MySwag.org The Off-road Camper Trailer Forum
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Garry H on October 14, 2013, 10:31:34 PM
-
just came across this advert on Gumtree in Adelaide
http://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/wingfield/auto-body-parts/d40-navara-arb-bullbar-with-winch-side-steps-rear-bar-canopy/1029707168
guessing to much tow bar weight when towing (over corrugations?), probably north somewhere judging by the red dust
common problem with using the vehicles beyond their capacities, google shows some startling results in almost any brand of dual cabs over time
-
.
-
Reminds me of the FIL defender coming back from 7 emus.
-
& another 1 bites the dust :cheers:
-
There's a lot of money gone into that rig :(
-
without reading the gumtree link I would say it also has airbags fitted in the rear.
-
without reading the gumtree link I would say it also has airbags fitted in the rear.
I agree, the air bags cause a lot of problems if inflated to high, we stayed away from air bags and put an extra leaf on the hilux ute rear springs for that reason, still rides very nice and carries a good load with heavy c/t behind. Cost $350 btw, no idea what air bags are worth.
-
Perfect for the next "which Dual Cab should I buy" thread.
I wouldnt have one if it was given to me. They have gone too far in trying to lighten them and lost their strength - air bags or not...
-
Biggest issue is the old age chassis design.
They all have the diff hump. The leaf spring is attached to either side of the "arch" and thus strength is found. Airbags (and the link type (coils) suspension) put strain upward at the mid point of the arch thus forcing the "arch" to act in a way it's not designed to do and therefore fail...................
Oh to add, my Patrol the rear chassis is laminated and gusseted to avoid such bending......... 8)
-
Agree with Doc.
Airbags on leaf spring equipped utes, and people loading vehicles up to close to GVM and heading offroad, probably cause 90% of these bananas. You cannot add a new stress point on a chassis (airbag) and then load the tray and the towbar up to the limit (what's the bet that tray was full + roof box, it was probably over GVM as well) and drive off into the blue yonder.
Time for manufs to start publishing de-ratings for offroad use again. You can tow 2.5t and 250kg ball weight on the blacktop, but I reckon it's closer to 100kg ball weight and 1.5t offroad for most vehicles these days.
-
I notice a bent one on another forum a few weeks ago.....he was on Fraser Island and yes it had air bags fitted
-
Meh... That'll buff out.
Not
-
Can't belive these are getting written off. It wouldn't take a day to have that back off straighten up the chassis and fish plate it. Be 8 x stronger than original
-
I am having trouble with the theory of the Airbag being the sole course of the chassis bending.
Assuming the vehicles are loaded when the bent chassis happens, and the vehicle is driven off road some where, with out the Airbags, the Diff Bump Stop would come into contact with the chassis even do so quiet violently. Whereas, with the Airbag fitted, this would be dampened.
Yes, I agree, weight is being transferred to the chassis on a constant basis above the diff with the air bag, but the original design of the chassis surely is such that it can withstand sudden contact from the bump stop.
I'll be interested to know if there are chassis failures like this without the AirBags fitted.
In the early 90's, I was a mechanic for a fleet of vehicles in an underground mine, these things coped a pounding, and some were carrying a lot of extra weight all the time. They were all fitted with better springs / shocks, and nothing else.
Never had damaged chassis, but did have cabin mounts braking away from the chassis due to corregations.
-
Can't belive these are getting written off. It wouldn't take a day to have that back off straighten up the chassis and fish plate it. Be 8 x stronger than original
Generally not covered by insurance or warranty, FIL had to foot bill for flat bed and repairs, as LR said not our issue, you modified it and then put stuff in it, insurance company said warranty issue, in the end he fixed it with local engineering mob, his split where LR joined the extension to the main chassis
No airbags on defender, LR latest was due to weight to far behind rear axle creating significant fulcrum effect
-
I am having trouble with the theory of the Airbag being the sole course of the chassis bending.
Assuming the vehicles are loaded when the bent chassis happens, and the vehicle is driven off road some where, with out the Airbags, the Diff Bump Stop would come into contact with the chassis even do so quiet violently. Whereas, with the Airbag fitted, this would be dampened.
Yes, I agree, weight is being transferred to the chassis on a constant basis above the diff with the air bag, but the original design of the chassis surely is such that it can withstand sudden contact from the bump stop.
I'll be interested to know if there are chassis failures like this without the AirBags fitted.
In the early 90's, I was a mechanic for a fleet of vehicles in an underground mine, these things coped a pounding, and some were carrying a lot of extra weight all the time. They were all fitted with better springs / shocks, and nothing else.
Never had damaged chassis, but did have cabin mounts braking away from the chassis due to corregations.
due to weight to far behind rear axle creating significant fulcrum effect
BINGO...........
Dave,
Chassis in the early '90s were a poo poo load stronger, thicker, designed, fabricated etc than today's crop of wafer thin steel pretending to be a chassis........add in the fulcrum effect and you get...........snap........
-
In the early 90's, I was a mechanic for a fleet of vehicles in an underground mine, these things coped a pounding, and some were carrying a lot of extra weight all the time. They were all fitted with better springs / shocks, and nothing else.
Never had damaged chassis, but did have cabin mounts braking away from the chassis due to corregations.
I would go as far as to say cars were better built - stronger back then..
-
I don't all were. My dad worked for a chasis specialists in the fifties fixing amongst other things bent chassis. who remembers the Holden one tonners? They used to bend the other way at the cab, just used to get straightened and plated.
-
I remember thinking along those lines Lost, in the 80's about vehicles built in the 70's .
-
I remember thinking along those lines Lost, in the 80's about vehicles built in the 70's .
too true... and as the years have gone on, cost cutting and material savin.
Remember.... I think it was called... something like Steel?? back in the olden days cars were made of it.. you could lean on a guard and not write the car off. They even had steel bumpers!! shiney ones!
-
I would go as far as to say cars were better built - stronger back then..
I think you underestimate the quality of modern steel and the benefits of modern stress analysis techniques etc.
Back then there were heavily built 4WDs (e.g. 60 series) or nothing - and they only "lasted" because of overengineering. "Medium duty" 4WDs - like virtually all current dual cab utes - didn't exist back then.
It comes back to buying a vehicle that is fit for purpose, and dual cab utes are not fit to be loaded to the gunnels and used offroad. Used intelligently (i.e. loaded thoughtfully, and towing weights severely de-rated) they will do the job perfectly fine.
-
I think you underestimate the quality of modern steel and the benefits of modern stress analysis techniques etc
they arent working :D
-
Cars these days are across the board far better designed, far better built, from far better materials using far better techniques.
