Why is it Necessary?
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
From: Albuquerque, NM
Why is it Necessary?
In response to the thread regarding, New Spacers Found.
Why is it necessary to raise the front end when so much money was spend on research and engineering to lower these new full size trucks so that occupants in lower smaller vehicles could have an improved possibility of living or not being crippled for life as a result of an accident with a full size vehicle?
Why is it necessary to raise the front end when so much money was spend on research and engineering to lower these new full size trucks so that occupants in lower smaller vehicles could have an improved possibility of living or not being crippled for life as a result of an accident with a full size vehicle?
Member
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: Arkansas
The lowering of the trucks from the factory will work for the average person but those of us who like the looks of the lifted truck or who use them off-road on a regular basis this is a problem. Lower truck less ground clearance which means less capability off-road. Keep in mind alot of people will not spend the money to lift the truck so this trick works for the most part but there will always be people who lift there truck no matter how high it is from the factory.
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Texas
I don't believe it's "necessary" for anyone to raise or lower their vehicle, it's a matter of personal choice, the same personal choice that allows consumers to take their hard earned money and plunk it down on the vehicle of their choice.
Personally, I'm sick and tired of the all out attacks on everything that made this country great. Patroitism, Christianity, the sanctity of marriage between a man and woman, family values, the right to keep and bear arms, American jobs (which should be staying in America instead of being moved to other countries). DANG IT! Will this insanity ever end? SUV's are blasted constantly in the press but they never mention that Mini-vans outsell SUV's every year, always have. So much for this scattershooting diatribe........
Excuse me for venting......I'm off the soap box now.
Personally, I'm sick and tired of the all out attacks on everything that made this country great. Patroitism, Christianity, the sanctity of marriage between a man and woman, family values, the right to keep and bear arms, American jobs (which should be staying in America instead of being moved to other countries). DANG IT! Will this insanity ever end? SUV's are blasted constantly in the press but they never mention that Mini-vans outsell SUV's every year, always have. So much for this scattershooting diatribe........
Excuse me for venting......I'm off the soap box now.
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
From: Georgia
Trending Topics
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,017
Likes: 0
Way to say what you mean Zach, and I totally agree. You shouldnt have to change my truck to look like it is going downhill all the time to make crackerbox cars safer. Spend that money on making the crackerboxes safer. Maybe they could put some real metal in them, what do you think?
Daystar installed and truck is back to level. Im happy.
Now if youll excuse me Ive got to watch the supercross!
Daystar installed and truck is back to level. Im happy.
Now if youll excuse me Ive got to watch the supercross!
Last edited by grayflare; Feb 22, 2004 at 05:49 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,278
Likes: 0
From: Pasadena, CA
Was the truck designed with a lower front just to increase safety? I know a lot of full size trucks are being designed like this. I had always heard and believed it was for aerodynamics and fuel mileage so that manufacturers can comply with CAFE requirements. I don't have any solid facts for either reasoning, just wondering.
And as far as the original question goes, the ***-high design is not as good looking as the level look. That's why people put it on. There is not a NEED, per se, but a desire. And since it is my truck, I will do damn well whatever I desire within the limits of the law. That's the beautiful thing that we enjoy living in a FREE country! It's the same freedom that allows those ugly ricer honda civics on the road. To each his own.
And as far as the original question goes, the ***-high design is not as good looking as the level look. That's why people put it on. There is not a NEED, per se, but a desire. And since it is my truck, I will do damn well whatever I desire within the limits of the law. That's the beautiful thing that we enjoy living in a FREE country! It's the same freedom that allows those ugly ricer honda civics on the road. To each his own.
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,553
Likes: 0
From: MA
My understanding was the rear-end was higher for load-bearing reasons. I'm sure Ford didn't do it just for looks, becasue it would look better level. But if you lower the rear-end, then you can't put as much weight in the bed. That's my understanding, at least, could be wrong...
Certified Goat Breeder
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 6,182
Likes: 19
From: the moral high ground
Re: Why is it Necessary?
Originally posted by fineride
...so much money was spend on research and engineering to lower these new full size trucks so that occupants in lower smaller vehicles could have an improved possibility of living or not being crippled for life as a result of an accident with a full size vehicle?
...so much money was spend on research and engineering to lower these new full size trucks so that occupants in lower smaller vehicles could have an improved possibility of living or not being crippled for life as a result of an accident with a full size vehicle?
It's all about aerodynamics. "MPG". Ford has to meet a goal and every 100th of gallon across their model line figures into it.
"You lift, you lose."
It's that simple.
As far as the back end being higher.
It's a damn pickup truck.
The back end is the business end.
The only time my truck is level is when it's doing it job.
That's when it has 1 or 2,000 pounds in the back.
If the truck came from the factory level, then the greatest commercial Chevy or Dodge could ever make is to load a half ton into the back of a Ford and show it going down the road.
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
From: Albuquerque, NM
SUV agreement set
Auto companies promise crash-safety design changes
By Royal Ford, Globe Staff, 12/5/2003
An alliance of 15 major auto manufacturers and the insurance industry yesterday launched a voluntary pact to make pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles safer by lowering stances and padding interiors with air bags.
