Hey Toy, I guess you and the other 8 owners of the little tundra might get a higher resale because they're so rare. Oh and by the way, **** off.

------------------
01 supercrew XLT,4x2,all black,5.4,captains chairs,355 ltd slip,trailer tow grp,remote keyless entry.
(MODS)gibson supertruck,K&N generation II air intake,expy console,lund intercepter,A.R.E LSII hard tonneau,tinted windows,E&G classics mesh speed grill,mud gaurds,ford seat covers, bed liner,ventvisor's,westin chrome nerf bars,smittybuilt outland sport bumper guard,KC daylighters, Hella fogs, Jensen flip down 6.8 TV, santeca 4" TV in passenger sunvisor,DVD player,panosonic cdqf800 fm-cd,pioneer 6865 speakers,keypad, lightning tails & brake light,hellwig rear swaybarics at http://www.f150world.com/4DOOR/

 

I noticed this too when one of my Chevy Blazer driving friends sent me the link. He wasn't rubbing it in, just a concerned friend.

But it looks like the F-150 hit the barrier at a much steeper angle. I'm not physics teacher but it would seem to be that an impact on a stationary, anchored, barrier with such a small amount of surface area to absorb the collision would cause more damage.

This must not be the case because I would find it really difficult to believe that Ford would not have picked this out and made comments about it unless there was going to be legal action taken on Fords parts against the IIHS for a biased test.

------------------
bIGGINS
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

My New Ride->>
2001 F-150XLT 4X4 Sport SuperCab
Styleside, Short Bed, Black on Black, 4R70W, 5.4L, 3.55reg, 17in Rubber, OEM Snapless Tonneau Cover, Harley Bedliner
Add On's
Sony CDX-M770 Head Unit, (2) JLAudio 8W6's, RF Punch 150 amp, HL Blackouts, DashMiser Plus II Strobe Light (fireman)
My Last Ride->>
1999 F-150XLT 4X4 Reg Cab
Styleside, Long Bed, Amazon Green, 4R70W, 4.2L V6, 3.55reg, 16in Bridgestone Duelers, OEM Snapless Tonneau Cover

 

The barrier was in a different position for the ford. Look at the track under the vehicle in relation to the vehicles. It is the same for all 4. Now, look at the relationship of the track to the barrier. It is definately different for the ford. Yes, same speed, smaller impact point equals more damage because a smaller surface area has to absorb the impact. If the main point of impact was directly the frame member, what could (and probably) happed was the frame came to an abrupt halt, while cab and box shear off some mounting bolt and continued their forward momentum, so cab hits barrier, box hit cab, cab crumples. If the point of impact was spread out, all components (frame, cab, box) would stop at the same relative speed. There appears to be a serious design problem, but I am not going to give up my truck or get overly hyper about it because of what I see as a flawed and biased test.

 

I think that the most significant discrepancy here is the fact that the Tundra 4x2 and 4x4 models have almost identical ride heights. The other models have substantial height differences between 4WD and 2WD models (clearly seen in the pictures). The result of this is that the IIHS should have tested 4x4 versions of the other models so that the frames were all in the same (or similar) horizontal plane. It's another example of "sloppy journalism". It's a cliché, but the IIHS really didn't compare apples to apples.

------------------
'00 5.4L AUTO 4X4 F-150 Lariat
'98 4.0L 5spd Jeep Wrangler Sport
'02 F-350 PSD CC DRW 6SPD 4X4 Lariat (order this year)
www.hawthorn-engineering.com

 

(Quote) fordification
Senior Member

Registered: Aug 1999
Location: Calgary,Alberta,Canada
Posts: 356

Hey guys, I may have found the major cause of the cab to deform so badly. If you review the video, you'll notice the box of the F-150 slam into the back of the cab causing the two doors to pop open. You also notice the cab and the box on the other trucks keep fairly separated, but when the box does come forward and make contact, the small door buckles. Check the video out and look for this. (End quote)

Now, you've got me curious, fordification (Sorry about the delay in responding; I've been away).

What say there should be better bolts and larger washers holding on the bed, so it doesn't smack the cab. What would be required? Anyone know?

 

I don't know if this was brought up but why is the Ford the only regular cab truck in the bunch tested? If the bed of the truck hits the back of the cab on all the truck then the rc truck has less structure to protect the occupants from this "secondary" hit.

DF

 

DF4.6 It is an extended cab not standard. It simpley folded that much. Makes me galad i got rid of mine.

 

Ever notice the F150 has a strange resemblance to the Barbie mobile... Perhaps Jacque Nasty had one when he was little.