Find me a 4 cylinder dual cab ute from the 80s that would have been loaded with the amount crap they get loaded with these days, towing the sort of things we tow now and driven with the sort of abandon that we drive with now. Go find someone with a 2.4lt hilux like my old one and tell him to fit all the accessories, load up with all the must have gear, hook up the 1500kg camper and go flog it over sand dunes. He'd just laugh at you :laugh: Even if it didn't overheat and crack the head on the way out of town it'd have to be painfully tickled all the way over every dune.
The fact that these things bend is a direct result of just how good cars are these days - we don't need nor offer anywhere near the mechanical sympathy that we once did. We expect them to do so much more than we ever did and we don't notice how hard they work. These days they're so powerful, they offer comfort even in the rough stuff, the AC, noise deadening and nearly zero feedback power steering insulate us from the violence that is happening under our bums.
Cars weren't built better from better steel 20 or 30 years ago, we just treated them with more respect.
-
Cars weren't built better from better steel 20 or 30 years ago, we just treated them with more respect.
Respectfully disagree. Maybe not better steel but definitely thinner.
My wife has a 2010 Subaru Forester which if you sneeze at any of the panels will result in a ding. Compare that to our old 1986 DL wagon which would take a hammer to achieve the same result. We had the DL for 20 years, I doubt the Forester will last 1/2 that at the current rate of problems we have had with it.
I would also like you to say that to my GQ. I doubt any current model car would cope with what it has been through and still be in the same condition in 20 years time.
-
I would also like you to say that to my GQ. I doubt any current model car would cope with what it has been through and still be in the same condition in 20 years time.
Same here Noel :cheers: :cup:
-
Same here Noel :cheers: :cup:
x 3
or MK or 40/55/60/80 series...
-
Respectfully disagree. Maybe not better steel but definitely thinner.
My wife has a 2010 Subaru Forester which if you sneeze at any of the panels will result in a ding. Compare that to our old 1986 DL wagon which would take a hammer to achieve the same result. We had the DL for 20 years, I doubt the Forester will last 1/2 that at the current rate of problems we have had with it.
And an X'trail has plastic front guards. So what, does the fact that you can't bash them with a hammer make it a bad front guard?
I would also like you to say that to my GQ. I doubt any current model car would cope with what it has been through and still be in the same condition in 20 years time.
Why not? What is 'condition'? Isn't it what a car is 'in' because of the way it was treated? A couple years back (2011) paid $750 for a beat up GQ to drive to cape york on a clunker trip. I can tell you, that GQ wasn't in particularly good condition. And while it made it to the top and back it wasn't without drama.
If you think that I wont be able to buy a 2013 Prado in 2033 and do something similar then we will have to wait and see about that. The only grace we have at the moment is that right now we numpties can keep the old stuff running with basic tools and some fencing wire. That won't be case when, in 2033 I buy that Prado but that doesn't make the old cars better, it just makes my mechanical ability substandard.
-
Respectfully disagree. Maybe not better steel but definitely thinner.
My wife has a 2010 Subaru Forester which if you sneeze at any of the panels will result in a ding. Compare that to our old 1986 DL wagon which would take a hammer to achieve the same result. We had the DL for 20 years, I doubt the Forester will last 1/2 that at the current rate of problems we have had with it.
The outer panels are just there for decoration. The real strength is everywhere else. A measure of the thickness of outer panels doesn't really tell the story.
And which car would you prefer to smash into a block wall at 80km/h? The old Suby or the new one? That gives you the best test of "strength".
Here's a good one - 2009 modern car (complete with "tinfoil" panels) vs thick steel 1950s Chevy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtxd27jlZ_g
Which car looks "stronger" now?
-
Here's a good one - 2009 modern car (complete with "tinfoil" panels) vs thick steel 1950s Chevy.
That's a terrible thing to do to a 59 bel air!
-
The outer panels are just there for decoration. The real strength is everywhere else. A measure of the thickness of outer panels doesn't really tell the story.
And which car would you prefer to smash into a block wall at 80km/h? The old Suby or the new one? That gives you the best test of "strength".
Here's a good one - 2009 modern car (complete with "tinfoil" panels) vs thick steel 1950s Chevy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtxd27jlZ_g
Which car looks "stronger" now?
having been in an accident as a teen in an old chev and mate grabbing reverse and driving off, I'll take the old chev still thanks.
-
200 series cruza v 9 tonne truck at 80kph :cheers:
Another good reason to have plywood drawers and don't use the third row!
Photo courtesy of lcool
-
BINGO...........
Dave,
Chassis in the early '90s were a poo poo load stronger, thicker, designed, fabricated etc than today's crop of wafer thin steel pretending to be a chassis........add in the fulcrum effect and you get...........snap........
Hummm, agreed, so then, that brings it all back to the manufacture as mentioned already above, what load spec to they provide, and for what conditions.
The dealers all happily sell you the car, canopy, roof racks and pods etc etc, do they then give revised load specs? Could be a case to claim warranty rather then putting all of our insurance fees up covering written off vehicles as often.
-
Don't need to be overweight or on the beach for it to happen.
Oops.
(http://i906.photobucket.com/albums/ac263/johnnofishing/hF985D02E_zps70e1cc3b.jpg) (http://s906.photobucket.com/user/johnnofishing/media/hF985D02E_zps70e1cc3b.jpg.html)
.
-
so this is how they came up with the 'oh what a feeling' slogan
-
Don't need to be overweight or on the beach for it to happen.
Oops.
(http://i906.photobucket.com/albums/ac263/johnnofishing/hF985D02E_zps70e1cc3b.jpg) (http://s906.photobucket.com/user/johnnofishing/media/hF985D02E_zps70e1cc3b.jpg.html)
.
Sheeesus.......... that could have killed someone, wonder what caused that? rust, manufacture fault, design flaw.
-
so this is how they came up with the 'oh what a feeling' slogan
Don't say anything bad about a Toyota! Had to be someone else's fault ;D
-
Sheeesus.......... that could have killed someone, wonder what caused that? rust, manufacture fault, design flaw.
The stupid TRD sticker on a Hilux. Karma ;D ;D
KB
-
Toyota build 'em all like this.
Something to do with the world not being flat i think, so, with the curvature (spelling?) of the world, they don't get as much air under 'em at high speed and to make 'em handle better, thus making them a world class 4WD.
Also good if ya mechanic has a club foot and stands on an angle, thus allowing him to service it better.
Just looks FUKKED to me but, shoulda bought a Jeep.... ;D
-
These days alot of the money is spent on the electronics.
Mark
-
Don't need to be overweight or on the beach for it to happen.
Oops.
(http://i906.photobucket.com/albums/ac263/johnnofishing/hF985D02E_zps70e1cc3b.jpg) (http://s906.photobucket.com/user/johnnofishing/media/hF985D02E_zps70e1cc3b.jpg.html)
. ??? ??? ??? Lucky they weren't checking the diff oil eh.
