FG best value truck?

[Gold Boy]

looks like i may be purchasing an FG, can't think of any other truck which is as good for the price.


tell me, how good/bad, has your FG been?

thanks

GB:wings:

[FusoFG]

I have 2 -

a 1993 109 in wheelbase with an 11,600 gvw that I bought new and at 113,000 miles runs perfect. Brakes are only worn 25% from new. Other than normal service just one repair - the electric fan on a/c condensor. Was a custom camper, now a stake truck.

a 2004 133 in wheelbase with a 14,500 lb gvw that I also bought new. More hp, more torque, much quieter and more comfortable. Custom camper with only 12,000 miles. No problems so far.

Newest year has even more torque.

For capability, capacity, comfort, size and price, only truck to buy IMO.

[Gold Boy]

thanks, very interesting.

ok milage?

[FusoFG]

15-17 mpg for both. used to get a little more before low sulphur.

[Gold Boy]

aluminum or steel for the flat deck?


i'm putting a Alaskan camper on a flat deck.....

cheers :)

[dhackney]

We've only got about 2,000 miles on ours, so we can't give you any real reliability or mileage data yet.

As long as you keep the weight of your camper & systems package low I think it's a viable platform for its intended use.

Our field testing to date tells us that it's good for ungraded fire road type use. We don't see it as a full-on off road vehicle. We are not experienced 4x4 off road people, others who are may be much more aggressive in their use of this platform.

Things I'd recommend based on our testing and use to date:
- air seats
- Dynamat type lining for the cab

For improved ride & handling, and especially if you get toward the upper reaches of GVWR, I'd highly recommend:
- Deaver springs (much more compliant and supple ride than stock)
- Bilstein or other aftermarket shocks (no comparison in damping control, especially in the front)
- Rear sway bar

If you are putting a 3 point pivot frame under your camper I'd also recommend some shocks to dampen the lateral motion.

When we did our initial field testing we had the stock suspension and no shocks on the 3 point pivot frame. We drove over 200+ miles yesterday in various conditions and there is a tremendous improvement with the aftermarket components installed. Our FG drives, rides and handles like a completely different vehicle. We drove over some of the same roads we did during testing and there is literally no comparison.

We've found the truck to be eerily quiet in the cab. The only time we can hear it running is when the radiator fan clutch engages and we can hear a little fan noise.

Based on our very limited experiences to date I don't think you will be disappointed in your choice.

[Gold Boy]

3 point pivot frame? what is this 3 point pivot frame?

cheers
:cow:

[dhackney]

GB,

Check out Haven's post to you on your thread over on ExCamper (http://www.expeditioncampers.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=392). It's got links that will show you clearly what a 3 point pivot frame is and how it is implemented.

There are FG expedition vehicles out there that don't have a 3 point pivot frame, such as Don & Kim Green http://www.questconnect.org/ so they are not necessarily a requirement.

We didn't think a production camper could take the torsional stresses of the FG frame so we used one. If you get a camper box built as tough as Don & Kim's you may not need one.

Doug

[haven]

The three point "torque free mount" is a sub-frame that joins the camper to the truck chassis. The purpose of this subframe is to prevent the twisting of the truck chassis from damaging the camper.

The three point sub-frame has two fixed mounting points to the truck chassis at one end of the camper, and a third, pivoting mount under the center of the other end of the camper.

The pivot can be at the front or rear. I tend to favor placing the pivot at the front. This places fixed mounts between the sub-frame and chassis at the rear axle. By holding the camper parallel to the rear axle when the chassis twists, the clearance between rear tires and camper is preserved.

A four point pivoting subframe is also possible. The sub-frame is attached to a pair of rails that run parallel to the truck chassis. One end of each rail is directly bolted to the chassis. The other end rides on a coil spring. When the chassis twists, the spring on one side is compressed. This allows the chassis to move without twisting the camper.