The promise, which is nonbinding, says that by 2007, half of a manufacturer's products must feature side air bags. And by Sept. 1, 2009, 100 percent must be equipped with them. Front air bags are already standard on virtually all vehicles.
Side impact air bags come in two forms: torso bags, which protect the body from the shoulders to the hips, and side curtain bags, which normally descend from above the door line and protect the head. Besides protecting the head, the curtain bags can prevent the upper body from being thrust through the window in a rollover, a common cause of fatalities in SUVs and pickup trucks.
Further, following the same two-step time line, automakers will change the design of trucks and SUVs to make them less dangerous if they collide with passenger cars head-on by lowering their frames to be more "compatible" with car bumpers.
Most SUVs and pickups have bumpers and chassis that sit higher than those of standard automobiles. The result is that, in a front collision, an SUV can ride up and over the hood of a passenger car, and severe impact occurs at dashboard height.
The agreement between the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the nonprofit, industry-funded Insurance Institute for Highway Safety calls for lowering the bumpers of SUVs and pickups, or installing additional "blockers" below the bumper that will "fully engage" the passenger-car bumper, according to Robert Strassburger, vice president for safety and harmonization for the auto alliance. The group represents manufacturers on three continents that sell more than 98 percent of all cars sold in the United States. Those automakers include BMW, DaimlerChrysler, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai, Isuzu, Kia, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Subaru, Suzuki, Toyota, and Volkswagen. Names familiar to New England drivers, Volvo and Saab, are also covered by the pact because Ford owns Volvo and General Motors owns Saab.
Many new cars already comply with the pact's guidelines.
Strassburger said at a news conference in Washington yesterday that lower stances could reduce fatalities in collisions between so-called light trucks (vans, SUVs, and pickups) by 16 to 28 percent. Side impact bags, he said, could cut deaths by as much as 45 percent.
The report's authors said changes to the vehicle frames, if done as part of regularly scheduled redesigns, would be cost-free. Others estimate that side and side curtain air bags would add a few hundred dollars to the price of a light truck, while today the features are often included in expensive options packages.
The costs to make the changes standard may be low, but the payoff could be dramatic. The group's report noted that collisions in which the driver's side door was struck showed a remarkable decline in deaths with the addition of side air bags. Police reports show that from 1999 through 2001, 350 fatalities per 100,000 drivers occurred in collisions where the dead were not protected by side air bags. The addition of torso-protecting bags dropped that to around 230. With the added protection of head-protecting curtain bags, the number was about 140.
These crashes kill more than 9,000 Americans every year -- about a third of all vehicle fatalities -- and they do not necessarily involve high speeds since, as the report noted, "fatal injuries in such crashes may occur even at impact speeds below 20 miles per hour."
However, critics of the agreement say the industry likely agreed to the plan to avoid facing tougher standards and they also point out the pact does not address the problem of rollovers, which cause 61 percent of deaths in SUV and pickup truck crashes, compared to 23 percent in cars, according to records tracing such fatalities from 1993 through 2002.
Strassburger denied the announcement was made to avoid regulation, adding that the agreement came about because of "a challenge by the National Highway Traffic Administration in February." That's when Jeffrey W. Runge, the NHTSA administrator, caused a huge flap by saying he did not want his children riding in SUVs.
But regulation may still be necessary, said David Friedman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, a nonprofit partnership of scientists and citizens that focuses on environmental and safety issues.
"I am skeptical of voluntary agreements given the auto industry's failure" to abide by earlier agreements, Friedman said, citing fuel consumption promises and the vow of American manufacturers to produce clean, efficient hybrid gasoline/electric vehicles. Yet the companies do "deserve some praise for finally acknowledging the safety defects in some of their SUVS and pickup trucks."
He also said that frontal crash compatibility is only part of the problem of mismatched vehicles, and that the pact does not address preventing rollovers or flimsy roofs that lead to many deaths. The Union of Concerned Scientists has designed a "safer" SUV, the "Guardian," and Friedman said yesterday the auto industry should use it as a model.
The Guardian features not only side and curtain air bags, but also an electronic anti-rollover system. The scientists' union said these two features would add $645 to the cost of a vehicle and save 2,900 lives per year.
"We don't envision this the end of the process," said Brian O'Neill, president of the National Institute for Highway Safety.
And, in fact, some automakers already build vehicles that meet or approach the new standards. Ford, for instance, has redesigned its troubled Explorer SUV, giving it a wider, lower stance, and has added softer crumple zones in critical areas, thereby absorbing some of the impact. Volvo's XC90 SUV features air bags and anti-rollover technology. And Honda says it plans to make side air bags and anti-lock braking systms standard throughout nearly its entire fleet of cars, trucks, and SUVs.