:cheers:
-
Toyota build 'em all like this.
Something to do with the world not being flat i think, so, with the curvature (spelling?) of the world, they don't get as much air under 'em at high speed and to make 'em handle better, thus making them a world class 4WD.
Also good if ya mechanic has a club foot and stands on an angle, thus allowing him to service it better.
Just looks FUKKED to me but, shoulda bought a Jeep.... ;D
I thought it was the foldable hilux. You know to save on parking, you pull up to work and hit a button and it folds up to briefcase size so you can just put it under you desk??mabye the fold button was jammed and that's why it is at the mechanics
-
So, it's the new George Jetsen model.... :D
-
These days alot of the money is spent on the electronics.
Mark
Must be the electronic Tipper model... faster to unload camping gear....
-
Don't need to be overweight or on the beach for it to happen.
Oops.
(http://i906.photobucket.com/albums/ac263/johnnofishing/hF985D02E_zps70e1cc3b.jpg) (http://s906.photobucket.com/user/johnnofishing/media/hF985D02E_zps70e1cc3b.jpg.html)
.
Looks like an 80 series cut down, just saying- wonder if it was engineered
-
Are the older 80's / 90's dual cab chassis really that much stronger, or are we more demanding on the latest offerings? Add to it, their popularity has skyrocketed in the last few years.
The earlier ones like mine were usually very under powered. Majority of owners would never think to load them with a massive custom canopy filled to the brim, or load up a heavy trailer for the fact you'd need low range to get moving.
-
So, it's the new George Jetsen model.... :D
Yes that's it mate. :cup:
-
i would have loved to be there to here the explanation on what happened ....lol
-
i would have loved to be there to here the explanation on what happened ....lol
Lol... Im hear to pickup the black dual cab that was having a bashplate fitted... is it ready yet?
-
200 series cruza v 9 tonne truck at 80kph :cheers:
Another good reason to have plywood drawers and don't use the third row!
Photo courtesy of lcool
Ummmm Bull bar at the back ??? that safety for you & driving lights , with a safety sign chucked in :cheers:
-
200 series cruza
I'd say truly an improvement on its looks. :cup:
-
having been in an accident as a teen in an old chev and mate grabbing reverse and driving off, I'll take the old chev still thanks.
So you didn't watch the video? You'd be dead in the Chev. The only place you'd be driving off in is a morgue van.
-
So you didn't watch the video? You'd be dead in the Chev. The only place you'd be driving off in is a morgue van.
I've seen it before, there are others using BMW's... the issue is the same damage would have happened to the newer car if it hit a toy poodle. Im not a believer in crimplezones nad Shit.. it just costs us money and makes manufacturers a ****in fortune.
-
I'd say truly an improvement on its looks. :cup:
Can't improve on Perfect lost. ;D
-
I've seen it before, there are others using BMW's... the issue is the same damage would have happened to the newer car if it hit a toy poodle. Im not a believer in crimplezones nad ****.. it just costs us money and makes manufacturers a ****in fortune.
Are you serious? You don't believe in crumplezones and think it's just a conspiracy? Wow ...
-
Don't need to be overweight or on the beach for it to happen.
Oops.
(http://i906.photobucket.com/albums/ac263/johnnofishing/hF985D02E_zps70e1cc3b.jpg) (http://s906.photobucket.com/user/johnnofishing/media/hF985D02E_zps70e1cc3b.jpg.html)
.
There was a thread on Pirate 4x4 about it, it's from the states it was a fault with the tundra chassis rusting from the in side out, so when a lot come in for a replacement chassis ( all under warranty ) they would fold like this one has.
-
I may be bias but I think Isuzu make a dual cab which is near enough indestructible
(http://i351.photobucket.com/albums/q462/toeball-boat/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zps29792d9a.jpg)[/URL]
-
I was sort of kind of considering buying a twin cab ute.
Wont be now.
Googled bent chassis, a lot of responses.
http://www.4wdaction.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?t=99859 (http://www.4wdaction.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?t=99859)
http://www.4wdaction.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?t=119057 (http://www.4wdaction.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?t=119057)
http://www.4wdaction.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=99859&start=195 (http://www.4wdaction.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=99859&start=195)
And that is just on one forum that is open to public, there seems to be a lot more out there.
-
I was sort of kind of considering buying a twin cab ute.
Wont be now.
One of the reasons I bought this.
-
One of the reasons I bought this.
I have been toying with doing that to my 105. There's no way I'd do it without a chassis stretch though. I reckon you're just asking for it with that much overhang. Even if the chassis don't bend, the load distribution between axles would be terrible.
-
Was reading a report on the ex army 6 wheelers being sold. Have to be the ultimate tray back if you could put up with the max speed and noise. The GVM was insane and included 6 full jerries as well iirc.
-
Was reading a report on the ex army 6 wheelers being sold. Have to be the ultimate tray back if you could put up with the max speed and noise. The GVM was insane and included 6 full jerries as well iirc.
a couple of problems, you cannot drive them on a car licence and i believe rego is somewhere between $1500 and $2000....once you get over that hump max.
speed is around 105km/hr +/- 5km/hr, with a bit of tweeking you can get this to 120km/hr which makes the whole rig more drivable
noise, seriously this rigs are noisey, once i got over 80km/hr i wore ear muffs
flat to the boards at GMV mine used around 20L-22L/100km which isn't too bad..cruise at 90km/hr much better on fuel
-
I have been toying with doing that to my 105. There's no way I'd do it without a chassis stretch though. I reckon you're just asking for it with that much overhang. Even if the chassis don't bend, the load distribution between axles would be terrible.
imagine drivin that fully loaded?? Talk about power steering!!!
-
Damn Myswag I really wanted a ute!!!!
-
Damn Myswag I really wanted a ute!!!!
Swannie if you want one buy one. You are now forewarned and just load it accordingly and drive sensible. This is largely a beat up. Are there more dual cabs bent than say 3 litre patrols that have shat themselves? Or Cruzas that use oil. As above Holden one toners used to bend chassis. I wouldn't worry about it to be honest.
-
imagine drivin that fully loaded?? Talk about power steering!!!
And no brakes :cup:
-
Damn Myswag I really wanted a ute!!!!
