If you believe this report the F-150 body doesn't hold up well in crashes. This sounds a little strange to me since several people I know bought their trucks after being hit by them and seeing how well the F-150s held up compared to what they were driving.

http://news.excite.com/news/ap/010604/11/crash-tests

------------------
2000 XL 4.6 5spd 2WD reg-cab long-box 3.55 LS 265/75/16 Chestnut (not 2-tone) Raven-Cap (and a '66 GTO with a '73 455, both combined cost less than a Lightning )

 

All you got to do is drop from 40 down to 35 and make sure you hit the Tundra head on, not offset. Then you'll kick butt.

F150 SuperCab Front = 4 stars, back = 5 stars
Tundra X-cab Front = 3 stars, back = 3 stars

These are the NHSTA scores according to the link below.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ncap/cars/2001Pkup.html

 

Right on Raoul. Just think of it this way if you have the offset wreck with a GEO Metro you still will be better off in the F150.

 

This is very interesting. I wonder if Firestone or GM sponsored the latest tests. Funny they don't agree with NHTSA, isn't it?

 

Firestone paid for this test after FORD told them to take their tires and shove them!

The timing of this test is questionable. Only a couple months ago the same test institute tested the bumpers on these trucks...and rated them all poor.

------------------
2000 F-150 XLT, 4x2, 5.4L Supercab, Superchip, Styleside, Black with silver two-tone, 3.55 rear, class III towing package with super engine cooling/auxiliary transmission cooling HD package, Heavy duty shocks, 4 wheel disk ABS, overhead console, sliding rear window, keyless entry, dark graphite interior, in dash CD, factory leather wrapped steering wheel, FORD bedliner, FORD black tubular cab steps, K&N air filter, mar-hyde rubberized undercoating, Modine climate filtration system, Bugflector II, Mobil 1 oil, build 7/2000

 

Those results are very disappointing for such a cool truck.

 

lets not forget that this test was done by the insurance institute. if you wanted to earn a little extra cash the best way is to find something wrong with the number one selling vehicle in the country. more rates to raise that way.
i wonder if the guy running the test would be willing to plant his but in a car about the height of the wall they used and let me hit him with my f150. which one would he want to be in then.
they forgot to mention that unlike brick walls a car of that height would not stand there and destroy the truck it would absorb the energy of the crash. most of the damage of course would go to the car. unless of course you happen to run into someone driving a brick wall.
btw: anyone looking to dump their truck cheap because of this report, my girlfriend might be in the market.

 

I don't care what they found in their test, I know this is going to sound realy bad but I will admit I have had an accident in my truck where I rear-ended a car that was stopped with that exact area of my truck completely missing the frame. Yeah I dose a bit of damage but i could never see it being as bad as they showed the worst that happened to mine wise that the frame punched through the bumper. It cost me $3500 for a new grill, hood, fender, bumper, and lots of paint. Good as new, people tell me I'm lieing when they see the truck cause there is no way to tell.

------------------
98 F150 XLT s/c s/b
Stock 4.6 3.55
255/70r16

 

In keeping with my requests in other threads, I am going to move this to the "Safety" forum where it really belongs.

Steve