16th Aug 2007, 21:50

Yeah, I've got something else. I've never seen a Ford with a bent frame. So how many pounds did it take to squat your Toyota all the way down? 300? 400? Oh maybe 1000 if you were feeling crazy. Oooooooooooohhhh! Heavy load! 1000 Pounds will squat my F-150 about 3 inches with it sitting against the tailgate. 4000 pounds will squat my Chevy about six inches. Oh no - of course, I'm making up all of these numbers because there's no way in Hell a Chevy or Ford could haul more than a Toyota...

I'm pretty confident you've never put a two-ton load in your Tundra as my Dad did his old F-150 13 years ago or my old Chevy 9 years ago. I'm also pretty confident you've never pulled 12,000lbs with your Tundra as my Chevy had done. I bet that "heavy-duty" aluminum engine would handle that much weight for thirty years, as Cast-Iron Chevy engines have from the old Custom Deluxe days, huh?

Thinner metal is not tougher. Why don't you take a measuring tape and measure the frame on your vehicle instead of just saying "it's tougher." Put the numbers to the test and let them speak for themselves.

You're right, your Tundra is tougher...

It's tougher because its frame is thinner.

It's tougher because its frame is not as wide.

It's tougher because its frame is not as tall.

It's tougher because its cross-members are smaller.

It's tougher because it has fewer cross-members.

It's tougher because its axles are smaller.

It's tougher because its leaf-springs are thinner.

It's tougher because it has fewer leaf-springs.

It's tougher because its front control arms are skinnier.

It's tougher because its hub-carriers are thinner.

It's tougher because its sheet metal is thinner.

It's tougher because its 500 to 1000 pounds lighter.

It's tougher because it can go through mud.

It's tougher because it is never used to do any real work.

It's tougher because it squats with a few hundred pounds in the back.

It's tougher because it can't pull as much.

It's tougher because it has a soft and light aluminum engine.

It's tougher because it doesn't have a heavy cast-iron engine.

It's tougher because it's notorious for having front brake rotor issues.

It's tougher because it's "more reliable" because it's never been put through any real abuse.

Yep, if this is what you mean by "tougher", then you're right, it's tougher.

You really got me... your turn. :)

17th Aug 2007, 15:09

21:50 Everything you mentioned has no relevance at all. The same could be said of your truck versus a big triaxle dump truck. My Toyota will still last longer, break less, go way more places, and is worth more now and will be if I EVER need to replace it; which might be in about 15 more years, since it's ten years old already.

And you don't remember that I said I use my truck for work and haul heavy loads all the time. Just did it again today on a construction site.

The two Ford vans that we usually use are both broken right now. One is leaking transmission fluid and the other won't start. The one leaking tranny fluid has about 150,000 on it. Any of my Toyota's went 50 to 100,000 miles further than that before I sold them, and nothing ever needed fixed. So, the Toyota truck got us there and back, like always, overloaded and still flawless.

The facts remain;

1. My truck will do anything yours will on the road, getting better gas mileage all the way.

2. You can't follow me off road because your truck isn't capable of going where mine can. Your thick frame and cast iron block (which is useless and outdated) are both worthless if they can't get you where you need to go.

17th Aug 2007, 18:40

It must be silly season. This is the most ridiculous Toyota thread I have ever seen. A Toyota fan has now actually implied that the laws of Physics do not apply to Toyota's, by actually implying that a Tundra's C frame is stronger than a Ford's (or other real truck's) box frame.

Here are the facts, in case you (Toyota fan (s) ) have never seen them before.

There are two types of stresses of primary concern to the load carrying capability and/or durability of a truck (can't include Toyota in this group of course for reasons that will become apparent) frame. Those are Tensile stress, and shear stress.

Tensile stress, which also has the same characteristics (behaves in the same way) as compressive stress, deals with how much you can pull or push on an object (i.e. a truck frame member), verses how much elongation or compression (tensile strain) you will get for the given amount of force applied.

Shear stress deals with twisting force, or specifically how much twisting force (force tangent to a material surface divided by the area on which it acts) can be applied to a body, versus how much twisting movement (shear strain) it creates.

Now pay attention...

Tensile “strain” is how much elongation or compression you get in an object divided by its length, for a given amount of force applied ( (elongated length – original length / original length). How much tensile strain will be produced in a material for a given amount of tensile stress is different for every type of material; in this case, we are concerned about that material parameters for steel. The term for that value in Physics is called Young's modulus, and guess how Young's modulus is defined Toyota fans... It is the elongated length divided by original length we already discussed, multiplied by stress divided by cross sectional “AREA.” Guess what that means... The THICKER the frame, the less tensile strain (elongation/compression) it will undergo for a given amount of applied force. That also means the MORE material/steel you use, such as with a BOX FRAME verses a C FRAME, the more tensile force you will be able to apply to a frame before it breaks or gets bent out of shape.

Bottom line: there is positively NO WAY the C frame of a Tundra can take more tensile stress than the box frame of a Ford, Chevy, or any type of real truck.

The same is true for shear stress, which is also dependent on AREA and/or amount of the material in question, which I do not feel like typing again. Bottom line: for the same reason(s) as noted again, real truck frames can take more shear stress then TOYota truck frames.

If you (Toyota fans) need more details, consult any Physics book. It is all there.

17th Aug 2007, 21:33

21:50 Do you actually think anyone out here will believe that a THOUSAND pounds sitting on, or even near, the tailgate of an F-150 (as if half a ton wouldn't fold the tailgate like a paper towel) is only going to make it drop 3 inches?

18th Aug 2007, 21:49

Actually the thousand pound load wasn't on the tailgate, it was against the tailgate on the back end of the bed. It's easier for a load to squat a truck at the back end of the truck bed because only the rear wheels are holding the load and because there's more leverage. Anyone who does work with a domestic would believe me easily. You think a Toyota holds the standard for a pickup truck, so since a Toyota can't handle 1000 pounds without squatting, you make the assumption that no truck can handle this. Domestics have always been made to handle very heavy loads in their beds. They all have thicker leaf springs and they usually have more leaf springs. Twice, I have delivered thousand pound loads of motorcraft oil filters from Somerset, Ky. to Lexington, Ky. Twice the truck barely squatted and handled like there was nothing back there. 1000 pounds really isn't an extremely heavy load, we've also put 1000 pounds in the back of Rangers. It really doesn't matter to me if you believe me or not.