Here ya go Swannie, this one shouldn't bend
-
a couple of problems, you cannot drive them on a car licence and i believe rego is somewhere between $1500 and $2000....once you get over that hump max.
speed is around 105km/hr +/- 5km/hr, with a bit of tweeking you can get this to 120km/hr which makes the whole rig more drivable
noise, seriously this rigs are noisey, once i got over 80km/hr i wore ear muffs
flat to the boards at GMV mine used around 20L-22L/100km which isn't too bad..cruise at 90km/hr much better on fuel
Got keyless start too :cheers:
-
And no brakes :cup:
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D gives new meaning to bumpstop.. everytime you hit a bump while braking ... the wheels come back down and :D
-
Here ya go Swannie, this one shouldn't bend
Love it
-
Damn Myswag I really wanted a ute!!!!
Just buy one and load it sensibly. They are perfectly fine if you understand they are not a heavy haulage carrier.
-
We were aware of the chasis dilema from the Triton Forum but didnt worry us as we purchased an Alloy CT which i always weigh at the bridge once loaded for each trip and thats everything we want it never exceeds 750kgs and the rear of the ute only takes minimal weight.I didnt put airbags but placed Ironman Helper Springs just to compensate for slight sag and i am very wary of speed over corrugations,hopefully this will help with the bent chasis happening. If it does happen ill be certainly trying to make a claim as im well under all there specs.
-
Here ya go Swannie, this one shouldn't bend
Buy it Swannie you will be king of the kids when you pick them up from school :cup: :cheers:
-
I have been toying with doing that to my 105. There's no way I'd do it without a chassis stretch though. I reckon you're just asking for it with that much overhang. Even if the chassis don't bend, the load distribution between axles would be terrible.
Those stretched conversions are far too long for real bush work. I think of mine as the short wheel base version. ;)
That photo makes the tray look longer than it is. I'm not worried about the chassis or load distribution, even though I don't personally need to load it to the max. Late 80 series are rated to tow 3500kg with a 350kg ball weight. I trust those specs on the 80 more than I do for the same ratings on the new trucks we're seeing bend. A quick viewing of the two will soon show why. :cheers:
-
Those stretched conversions are far too long for real bush work. I think of mine as the short wheel base version. ;)
That photo makes the tray look longer than it is. I'm not worried about the chassis or load distribution, even though I don't personally need to load it to the max. Late 80 series are rated to tow 3500kg with a 350kg ball weight. I trust those specs on the 80 more than I do for the same ratings on the new trucks we're seeing bend. A quick viewing of the two will soon show why. :cheers:
What does that mean 'real bush work'? I couldn't drive a stretched 105 between the trees in my back yard but I could take it up the CSR ;D
-
Just buy one and load it sensibly. They are perfectly fine if you understand they are not a heavy haulage carrier.
But that's NOT what the companies and advertising agencies tell us.................. >:( >:(
Oh, and Joff, you've seen my rig, just do it.......... ;D ;D ;D
-
If you get a GVM upgrade you can bend it quicker too !!! >:D ;D
-
.I didnt put airbags but placed Ironman Helper Springs just to compensate for slight sag
Hi Bushbandit , do they make (helper srings) that much of a difference ?
Cheers
Stephen.
-
Hi Bushbandit , do they make (helper srings) that much of a difference ?
Cheers
Stephen.
Yes you can notice the difference straight away not only with the sag in the rear but with the handling and ride of the vehicle it amazing how much different the rear feels with these on best $110 ive spent.They are adjustable so if you take more than 400kg you just adjust the nuts up to 40mm i have set mine to 30mm to see how they go next week so i can report how effective they are.They are easy to fit aswell.All the guys who have them on the Triton Forum who haved used them on outback long journeys swear by them.
-
Good to hear they work well , thanks.
-
If you really want to bend your chassis then air bags certainly help but they are not essential. This Hilux does not have any but it does have the one thing that is common with all cars that bend their chassis and that is far too much material too far behind the rear axle.
When the rear wheels drop into a depression in the road, the chassis drops and is brought to a sudden stop by the bump rubbers. Whatever is behind the rubbers wants to keep falling. As it falls the forces generated increase and, I think from memory, it is by the square of the distance that everything is from the axle. This means the chassis tries to pivot on the axle and lift the front.
A split second later the wheels come up out of the depression resulting in the end of the chassis having to catch the falling material and heave it back up again. Imagine what this is doing to the chassis.
The same will happen when the front end drops. The chassis will go down and its rear end will go up. All the material behind the axle will have to be instantly pushed up placing tremendous stress on the chassis.
Whatever you put in your car will weigh something but it is only that weight while it is stationery. Things change dramatically when it moves.
All of this will flex the chassis a little each time then it will return to its original shape. It can only take so much of it though, particularly on rough roads, before metal fatigue sets in and the chassis bends permanently.
If anyone doubts this then try a simple experiment with a hammer. Hold it by its head then extend your arm and the handle straight out in front of you. Move your arm up and down a few times and note how it feels. Now hold the hammer by the end of its handle and move your arm again. You will very quickly feel a build up of stress in your wrist. If you bring your hand holding the hammer down firmly into the open palm of your other hand, the head will want to keep going down and the end of the handle will most likely move a little in your hand.
The weight (pull of gravity) of the hammer has not changed and the amount of material (mass) in it is still the same. The only change is you have moved the greater part of its mass further away from your hand. If you think of your open hand as a bump rubber, you will soon see what is happening to the overloaded end of a chassis.
A major problem with people loading utes is they do not understand the difference between mass and weight. The claim that it was under GVM but the chassis bent therefore it must be a crappy design is often heard. Take two identical dual cabs loaded in different ways for example. One has four large adults and a good sized teenager in the middle of the back seat. The fuel tank is full and the rest of the load needed to take it up to GVM is in the back with the heaviest items as far forward as possible. The other has a 60 kg driver plus a full tank and the rest in the back. One of those cars will be sitting low and level while the other will be on the bump rubbers at the rear yet both are at GVM. One driver will be smiling while the other will be complaining bitterly and rushing to the aftermarket industry to get the rear back up again. One has all the material in it correctly distributed while the other definitely does not.
You simply can't load cars anyway you want to. Everything must be distributed properly. If you can't get enough material into the front of a dual cab then you can't get it up to GVM without running the risk of damaging it.
You could argue that the manufacturer claims it will take 300 kg hanging off the end of the tow bar and that is a long way from the axle. It will but there may well be a few restrictions. The handbook in my Lux says a maximum of 180 kg on the ball but a WDH must be used for anything over 90kg. Toyota is saying the chassis will need a lift but a WDH, which is a lever and not a spring, is the approved way to do it. Others may so no WDH and you can fully load up the seats but don't put very much in the tub or tray.
A WDH lifts the rear end and transfers weight to the front wheels just like the handles on a wheel barrow. Heavier springs or air bags just lift the rear end up higher and don't transfer weight.
If you load your car and find it is not siltting up properly then you have done something wrong and it is time to make a few inquires to find out why. The best place is the manufacturer's customer information service which will be on their web site.