 

Ok correct me if I'm wrong but the Fseries is made in KS..I know the US version is..@ least mine...the fseries made in mexico isn't legal for export I heard...and it would be pointless to bring them in from Canada seein as how the have a plant in KS..hmm..as much time as these tundra owners have spent on this sight you mighta figured they would have learned a few facts about our trucks..but then again its probably easier makin up there own..I hear reading makes their head hurt...

 

Straight from their site:

FORD F-150
1997-2001 models
Vehicle tested:
2001 Ford F-150 XLT SuperCab

Class: Large pickup truck
Weight: 4,475 lbs.
Wheelbase: 139 in.
Length: 226 in.
Width: 79 in.
EPA ratings: 16 mpg city/
21 mpg highway
Engine: 4.6L V8

(Not a 4x4 obviously by the weight.)


Again from their site:

CAUTION: The kinetic energy a vehicle must absorb in a crash test increases with vehicle weight, so barrier tests are more demanding of heavier vehicles. But people in heavier vehicles in real-world, 2-vehicle crashes typically fare better than people in lighter vehicles (in many single-vehicle crashes, weight offers no safety advantage). This is why test results shouldn't be compared among vehicles with large weight differences.

 

BADBLACK99

The mexican plants export to the US and Canada,The Canadian plant exports to the US. you also forgot the Norfolk plant.

Dont get get hurt reading anything!


(PS I do not own or like the toyota's but atleast they dont fold up like a tin can)

 

The Tundra camera is to the right also. I don't think the camera position would affect the complete destruction of our f150's cab. In that particular test, the f150 lost....BIG TIME. I don't like it either, but it folded like a soda can.

Toby

 

Its hard to sayif the Toyota is 4x4 cause there is something hanging down from the lower part of the center that could be a trasfer case. I may go take a look at a toyota dealer today just for something to do.
all the pics mean nothing. look at the Dodge caravan and the same type crash but it had fuel leaking. the Ford looks the worse does that mean the body and chassis absorbed the impact or did the vehicle just come apart like that or was it designed to do that.
I am not an engineer and would not know but to me seams that parts loosening form vehicle can not absorb impact. I may be wrong but I am not an engineer. one thing that looks good about the toyota is the way the doors stayed put in the crash. look at the Ford and tell me if you want to be in that vehicle when the doors open like that.

 

I don't care about camera angles, 2 X4 vs 4 X 4 or any other BS. Two reasons:

1. One vehicle tested doesn't mean JACK. Like any other type of statistic, many samples are required. Until the insurance a**holes test several samples of each model, their test results are good only for causing the sensationalist media to cream themselves.

2. I'll take my truck in a crash against ANY car made. Any. And I KNOW I'll come out ahead. And if I run into an immovable object at 50 mph, I'd rather be in my truck than any car. So who gives a damn about the meaningless test results.

Toyota makes good vehicles. And if I wanted a boring looking, wussy truck, I'd probably buy one. I'd certainly get one if Ford didn't exist, 'cause you couldn't force me into a Chevy or (GAG) Dodge.

Thanks for listening.

1998 F150 Lariat 4 X 4, ext cab, off-road. No aftermarket anything because it's PERFECT the way Ford made it.

 

After carefully reading everybody's input I have learned to never drive my brand new supercrew into a bridge abutment. Of course a bridge abutment is about the only thing I can think of which would be similar to this test. It is the only thing small enough, solid enough and immovable enough to represent the crash circumstances illustrated by the IIHS. It seems to me that crashing into any other object (moving car, parked car, tree, telephone pole, small child, heck - even a lot of buildings) will give to SOME degree. Figure that that the most common collision involves another vehicle. Whether that vehicle is moving or not, that other vehicle is also going to absorb the collision and travel in another direction. This means that the results of the crashed Ford would be different. Of course, this is almost impossible to test. You would have to develop a 'standard other automobile' to be involved in the simulations.

While I do not like the insurance indsutry at all... I do put a lot of faith into the IIHS testing. I mean when you think about it, they want to make our cars and trucks safer so they don't have to waste their money on frivolous things like , say, paying their clients' medical bills. Having said THAT... Are you even kidding me????? DATELINE NBC? Isn't this the same tv magazine that was lighting old GM pickups on fire to show how unsafe they were? I can't believe the network ever let this show continue, let alone come within 10 miles of another car safety test episode.

Oh yeah, I also learned that Toyota drivers have a lot of pent up anger they developed while driving ugly trucks.