It was just a tire problem. . some tires follow the road grooves more than others.

 

While it was interesting it still doesnt mean I have to like bed bounce. They can add supports, use thicker metal in the bed pan do something but don't tell me that it's ok becasue it's better than anyone elses right now.
I've had rusty old trucks with 1/2 the bed floor gone from rust! That did not bounce this bad!

I've got a 67 F100 pick up bed trailer, that I am using scrap sheets of galvanized steel for the bed floor becasue there is nothing left of the orginal floor. The only thing that holds the sides up are the supports and it still does not bounce or flex outward like my bed!

The only way besides modifying which I will eventually weld some suports in when it gets to annoying me to bad and I have time. The only other way is to load it down. A log chain, a 4 way and ratchet straps is just enough weight to minimize the flex while going down the interstate.

BTW where was Dodge? Do they flex, bounce, and move side to side?
I would assume not since they were not included, I would assume that is becasue it would make FOMOCO look bad.

Its never been a question wether Ford has a better suspension. Even the hardest Chevy and Dodge guys recognize that. I know because I use to be one of the Chevy guys.

Until the mid to late 90's, I had always said that if you buy a dodge, slap a Ford suspension under it, and a chevy drive train then you would have the perfect truck!
Now chevies new engines are crap on the low end and ford exceed them. So now it'd be a dodge frame and body on a ford suspension and drive train. Maybe for poops and grins mate a hemi to the 4R100.

I would like to see someone like Consumer Reports or other 3rd party with no vested interest, do this test. Just to know for sure that they are all stock vehicles, nothing has been modified and that they are all comparable models and include everybody.

 

PSS was that directed towards me? The first part? I was only talking about the 08 SDs that the original poster just posted about.

 

This video seems to only be Ford putting the slightly dated 150 up against the newer trucks on the market. In the old truth about trucks videos they did test the Dodge and it was every bit as pathetic as the toyota did

 

No it wasnt a response to anybody, I just glanced over the replies.
I was just responding to the video.

 

So why do you guys think the Chevy hops around? Why does the Tundra's bed almost fall off and make contact with the cab?

10-4. .

 

Fair enough, I'd still like to see it in there though.
Both Dodge and Ford revamped in 1997, then Dodge again in 2002. So if it was that bad it would only support thier point to investors and consumers that there is no need to fix anything. It just seems some what misleading.

I still say improve the bed bounce!!! I dont care if it's better than anyone else's or not, it's still there even on the interstate.

To everyone else I say they should fix thiers too.

 

It's a combination of materials, design and set up.

When at the feed store and I drop 500 lbs of feed at the rear of my bed I drop 4"-5" considerably.

The stock 1/2 ton chevy next to me barely maybe 2"-3". Even a long bed which should drop more due to leverage, they dont drop as much as me.

It gives the appearnce that I am reaching payload but experince shows that I am not. Stack more on me and mine will hit a point and get stiffer. Thiers hits that same ponit and instantly breaks over to the overloads. and becomes weak.

There is not alot of dodges and I have not met a farmer are using Tundras here. So cant cmopare those 2.

In comparison, Chevorlets rear suspesnion is designed like an oak tree. Rigid and stiff. But when bent it breaks.

Ford is a hickory, flexiable yet hardy.

If you look at the rear leaf springs its obvious why.

Chevorlet ties all of thier springs all together end to end. They all carry the load at all times. The majority of the up and down movemnt is taken by the shackles first, then the springs.

Ford leaves a gap between each spring so as the load increses and the upper weaker spring begins to bend, it meets the next spring. Where it gains support until they are both bent down to the next one and now you have all 3 supporting, etc etc etc.. You dont need 1000 lbs of resistance on an empty bed. This allows for a quick reaction time of the articulation of the wheel. Because there is less resstance.

 

For the tundra thats a design flaw......
I went and looked at them a month or so ago and inspected pretty close.

The front of the frame is boxed, under the cab is reinforced and the bed is plain. So as the energy is transfered through out the frame. The cab forward is not going to flex... so all of the energy is sent straight to the bed frame where that part of the frame is weaker. So it's going to want to move from when the front tires hit, then at that same time the rear are hitting so it's reciveing waves from both ends. That with a thin bed floor, probably no thinner than ours or chevy but sitll thin, that allows warpage and flex, the energy has got to go some where.

 

TOYOTA= JOKE!!!

 

But according to Toy Yoda, their "triple frame technology" is just one of the things that make it better than Ford's fully boxed frame... are you saying they're lying? LoL.

I love the old TruthAboutTrucks vids... had to watch them numerous times cause Ford's competition just offered so many laughs.

 

Ohh I'd say if you were in the cab there is a high chance that it might not feel as rough compared to the other 2. becasue the cab and seat are not moving, all the energy, all the movement, is sent to the bed.

It might effectively do as they claim and give a better ride as long as your not riding in the bed.

The one I looked at and test drove I took it over railroad tracks at about 35 mph. and I never knew I hit them. But I bet if I looked in the mirror and watched the bed it would have shown movement.

Thats not saying it's better design for every purpose, but for driving, got to give credit. Maybe it was all the frame or maybe just all the parts working together in the over all design. I don't know.

 

I agree.... I would like to see every 1/2 ton truck currently on the market put through every single test. Leaving out a truck here and there only takes away the credibility to the testing and, as mentioned, could let people believe that those trucks missing did infact perform better. Ford already chooses the series of test run, they shouldnt choose what vehicles are excluded also.

Im sure the rear suspension plays a role in helping to reduce bed bounce, but leaf springs are a pretty simplistic design with only so much room for change. Im sure most of the reason the ford did so well is the stiffer frame. Along with the stiffer frame comes the added weight most here seem to complain about. I would say keep the trucks weight under control as much as possible while beating out the competition. Over engineering can, at times, be a negative

 

they did this test for the 2006 truth about trucks series with all the trucks cept last years models.

toyota tundra was just as bad maybe even a little better than this years.
youd think they would fix that after seeing it.


chevy was a lot better this year.

and ford was obvious the same good ol thing.



but man, im really starting to want a silverado .


not to mention it could happen.

a Dealer around me has new silvy ext cabs MSRPed for 30 grand for $245 a month with only tax and license fees due at signing.

and i recall looking on a chevy lot when the new silvys came out and i remember that very respectable packages such as the offroad package they had in the ext cab with raise letter tires was priced at 30k.

 

My bed on my 2004 F-150 shook like an out of balance washing machine on spin cycle. Flat ground, up hill, down hill, in curves, didn't matter.