The other issue is air bags. Your springs compress at a predetermined rate. X number of kgs will compress them one inch. Double the weight and they will go down 2 inches. Triple it and they compress 3 inches. They will keep going down at that rate untill something stops them and that is the role of the bump rubbers. They are the last line of defence before the chassis slams into the axle. They will stop the chassis and do it very quickly because they are exponential springs, not linear springs. They will become prorgessively harder as they compress and the more you try and compress them, the more they resist further compression.
Your air bags are also exponential so installing them in your car is like sitting it on oversize bump rubbers. If you have enough pressure in them, they can become very hard and really start resisting further downward movement of the chassis before it would normally reach the stock bump rubber. This results in a better pivot point for the chassis as the back goes down and the front goes up and explains why a lot more air bag cars bend chassis than do those without them..
Heavier spings can do much the same. The Lux in the photo would have to have heavier springs with all that stuff out the back and it has ended up with the worse case of chassis bending that I have ever seen. They just get the chassis rocking up and down at each end a little earlier than it would on stock suspension.
Many will say their modified suspension is working fine and that may well be true but, if the car is not loaded corectly and is outside its design limits, there is always the chance that major problems are slowly but surely developing and it will just take a combination of the right speed and the right type of road conditions to change everything from smooth sailing to disaster.
(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y287/BND1928/cb6a2ce6-445f-4e21-b0ee-ae4ca6bf195d_zpse55b19d0.jpg) (http://s7.photobucket.com/user/BND1928/media/cb6a2ce6-445f-4e21-b0ee-ae4ca6bf195d_zpse55b19d0.jpg.html)
-
excellant explination
-
excellant explination
X2
I had a generally good understanding of this prior but your explanation put it in plain simple terms. Thanks
-
That was well written. :cup:
V8ute
-
(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y287/BND1928/cb6a2ce6-445f-4e21-b0ee-ae4ca6bf195d_zpse55b19d0.jpg) (http://s7.photobucket.com/user/BND1928/media/cb6a2ce6-445f-4e21-b0ee-ae4ca6bf195d_zpse55b19d0.jpg.html)
there was another thread a while back with a Britts I think it was - it was that rooted, that the chassis was held together with rope.. wish I could find the pics.
-
Is there a general rule of thumb as to the age of these bent dual cabs? Post 2000, 2005, 2010 ? Or do the earlier vehicles also suffer?
Shane.
-
T minus 10, 9, 8, 7, 6 we have ignition, 4, 3, 2
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jX2le7JNfJY/T4hkm_RyyjI/AAAAAAAAAAk/0GuyQwVHEP4/s1600/IMGP1403.JPG)
-
Is there a general rule of thumb as to the age of these bent dual cabs? Post 2000, 2005, 2010 ? Or do the earlier vehicles also suffer?
Shane.
Vehicles have been suffering at the hands of idiots for decades. Your question would be more relevant if you framed it in terms of driver ignorance. Ie; when did we really start to see high numbers of ignorant people overstressing their dual cabs? After 2000, 2005, 2010?
The Navara above is a good example. If its not just inherently obvious that that thing is headed for world of pain, the panel gap between the cab and tub should be a blinding red flashing light. If its not then Shit like the hilux happens.
-
There is just simply too much weight behind the axle, anybody with half a clue can see this.
-
"Vehicles have been suffering at the hands of idiots for decades."
But I reckon the growth of the off road accessories business has been a factor. We have all seen the utes and wagons where the first stop from the dealer was ARB or whoever and the cheque was blank. The next stop is sometimes a high end camper trailer dealer which means another 150kg plus on the towbar and then a couple of trips involving some dunes or decent corros ... And we have seen the results.
One of the good things about being on a small budget is that I haven't loaded the ute up with things that might look good or might be good to have. It has never stopped me going where I have wanted yet.
-
"Vehicles have been suffering at the hands of idiots for decades."
But I reckon the growth of the off road accessories business has been a factor. We have all seen the utes and wagons where the first stop from the dealer was ARB or whoever and the cheque was blank. The next stop is sometimes a high end camper trailer dealer which means another 150kg plus on the towbar and then a couple of trips involving some dunes or decent corros ... And we have seen the results.
One of the good things about being on a small budget is that I haven't loaded the ute up with things that might look good or might be good to have. It has never stopped me going where I have wanted yet.
It could be argued that the two phenomenon are related. Back in the day it was harder for idiots to feel ready to tackle the vastness of the Aussie bush. Now, with the advent of all the whizzbangery, there are more people out there that maybe - I won't say shouldn't be Out there because I think we all have the right to be - but maybe before they head out they should look more toward an understanding of what they are doing rather than just pouring money into the latest catalogue.
-
wow, the Hilux is certainly the worst picture I have ever seen,
the Navara originally posted was even worse than I thought when I went and had a look at it tonight after work, it was a 2006 and certainly had had a heap of $ thrown at it, nothing that I needed to have of it though, went with high hopes of getting something
-
T minus 10, 9, 8, 7, 6 we have ignition, 4, 3, 2
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jX2le7JNfJY/T4hkm_RyyjI/AAAAAAAAAAk/0GuyQwVHEP4/s1600/IMGP1403.JPG)
Something not right with this photo even if it's not in Oz. Line up the green background. Fair enough. Could undulate.
Line up the fence. Once again could be OK.
Line up the brickwork. Does it match the fence step.
Shadow from the ute but not the camper????
Can't tell but mighty suss!!!!
-
Is there a general rule of thumb as to the age of these bent dual cabs? Post 2000, 2005, 2010 ? Or do the earlier vehicles also suffer?
It is not only dual cabs Shane. I know one man who bent his extra cab chassis with a slide on camper body. Another extra cab bends it chassis in the DVD released last year titled " Desert Highways. The Roads of Len Beadell" by Lifestyle Video Productions in Melbourne.. It had a large slide on camper plus air bags and was travelling in a convoy on either the Gunbarrel Highway or the Gary Highway.
Single cabs are not immune to it either and it is not confined to the light weight Hilux /Triton size cars. There was a DVD on Utube recently but it had been removed the last time I checked. It showed an F250 tow truck in the US trying to drag a Defender out of a bog. A Dodge 4wd pickup was assisting by pulling the front end of the Ford. The driver ran his lifting cable back from the top of the jib on his truck to the Landy. When he started pulling the high jib acted like a giant lever on the back of the truck and lifted the front wheels well clear of the ground. The chassis slowly bent badly just in front of the front hangers for the rear springs.
I saw exactly the same thing happen to an F100 tow truck as it tried to pull apart a tangle of old stock cars on the Sydney Showground speedway in the mid 1960s. The back was levered down, the front went way up and the chassis bent nearly double in front of 25,000 cheering people.