Chip Haven

[CornDog]

The pivot can be at the front or rear. I tend to favor placing the pivot at the front. This places fixed mounts between the sub-frame and chassis at the rear axle. By holding the camper parallel to the rear axle when the chassis twists, the clearance between rear tires and camper is preserved.

Chip Haven
Wouldn't you need a second pivot at the rear end of the frame: forming something like <> ?
Or can one construct the sub-frame rigid enough to compensate for the overhang (past the axle) to the rear?

[haven]

The Unimog has a two pivot design as you suggest:
one pivot close to the cab, two fixed mounts at the
rear axle, and one pivot behind the rear axle. This
would be necessary to control a heavy load. The
campers we're talking about don't weigh enough for
the rear pivot to be necessary. No harm in adding
one, though, if you're concerned about it.

Chip Haven

[Robthebrit]

Dunno about that, the rear pivot on my 416 camper mog is needed. The truck twists like its made of rubber when offroad, I can get 20 between the cab and camper box. My mog camper is also heavy, fully loaded for a long trip with 200 gallons of diesel and 44 gallons of water I can almost get to GVW (15,000).

Charlie's Unicat is 10,000 pounds heavier than me!

Rob

[dhackney]

3 point pivot frame? what is this 3 point pivot frame?

cheers
:cow:

Simon,

I built a page to describe what a 3 point pivot frame is and how we implemented ours:

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-pivot-frame.htm

Doug

[Gold Boy]

Simon,

I built a page to describe what a 3 point pivot frame is and how we implemented ours:

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-pivot-frame.htm

Doug

thanks very much

very helpful.... and encouraging!

cheers

[805gregg]

looks like i may be purchasing an FG, can't think of any other truck which is as good for the price.


tell me, how good/bad, has your FG been?

thanks

GB:wings:

Dodge is better, stronger and a much better engine for less money.

[haven]

805gregg, which Dodge are you referring to?

"Better" is a value judgement, but "stronger" and "for less money" can be evaluated more objectively.

Chip Haven

[007]

Dodge is better, stronger and a much better engine for less money.

Fleet owners are moving towards Fuso and isuzu in the medium duty truck sector and away from domestic trucks.

This is based on payload ability and cost of ownership.

There are many reasons to own a pickup, stronger and cheaper isn't one of them.

[CF-Transplant]

Dodge is better, stronger and a much better engine for less money.


With the fuel pump issues with 2000-2002 Dodge, engine issues with 2005-2008 I would read the TDR site (Turbo Diesel Register) first. The Dodge payload is low compared to the Fuso. Heck the Dodge with a 8 foot overhead is over gross wt.

[jhrodd]

My FE has been fantastic, it's a daily driver/work truck for me with the stake sides on it. I've put about 26,000 miles on it in 2 years and other than a couple of little recall items have had 0 problems. It is very quiet, I'm always surprised by how noisy the Dodge or GM diesel pickups are when they pull along side.

[Gold Boy]

My FE has been fantastic, it's a daily driver/work truck for me with the stake sides on it. I've put about 26,000 miles on it in 2 years and other than a couple of little recall items have had 0 problems. It is very quiet, I'm always surprised by how noisy the Dodge or GM diesel pickups are when they pull along side.

nice

[theMec]

Dodge, engine issues with 2005-2008 I would read the TDR site (Turbo Diesel Register) first.
I read the DTR site (Diesel Truck Resource - the free answer to TDR) very regularly and have NOT heard of 2005 engine (5.9L) problems. Do you mean the new 6.7L engine (2006-2008)?
Thanks.

[DontPanic42]

I am a bit late getting to this discussion but I thought I would show you how I mounted my living module on the FG. I would say it qualifies as a 4 point system. Instead of springs up front, we used 2 airbags from the cab of a Freightliner. Shocks are used to to restrict vertical movement and roll.
http://inlinethumb62.webshots.com/33725/2153391470054322218S600x600Q85.jpg
The rear has a traditional mounting. This setup gives me yaw, pitch, and some roll. So far since early spring of 2004, I have only had one failure. A broken shock which I was able to compensate for by adjusting air pressure.
Just another way to get the job done

[Bajaroad]

Bruce, thanks for sharing.

