SVT Boss goes on record About Raptor frame dammage

[debate]

because the fact that the beds V away from the body is an impossible act.

I'd speculate that the leaf springs and Fox shocks arched the rear frame section away from the middle frame section. The black Raptor in the autoblog pic probably had a max V of three to four inches to get that much deflection.

I've noticed that my frame is reinforced on the bottom of the middle/rear connections, but not on the top.

 

[debate]

The Raptor beds "Ving" away from the cabs makes perfect sense.

It would be really easy to prove if the frame material were substandard.

The frame is PLENTY strong.

A very heavy impact from the rear axle could be expected to crush the bed into the cab as the middle/rear connections deformed. The V gaps, most likely, are caused by the rear suspension overstressing the modular frame.

The 49,300 psi yield modulus is from the 2012 frame specs. The figure is a minimum.

The F150 modular frame is strong enough for a work/farm/passenger vehicle. For an SVT offroad project ... evidently not.

 

[SOCOMech]

A very heavy impact from the rear axle could be expected to crush the bed into the cab as the middle/rear connections deformed. The V gaps, most likely, are caused by the rear suspension overstressing the modular frame.

The 49,300 psi yield modulus is from the 2012 frame specs. The figure is a minimum.

The F150 modular frame is strong enough for a work/farm/passenger vehicle. For an SVT offroad project ... evidently not.

It's pretty simple really....the point of impact (where the bumstop and frame opening are) is taking a hit driving that exact point upward, the result being more or less an "A" shape. Let's not forget the weight behind the impact point i.e. bumper/hitch receiver and spare that weighs almost 100lbs in itself......the result, a frame that is bending the bed away from the cab. Have fun being scared and not taking your uncapable off-road truck off-road.

 

[debate]

It's pretty simple really....the point of impact (where the bumstop and frame opening are) is taking a hit driving that exact point upward, the result being more or less an "A" shape.

That shallow "A" shaped damage was noticeable inside the bed of the orange Raptor. However, the slant of the "A" toward the cab would tend to buckle the bed into the cab instead of opening a V gap.

When the 2012 Raptors are delivered, I would wager the middle/rear frame connections are different. Without building a whole new production line, the sleeve joints could be made deeper and the top of the connections could be reinforced. That might stop the leaf springs and shock from overstressing the middle/rear frame connection.

Some of the "A" shaped damage above the axle might be avoided if the shelves were deleted from the Raptor lift blocks.

 

[Bad company]

Debate,
you are totally missing the point. High speed plus bump bigger than available suspension travel, equals bent frame. Period. From the bottom, by the axle being forced upward in excess of the suspension travel.

The potential loads are in 100s of TONS. No reinforcement will help if the bump is big enough, or if the speed is too high.

The fact that the frames failed at the point of impact RATHER than at the point of greatest moment (at the back of the cab), which by the way would probably render the truck inoperable, is a testiment to the strength of the frame.

But please continue to argue with all the experts. It's obvious that you are very familiar with frame construction, and know how to "make it better". The issue here is that the frame does not need to be made better.

Either the suspension needs to more travel, or the trucks need to be driven within reasonable limits. Everything will break when used beyond its capabilities.

 

[Ruger]

When I was a motorcycle salesman years ago I identified the concept of the "fright bike." People with experience, judgment and skills less than equal to the fire breathing superbike they just bought would bring the bike back in less than six months to sell it back and take a whale of a loss. (Or put it in the shop for major crash damage repair, and then sell it back to the shop at an even greater loss.) The rationale was invariably the same: "This bike is going to kill me." No, grasshopper, your underdeveloped sense of judgement is going to kill you. Sure, we'll buy the bike back from you and make even more profit on it on the resale. But that won't solve your real problem, now will it?

The second posibile eventuality was the father who made the "buy your son his first and last motorcycle for high school graduation" mistake. I recall a young man who came into the shop escorted by his dad, and he needed the help. The motorcycle had been destroyed in the wreck, and so had the young man's future. He'd sustained a horrific head injury that permanently affected his vision, balance, and mentation. The father was looking to sue somebody, of course. Maybe the motorcycle manufacturer could be held accountable for his son's ruined life. Or maybe the helmet manufacturer. Or maybe the shop that sold him the motorcycle and helmet. Anybody, anybody but the man whose poor judgment led him to buy his 17 year old son a 180 hp race replica superbike.

The third possible eventuality was the only happy one. The purchaser had sufficiently mature judgment to realize that he was never going to be the equal of the wonderbike between his legs, and that it was going to be teaching him how to ride as long as he owned it. That buyer returned to the shop to buy more gear, maintenance tools, oil and filters, etc. A three-way successful marriage - buyer, bike, and shop.

In all cases the outcome did not pivot on the quality or design of the machine involved. No, the outcome - happy, disappointing or tragic - rested exclusively on the judgment of the person who owned the machine.

 

[debate]

The fact that the frames failed at the point of impact RATHER than at the point of greatest moment (at the back of the cab), which by the way would probably render the truck inoperable, is a testiment to the strength of the frame

Looks to me like the frames can bend in both locations: middle/rear modular connections and directly above the rear axle.

Please offer evidence that the Raptor frames did not undergo a yield failure at the middle/rear connection; the pics I've seen work against your assertion. By the way, yielding is a 0.2% deflection in the sample.

Back on comment #40, there was mention of a "bet" on the condtion of the rubber baby buggy bumper cups. Maybe Mr. Hameedi would like in on the action.

 

[Bad company]

Looks to me like the frames can bend in both locations: middle/rear modular connections and directly above the rear axle.

Please offer evidence that the Raptor frames did not undergo a yield failure at the middle/rear connection; the pics I've seen work against your assertion. By the way, yielding is a 0.2% deflection in the sample.

Back on comment #40, there was mention of a "bet" on the condtion of the rubber baby buggy bumper cups. Maybe Mr. Hameedi would like in on the action.

This is all MOOT. The loads involved are in the 100's of TONS. The frames bent. Even if you can come up with a picture of the frame bent in a location other than where the axle crashed into it, it doesn't matter.

Subjected to those conditions, any production pickup truck would have failed, and almost certainly much more catastrophically than the Raptors did. What are you trying to prove?

My previous point still stands:

As a degreed mechanical engineer, who has designed suspension systems for million dollar systems for the military, who understands mechanics of materials, and structural analysis, and isn't afraid of a wrench, I have seen ZERO evidence that the Raptor is anything but KICKASS.

 

[bstoner59]

Go back your truck into a brick wall at 20 mph and see what happens to the frame. I bet it bends in the same place and I'm pretty sure it was designed that way. Try to remember Ford isn't building a prerunner or a race truck. They are building a street truck with better than average suspension components. It still needs to pass all the safety and crash test standards as the regular F150.

 

[debate]

This is all MOOT.

Correct. From Merriam-Webster:

" 3) moot (adjective)

1 a: open to question
b: subject to discussion"

When the 2012 Raptors hit the ground we'll have more to discuss. And when FoMoCo wants reduce production costs and build F150 frames from full length blanks, I'll be delighted to decoil a trial order.

Fully lab certified, tight gauge tolerance, 945 YLK 216" +/- .032", finished width +/- .010". No internal stresses, ready for the laser table and hydroforming.