If you push down the rear end of any chassis it will pivot on the axle and try and lift the front. All chassis will have been designed to cope with the stresses involved in normal use with a correctly loaded car but not when the car is taken outside those limits. Unfortunately that is very easy to do when you don't stop and think. One common example is spare wheels.
I had a look at my Lux single cab today and noticed its stock size 32 kg spare is mounted under the chassis and up close behind the axle where it will cause the lowest possible downward force on the chassis behind the axle when the rear end drops down. Only about 210 mm of it extends back behind the rear spring hanger.
If I wanted to fit two wheels on the back, I have no doubt the after market industry would be able to supply me with a reliable dual wheel mounting kit that would attach somewhere on the rear of the tray of whatever. That would mean 64 kgs of wheels plus the kit sitting 3/4 of a metre further back behind the spring hanger [ not to mention the distance from the axle] and about one metre higher than the original wheel.
Just imagine what that would do to the chassis and the whole handling dynamics of the car.
It would cost manufacturers a fortune to try and make their cars idiot proof and it would take them up into a price bracket that few would be able to afford. I don't think the age of the car or the size of the cabin will make any difference. There are people out there who could break an anvil if given the chance so what hope have the car manufacturers got?
-
So whats the solution, ok dont overload in the first place, but what are people doing to fix their broken and cracked chassis??
Are some people strengthening chassis as part of their vehicle and trip preparation?
I see not everyone thinks of their chassis but are some ppl doing something before they brake and what are they doing, pics please.
iPad with IOS 7.02 using Tapatalk HD
-
what are people doing to fix their broken and cracked chassis??
From what I have seen on the net, the usual thing seems to be weld the cracks etc and add strengthening plates to the chassis rails. This will fix the immediate problem but may lead to long term ones. Chassis are designed to flex to a certain degree. Adding steel plates to one section could lead to cracks developing between the stiffened and the more flexible stock section. So far I have not heard of anyone complaining about this but it is possible.
Are some people strengthening chassis as part of their vehicle and trip preparation?
If you have to do that then you really should sit down and ask yourself if you have bought the right car. You hear people for exmple saying they are going to upgrade their Hilux. Toyota already make an upgraded Hilux that they call a Landcruiser. Ford make an upgraded Cruiser that they call an F250. Isuzu make an upgraded F250 that they call a 3 ton truck. I am sure if you wanted to carry 10 tons out into the desert then MACK could fix you up with something suitable. There is a vehicle out there to do every job so why not buy the right one in the first place?
The way to go is to decide what you want to take and where then find a suitable car. Don't buy the car then try and work out what you can do with it.
Do not believe all of this BS that you read in magazines about having to build a "tough Outback tourer" if you want to see this country. Since I retired 11 years ago my wife and I have toured extensively through seven of the central deserts in a stock standard Hilux. Some of the tracks we have driven over have been Len Beadell roads. Everywhere we have gone we have been surrounded by local people in their standard cars. Our car is usually around 200 kg under GVM. To save weight we don't have a bull bar or tow bar. We carry only one spare wheel but have a couple of tubes and enough tyre repair equipment to fix holes up to 80 mm long in the sidewalls. We don't take anything with us that is not absolutely necessary and we take as long as is necessary to drive carefully through rough sections of tracks.
So far the car has not stopped and we have not broken anything. One day something might break but it will not be something that we could be blamed for because of the way we have treated the car.
It can be done if you put a little thought into it.
-
:cup: For Metters. A man with a brain :cheers:
Cept the bit about an Ef2fiddy being an uprade on a Cruiser >:D That's clearly not correct 8)
-
:cup: For Metters. A man with a brain :cheers:
Cept the bit about an Ef2fiddy being an uprade on a Cruiser >:D That's clearly not correct 8)
x2
-
Cept the bit about an Ef2fiddy being an uprade on a Cruiser >:D That's clearly not correct 8)
I was thinking more about size than anything else. Would a Unimog be any better or have I bombed out there as well? ;D
-
Have you ever seen Metters and Robin Miller in the same room...
-
Have you ever seen Metters and Robin Miller in the same room...
as anyone ever seen robin miller in a Toyota?
-
Who is Robin Miller ???
-
Who is Robin Miller ???
Mrs Millers son
:cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup:
-
WOW.. how bent is the chassis... and it doesnt even look like a large hit on the door!
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/231025841860 (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/231025841860)
(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTIwMFgxNjAw/z/BBcAAOxyXTRR-aA6/$T2eC16d,!)sE9swm,vw)BR-,!5tj1w~~60_57.JPG)
(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTIwMFgxNjAw/z/3IkAAOxyVVJR-aBH/$(KGrHqZ,!rQFHZ+9FDBrBR-,BHZbB!~~60_57.JPG)
-
That's why when I cut down my 80 series the chassis was made to never break and was done by a marine boilermaker.
You get a little flex but she sits solid on and off road.
The doubler plate finished forward of the rear wheel on the chassis and is 5mm plate.
-
That's why when I cut down my 80 series the chassis was made to never break and was done by a marine boilermaker.
You'd be doing well to bend an 80 series chassis!
-
A neighbour showed up with a bent d40 navara today. Heard something about a washout. He was towing a trailer but not heavily loaded.
-
Mrs Millers son
:cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup: :cup:
or daughter....
-
WOW.. how bent is the chassis... and it doesnt even look like a large hit on the door!
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/231025841860 (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/231025841860)
(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTIwMFgxNjAw/z/BBcAAOxyXTRR-aA6/$T2eC16d,!)sE9swm,vw)BR-,!5tj1w~~60_57.JPG)
(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTIwMFgxNjAw/z/3IkAAOxyVVJR-aBH/$(KGrHqZ,!rQFHZ+9FDBrBR-,BHZbB!~~60_57.JPG)
That's because all the dual cabs today are just glorified models of a decade ago when they were rated to handle 1,800kg with upgraded brakes, motors and sales brochures :cheers:
-
It does say "Flexiglass".
-
It does say "Flexiglass".
And I would have sworn it was aluminium ???. You just can't trust those new fangled composites ;D.
-
BINGO...........
Dave,
Chassis in the early '90s were a poo poo load stronger, thicker, designed, fabricated etc than today's crop of wafer thin steel pretending to be a chassis........add in the fulcrum effect and you get...........snap........
I have just reread this whole thread from wo to go, the above statement made way back in October 16, 2013, nearly hit the nail on its head.
Yes I agree that air bags can and do have some affect of chassis bending/breaking and yes I agree with Metters and his statement from October 21, 2013.
But the earlier 4x4's including the 60 series and the Nissan GQ range had chassis made from mild steel and were thickr than modern chassis.
