personally I hate boxed frames. There is no reason to have a boxed frame on a truck. All I see is potential problems. It is to early to tell with the chevies, just wait a few more years.

 

While retrofitting in my OEM backup camera, I really appreciated the open C-rail frame (at least at the rear of my Super Duty). It was a great place to route the camera harness, with lots of pre-drilled holes to secure the harness along the way. I can see why upfitters love this frame.

That being said, this truck flexes a lot. I can only imagine how the long bed version flexes even more. I think a boxed frame is great, if it is done right. Sure, it is not as easy to mount things to the frame, but still doable. Many people have this horrible perception of a boxed frame as something that rots out after a few years, due to being an ideal place for water, salt, and mud to fester. Indeed, several vehicles come to mind which suffered rotted out frames due to this issue (Jeep Wrangler TJ, for one). However, I've been through a few Land Rovers which have seen lots of off-road mud, and the salt of new england winters, and still have solidly intact frames. The boxed frame can create more strength, a better ride, fewer cabin squeaks and rattles, and better handling vs an open frame. I think truck frames may ultimately all go this route.

 

What is wrong with some flex? Airplanes flex, they are designed to flex, why? Because if they are made to ridged they crack, break, and fail.

 

Well this threat is going to repeat itself since this flex-non-flex debate is fairly old now.

Since there are soo many boxed trucks and offroaders here in europe which are 30 years and older, i do not see any reason for the rust-argument. Either the manufactureer did use quality steele and proper coating or he did his job wrong. end of story.

As for the flex: If you design a vehicle and it's fram specifically fo flexing i do not see anything wrong with it, the unimog works pretty well with its flexible frame. But the unimog has a very specially shaped frame, crossmembers which are designed to help a flex without damage and the rails are punctual heat-threated.

In case of a pickup which costs only 20% of the unimog price, i duopt that it has the same arrangements, the crossmembers are definetly standart. So if you really flex this often enough you will crack the frame or at least the frame will somehow stay in a flexed state.

Like i mentioned before there are so many heavy military trucks with stiff frames, which are getting used for serious offroad carriage, the engineers know why they do this.

By the way you U.S. Oshkosh HEMT is one example, since it is a copy of the MAN KAT anyway.

 

A stiff frame has many advantages over a flexible one. However, for it to be durable, the frame must be able to remain rigid in any situation the vehicle it is support encounters. For example, possibly the most stressing situation to a frame is when one or more axles reaches maximum articulation - for example, when crossing a ditch. In this case, one or more wheels hangs in the air, with leverage pulling it down and trying to twist the frame. If the frame can withstand this, then no problem. However, if it cannot, or cannot repeatedly, then you're right - it will crack.

I'm sure we've all watched the video of the GM HD truck with a boxed frame vs the current SD frame flexing while articulated. While the Ford frame may not have been inherently harmed by flexing, it definitely harmed the tailgate. It is possible someone could encounter this situation while driving off-road. However, even the GM boxed frame flexed a little - and this could end up being to its detriment.

Fullsize is right about the Unimog - the frame is deliberately designed to flex and help the vehicle contour to terrain. However, I tend to agree that the pickup truck is no where near as specialized as that. It is interesting that Ford doesn't really put that many cross members under their frame- they must have some intent to allow flexing.