I'm planning on using air springs in my design too, but in a different way. Since the air springs offer no lateral support, how do you keep your camper stable from side to side in the front? - is that achieved solely through your rear mounting?

I've always like the Casita Trailers - well built but not too heavy. Do you know how much your complete rig weighs?

-Brent
new 07FG
old Wanderlodge FC31

[DontPanic42]

Brent,
The last time I weighed my rig it was just shy of 10,000 lbs. with me in it. I have added a few hundred more pounds ( to the truck, not me) but I estimate I am still under 11,000 lbs. loaded. I need to get it down to the scales again. I like to carry an offical weigh slip when I travel.
I use another shock running at an angle from near the top of the curb side airbag to below the travel side bag. It limits the side to side travel.
I have tried to upload a closeup that shows the shock locations better but I haven't had any luck. I'll try to get it posted later today.
success!

http://inlinethumb18.webshots.com/24209/2129481410101252971S500x500Q85.jpg

The large hex head bolts are the mounts for the shock that acts as an antisway bar. When the rig is moving, the Casita looks like it is floating. Interesting sight from the back.

Thanks for the interest.
Bruce

[kerry]

I like that setup. What's the radiator(?) down by the frame?
Where's the step in the frame in your picture?

[DontPanic42]

The small radiator is the transmission cooler. If you follow back on the subframe attached to the RV from the airbag, you will see it curves downward. The total drop in the frame is below the pressure gauges. I used a half inch piece of oak between the mainframe and subframe that attaches to the RV frame. That way there isn't metal on metal contact. Makes it a bit quieter when everything is moving around. I soaked the oak in a mixture of linseed oil and mineral spirts. Probably need to brush it down again.
Bruce

[eMULe]

Is the sub frame riding on the oak pieces 'U' shaped or rectangular? Does it have cross members? Does it run the full length of the Fuso frame & how is this sub frame attached to the Fuso frame?

It looks like really nice fabrication and would certainly isolate the trailer from the 'twisties'.

Brian
N New Mexico

[DontPanic42]

The oak strips are flat pieces rescued from old pallets. I like to recycle. They run the full length of the frame.
No x-members except the original ones on the FUSO chassis and the RV frame.
Tabs were welded on the subframe and then bolted to the FUSO frame. No new holes were made in the original frame. No welding either. Fenders, storage boxes, etc., are welded to the subrame with only bolts in the FUSO chassis. Actually, most everything is hung off the subframe and floats. Guess I should draw up some illustrations. Black on black parts don't photograph so well.
B

[Gold Boy]

http://inlinethumb62.webshots.com/33725/2153391470054322218S600x600Q85.jpg

now that's what i call a transmission cooler... ;)

[Mobryan]

GB, remember, that which is overkill in BC is merely sufficent in west Texas. Unless he means West, Texas, which is a different matter :costumed-smiley-007 :costumed-smiley-007 :costumed-smiley-007


:D


Matt

[DontPanic42]

No comma.
Western part of the state (where it Sticks, Stings, Scratches, or Bites) on the edge of what is not technically a desert but sure seems like one. More and more desert dwelling critters are showing up every year.

[CF-Transplant]

I read the DTR site (Diesel Truck Resource - the free answer to TDR) very regularly and have NOT heard of 2005 engine (5.9L) problems. Do you mean the new 6.7L engine (2006-2008)?
Thanks.


The TDR web site is nolonger usable (older format worked well). The 2005 and 06 have less fuel mileage than the 03-04 HO engine. Plus the 05 had two intercoolers for the year (one plastic?), the 05 also had many tranny issues. My mechanic (just talked to him) does not like the 05 and some have had issues with the 06.

The FG is a commercial truck, not a light duty pickup.