The newer late 90,s onward 4x4's went to lighter, thinner HIGH TENSILE steel to build their chassis with.
High tensile chassis are in fact stronger than their heaver MILD steel cousins, but unlike mild steel ( if not made thick/strong enough they will bend, but seldom break ) , HIGH TENSILE steel fatigues with constant flexing ( same as Stainless Steel ) and in time the high tensile steel will develop cracks , the cracks weaken the chassis design and will fail.
In the mining industry, particularly the underground industry , the average age of a vehicle ( mainly Toyota Landcruisers are used in this industry ) , is only a couple of years before the chassis fail and the vehicle becomes land fill. No air bags , not that much in the way of overload, but constant flexing of the chassis.
-
Mentioning the mining industry.. Years ago back around 2000 - 2001 I was bringing Land Cruisers in from Freeport Mine in Irian Jaya.. Used to build utes using the 1PZ turbo engines.. (That's another story) Bottom line is the mid wheel base cruisers from Freeport were stripped down to the bare chassis, Australian long wheel base chassis's were used to build the utes. A bare Australian ute chassis could be picked up by two people, one at each end.. But the bare mid wheel base chassis of 1990 vintage needed four people to pick it up..
-
That's because all the dual cabs today are just glorified models of a decade ago when they were rated to handle 1,800kg with upgraded brakes, motors and sales brochures :cheers:
Very true. People forget the intended purpose of design. In the case of dual cab utes it is to essentially carry five people and their tools/equipment to a work site. Personally I think it is nearly criminal for these manufacturers to rate these vehicles with 3500kg towing capacities. People load them to the limit or beyond, throw a 2 tonne van on the back and then hit dips and cattle grids at 100kmh and wonder why something fails.
-
That should " Buff Out " :cheers:
-
Here is another one. Must have over loaded the tray.
-
Here is another one. Must have over loaded the tray.
Similar sort of scenario killed a bloke at my old mans work years ago.
-
Here is another one. Must have over loaded the tray.
The mounting bolts look as though they didn't go very far into the slab
KB
-
I was talking to a hoist installer when we had one fitted to our workshop. He said a few times he's go to a job and drill through the '250mm slab', only to find it wasn't even 100mm thick.
One place had a hoist there for years, bolted through 80mm of concrete. more good luck than good management.
I knew a bloke in Newcastle that punched a hole in his slab in the garage changing a tyre. The vehicle went up on the jack and then the concrete started cracking and the jack went through the floor. The builder skimped a bit on the concrete by all accounts.
-
l drove my 650kg tractor over a 100mm footpath , it cracked . l was going to have to pay the damage till l asked to sample the path for depth . the concrete was 12mm thick at that spot & no reo at all . the tune was very different after that . >:D >:D :'(
-
I googled this topic last week and found a bucket loead of bent dual cabs regardless of make....people just don't understand axel loading ???????????
I got married in Nagambie a few years ago!
-
I googled this topic last week and found a bucket loead of bent dual cabs regardless of make....people just don't understand axel loading ???????????
Has anybody seen a bent Isuzu Dmax chassis? Was discussing with a few mates the other day and a google search failed to find an example.
KB
-
l drove my 650kg tractor over a 100mm footpath , it cracked . l was going to have to pay the damage till l asked to sample the path for depth . the concrete was 12mm thick at that spot & no reo at all . the tune was very different after that . >:D >:D :'(
12mm is rude. Most councils have gone away from putting reo in footpaths these days - not required.
-
The bent dual cab ute thing has been happening for a long time, in 1990 when I was last on the spanners for a job as a mechanic, a lad i worked with bent his dual cab with the weight of his tool chest sitting in the tray against the rear tali gate. That is the standard style side tray, no canopy.
All that took was speed humps in car parks. It never went off road.
We sorted it out by adding a spacer under the rear tray mount so he could sell it.
You do know to never buy a car from a Mechanic don't you ;D ;D
Just today I noticed one in a car park, a late 90's model, just a very slight bend to it, the gap between the tray and cabin gets wider the further up you look.
-
Has anybody seen a bent Isuzu Dmax chassis? Was discussing with a few mates the other day and a google search failed to find an example.
KB
I take it you drive a izuzu
-
I take it you drive a izuzu
Well yes I do but I am not asking for any bragging rights, just that I am genuinely interested if there are any reported cases.
KB
-
Well yes I do but I am not asking for any bragging rights, just that I am genuinely interested if there are any reported cases.
KB
I just searched a heap!
none so far at all!
I'm big fan of the dmax...bloody good engine indeed!
-
I knew a bloke in Newcastle that punched a hole in his slab in the garage changing a tyre. The vehicle went up on the jack and then the concrete started cracking and the jack went through the floor. The builder skimped a bit on the concrete by all accounts.
That is especially a concern now days with waffle pod slab construction
-
That is especially a concern now days with waffle pod slab construction
it's not uncommon to hear of waffle pods that have floated up in slabs...pretty sure a few people have been killed working on cars in their garages when jacks or stands go through the slab due to lack of thickness of concrete
-
Came across this pic on Facebook. Yes it has airbags and according to the comments, yes it was overloaded, but....... Seriously Mitsubushi, WTF were you thinking welding across a chassis rail in such a high stress area, above that dirty great big hole?
Couldn't the tray mount have been welded to the side of the chassis?
(Yes I know the airbag has increased the stress on that particular area :D )
-
but....... Seriously Mitsubushi, WTF were you thinking
No thinking, celebrating, they've sold another car now.....
-
Read on the ozisuzu.com.au forum that a Dmax chassis is made from 4.8mm steel and an early model Gen 7 Hilux had a chassis of 3.6 mm. 1.2 mm is a big difference. One third thicker than the Hilux.
Not bagging the Hiluxs, I have owned one or two. Just posting as a comparison.
KB
-
Read on the ozisuzu.com.au forum that a Dmax chassis is made from 4.8mm steel and an early model Gen 7 Hilux had a chassis of 3.6 mm. 1.2 mm is a big difference. One third thicker than the Hilux.
Not bagging the Hiluxs, I have owned one or two. Just posting as a comparison.
KB
I had an early Hilux years ago that cracked the chassis, mostly due to cancer. Anyhow, I replaced it with a mid 90's chassis. When I picked the chassis up from the wreckers, I managed to lift and drag that chassis up onto the ladder racks of lifted 4x4 ute on my own, that's how light they are.
Try that with an old Holden 1 Tonner ; D
-
Came across this pic on Facebook. Yes it has airbags and according to the comments, yes it was overloaded, but....... Seriously Mitsubushi, WTF were you thinking welding across a chassis rail in such a high stress area, above that dirty great big hole?
Couldn't the tray mount have been welded to the side of the chassis?