Royal Ford can be reached at ford@globe.com.
http://www.boston.com/business/globe...agreement_set/
Auto companies promise crash-safety design changes
By Royal Ford, Globe Staff, 12/5/2003
An alliance of 15 major auto manufacturers and the insurance industry yesterday launched a voluntary pact to make pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles safer by lowering stances and padding interiors with air bags.
The promise, which is nonbinding, says that by 2007, half of a manufacturer's products must feature side air bags. And by Sept. 1, 2009, 100 percent must be equipped with them. Front air bags are already standard on virtually all vehicles.
Side impact air bags come in two forms: torso bags, which protect the body from the shoulders to the hips, and side curtain bags, which normally descend from above the door line and protect the head. Besides protecting the head, the curtain bags can prevent the upper body from being thrust through the window in a rollover, a common cause of fatalities in SUVs and pickup trucks.
Further, following the same two-step time line, automakers will change the design of trucks and SUVs to make them less dangerous if they collide with passenger cars head-on by lowering their frames to be more "compatible" with car bumpers.
Most SUVs and pickups have bumpers and chassis that sit higher than those of standard automobiles. The result is that, in a front collision, an SUV can ride up and over the hood of a passenger car, and severe impact occurs at dashboard height.
The agreement between the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the nonprofit, industry-funded Insurance Institute for Highway Safety calls for lowering the bumpers of SUVs and pickups, or installing additional "blockers" below the bumper that will "fully engage" the passenger-car bumper, according to Robert Strassburger, vice president for safety and harmonization for the auto alliance. The group represents manufacturers on three continents that sell more than 98 percent of all cars sold in the United States. Those automakers include BMW, DaimlerChrysler, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai, Isuzu, Kia, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Subaru, Suzuki, Toyota, and Volkswagen. Names familiar to New England drivers, Volvo and Saab, are also covered by the pact because Ford owns Volvo and General Motors owns Saab.
Many new cars already comply with the pact's guidelines.
Strassburger said at a news conference in Washington yesterday that lower stances could reduce fatalities in collisions between so-called light trucks (vans, SUVs, and pickups) by 16 to 28 percent. Side impact bags, he said, could cut deaths by as much as 45 percent.
The report's authors said changes to the vehicle frames, if done as part of regularly scheduled redesigns, would be cost-free. Others estimate that side and side curtain air bags would add a few hundred dollars to the price of a light truck, while today the features are often included in expensive options packages.
The costs to make the changes standard may be low, but the payoff could be dramatic. The group's report noted that collisions in which the driver's side door was struck showed a remarkable decline in deaths with the addition of side air bags. Police reports show that from 1999 through 2001, 350 fatalities per 100,000 drivers occurred in collisions where the dead were not protected by side air bags. The addition of torso-protecting bags dropped that to around 230. With the added protection of head-protecting curtain bags, the number was about 140.
These crashes kill more than 9,000 Americans every year -- about a third of all vehicle fatalities -- and they do not necessarily involve high speeds since, as the report noted, "fatal injuries in such crashes may occur even at impact speeds below 20 miles per hour."
However, critics of the agreement say the industry likely agreed to the plan to avoid facing tougher standards and they also point out the pact does not address the problem of rollovers, which cause 61 percent of deaths in SUV and pickup truck crashes, compared to 23 percent in cars, according to records tracing such fatalities from 1993 through 2002.
Strassburger denied the announcement was made to avoid regulation, adding that the agreement came about because of "a challenge by the National Highway Traffic Administration in February." That's when Jeffrey W. Runge, the NHTSA administrator, caused a huge flap by saying he did not want his children riding in SUVs.
But regulation may still be necessary, said David Friedman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, a nonprofit partnership of scientists and citizens that focuses on environmental and safety issues.
"I am skeptical of voluntary agreements given the auto industry's failure" to abide by earlier agreements, Friedman said, citing fuel consumption promises and the vow of American manufacturers to produce clean, efficient hybrid gasoline/electric vehicles. Yet the companies do "deserve some praise for finally acknowledging the safety defects in some of their SUVS and pickup trucks."
He also said that frontal crash compatibility is only part of the problem of mismatched vehicles, and that the pact does not address preventing rollovers or flimsy roofs that lead to many deaths. The Union of Concerned Scientists has designed a "safer" SUV, the "Guardian," and Friedman said yesterday the auto industry should use it as a model.
The Guardian features not only side and curtain air bags, but also an electronic anti-rollover system. The scientists' union said these two features would add $645 to the cost of a vehicle and save 2,900 lives per year.
"We don't envision this the end of the process," said Brian O'Neill, president of the National Institute for Highway Safety.
And, in fact, some automakers already build vehicles that meet or approach the new standards. Ford, for instance, has redesigned its troubled Explorer SUV, giving it a wider, lower stance, and has added softer crumple zones in critical areas, thereby absorbing some of the impact. Volvo's XC90 SUV features air bags and anti-rollover technology. And Honda says it plans to make side air bags and anti-lock braking systms standard throughout nearly its entire fleet of cars, trucks, and SUVs.
Royal Ford can be reached at ford@globe.com.
http://www.boston.com/business/globe...agreement_set/