(Yes I know the airbag has increased the stress on that particular area :D )
Maybe because the design load puts that weld in compression, not tension.
-
Maybe because the design load puts that weld in compression, not tension.
Does it really need to be there? It's a tray mount.
-
Try that with an old Holden 1 Tonner ; D
Yet they are renowned for cracking....
Although at the other end.
Sent from my GT-I9507 using Tapatalk
-
Yet they are renowned for cracking....
Although at the other end.
Sent from my GT-I9507 using Tapatalk
And that stupid front tray mount that catches all dirt and water. Many of them snapped in half there.
-
Does it really need to be there? It's a tray mount.
With respect, we, sitting here on our little forum, can't know what the engineers in one of the largest and oldest motor vehicle companies in the world are confronted with when designing these things. We don't know their brief, we don't know what they have been given as the design limits and we certainley don't know if the Australian outback traveler's penchant for bolting enormously heavy accessories onto these vehicles even gets a mention in their design meetings let alone our eagerness to force 50psi of air between the axle and the top bend of their chassis. And, in this day and age of platform vehicle building, we also don't know what other model constraints are put on the placement of chassis members.
To be blatantly frank I wouldn't build my outback tourer out of any of the current dual cab offerings for this very reason. The difference though is that I don't think these vehicles are inherently badly designed as some people seem to, or not fit for their design purpose , I simply don't think the design as it stands is up to what we want to do with it.
I mean let's be honest, what could be harder on a vehicle than to load it often beyond its GVM, load it is such a way that it has a good portion of the heavy stuff cantilevered beyond the wheel base, force suspension loads in places the designers never allowed for then drive it over some of the most hellish roads in the world?
Sure the old girls may have thicker steel in their chassis but as the previous owner of two old skool Hilux's if i had loaded it the way we do today the engines would not have had enough oomph to get out of my driveway. was that then a design fault?
-
Maybe because the design load puts that weld in compression, not tension.
A transverse weld across a load bearing member will definitely reduce its fatigue life even if the attached bracket is carrying no load! This is a well known engineering fact documented in many standards such as bs7608 if anyone wants some light reading.
High strength steels do not increase the fatigue life at a welded connection like this. So if it is a verifiable fact that one model has thicker chassis members then all else equal (which it is not) it will have better fatigue life.
I'm also not knocking the engineers that work for Toyota or whoever. They have cost and weight targets for the project that mean compromises must be made or we would all be driving unimogs.
Andy
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
With respect, we, sitting here on our little forum, can't know what the engineers in one of the largest and oldest motor vehicle companies in the world are confronted with when designing these things. We don't know their brief, we don't know what they have been given as the design limits and we certainley don't know if the Australian outback traveler's penchant for bolting enormously heavy accessories onto these vehicles even gets a mention in their design meetings let alone our eagerness to force 50psi of air between the axle and the top bend of their chassis. And, in this day and age of platform vehicle building, we also don't know what other model constraints are put on the placement of chassis members.
To be blatantly frank I wouldn't build my outback tourer out of any of the current dual cab offerings for this very reason. The difference though is that I don't think these vehicles are inherently badly designed as some people seem to, or not fit for their design purpose , I simply don't think the design as it stands is up to what we want to do with it.
I mean let's be honest, what could be harder on a vehicle than to load it often beyond its GVM, load it is such a way that it has a good portion of the heavy stuff cantilevered beyond the wheel base, force suspension loads in places the designers never allowed for then drive it over some of the most hellish roads in the world?
Sure the old girls may have thicker steel in their chassis but as the previous owner of two old skool Hilux's if i had loaded it the way we do today the engines would not have had enough oomph to get out of my driveway. was that then a design fault?
So was that yes or no ???
-
So was that yes or no ???
It's neither. it's a nicer way of saying 'How the hell would you know?' :angel: :cheers:
-
With respect, we, sitting here on our little forum, can't know what the engineers in one of the largest and oldest motor vehicle companies in the world are confronted with when designing these things. We don't know their brief, we don't know what they have been given as the design limits and we certainley don't know if the Australian outback traveler's penchant for bolting enormously heavy accessories onto these vehicles even gets a mention in their design meetings let alone our eagerness to force 50psi of air between the axle and the top bend of their chassis. And, in this day and age of platform vehicle building, we also don't know what other model constraints are put on the placement of chassis members.
To be blatantly frank I wouldn't build my outback tourer out of any of the current dual cab offerings for this very reason. The difference though is that I don't think these vehicles are inherently badly designed as some people seem to, or not fit for their design purpose , I simply don't think the design as it stands is up to what we want to do with it.
I mean let's be honest, what could be harder on a vehicle than to load it often beyond its GVM, load it is such a way that it has a good portion of the heavy stuff cantilevered beyond the wheel base, force suspension loads in places the designers never allowed for then drive it over some of the most hellish roads in the world?
Sure the old girls may have thicker steel in their chassis but as the previous owner of two old skool Hilux's if i had loaded it the way we do today the engines would not have had enough oomph to get out of my driveway. was that then a design fault?
Well said.
Sadly there is a BUT
Many of these vehicles are bending when being used inside the design limits, well, as per the supply from the dealer, and not over loaded nor modified.
-
Look at exactly how they are loaded and many are being used outside limits
payload is to be spread evenly on axles, almost impossible in a dual cab unless most of your load is passengers
-
New development ?
Seems it's happening overseas as well.
https://mr4x4.com.au/uk-owners-want-recall-navara-snapped-chassis/
-
I thought everybody in England knew salt was used on roads and washing it off regularly will prolong the life of the car. This one looks like it has never seen a hose.
Just a comment on that cracked Mitsubishi chassis above. My Hilux has the front and rear hangers for the rear springs welded across the flanges. There is more welds across the flanges at the front of the car. You will most likely find the same thing on all other makes. A lot depends on the type of steel and what it is being used for. In some applications welds have to be stress relieved after welding. If that was necessary in this case then I am sure Mitsubishi engineers would have done it.
That crack was caused by the same old problem of overloading the rear end. You can crack or bend any type of steel if you try hard enough. It is easy to do even if the total weight of the car is under its maximum. If you must overload the rear then you find it is sagging, it is easy enough to fix. All you have to do is find either a spring that fits between the far end of the car and the road or find an aftermarket suspension or air bags that are capable of picking up heavy items and moving them further forward.
-
I thought everybody in England knew salt was used on roads and washing it off regularly will prolong the life of the car. This one looks like it has never seen a hose.
Same as when I lived in South Dakota for a year.. There were F100's etc there with most of the tray and body rusted away still driving around... I tried explaining to the yanks with the laws here if you have a 20 cent piece size rust spot your car is ****ed! LMAO!