I think that's up to the purchaser. Most fabricators sub that out anyways.
Clearly important in the discussion. But there is much more than that.It's been frustrating to be missing the single most important piece of data - load weight - when discussing the frame strength and appropriate camper mounts on the FG...Moe
Yeah I could see how it might be better - not sure if it does more than postpone the inevitable though, you still have that point concentration of the load when you hit bumps, potholes, etc. I'm convinced that's the real killer.I was wondering, from picts is saw,what if you reversed the three points? Meaning the single point up front and the two in the rear. The center of the frames seems to be where it would twist the most. Seems like would allow you subframe to twist with less resistance or tension.
Sent from my QMV7A using Tapatalk
Heh, I'm not just a pickup truck guy.Well here comes out my thoughts...
Frame extended, too much weight too far back. Past what the frame was designed for. Frame breaks. Frame gets fixed with a heavier duty frame that no longer is designed to flex like original. Fixed? No. The lack of flex on the rear frame is now transferred to the frame that still flexes in front. Another break. Perhaps that frame was damaged months ago and the compounded stress has finally made it snap due to the transfer of forces.
Okay now what I would do...
Doug is brilliant. I have seen his build. Actually the systems he put into the truck and how they are organized reminds me of the space shuttle. I just can't believe that someone single handed could create something like this. But I think having that motorcycle garage perhaps wasn't a good idea. Could camper be positioned over the cab over. Perhaps perhaps not. Would that have created a high center of gravity to allow the cab over to rotate open which would have too much twisting force with the extreme weight and destroyed the frame anyhow? Doug must have been an engineer from what I have seen from the systems he created. You see, I think over the long term this repair you did perhaps is a temporary measure and something else will snap.
Okay NOW what I would do. I would either fix the frame up front and move that camper forward if possible or...
Take that space shuttle off the back of the truck and give up on the fuso. Sell it for what you can get out of it. Find a Ford f450/F550 7.2l truck and put that space shuttle on the back of it. Hmm like an Earthroamer.
We all feel bad this happened to you but you got this amazing truck for a steal broken frame or not. I wish the best for you in this and hopefully this info will help you in someway. I don't know. Put it on a Ford f450/f550. Or course, this all takes cash and time or lots of cash. I don't want to discredit Doug in all of this. He is simply brilliant and someone I highly admire and respect like the rest of us.
Thanks John - I'm starting to think more seriously about the fasteners now. Since I'm in the US my plan is to use 1/2" grade 5 fine-pitch bolts torqued to 64 ft lbs. Does that sound about right to you?Once you get the body off, it should look a lot easier than you think. The frame will be riveted up into the S-section. Use the back edge of the S-section as the reference point. Mark a line there on the old rail.....measure everything foreward and aft from that line.
Replace every rivet with 12mm high tensile bolts with nyloc nuts and a washer on both sides..... Or Huck rivets are nice if you can hire or borrow a gun.
Yeah, I meant replicating the bolt pattern between the crossmembers and frame rails. I don't plan on making any more holes than I need to!As you would obviously know, the OEM chassis has many holes in the chassis that are not used. Given that you know exactly what is going back onto your truck, replicating all of the OEM holes seems a little pointless.
Yeowza. I am not aware of any situation where drilling a hole in a beam makes it stronger in any way. But hey I have been wrong before.You guys would certainly know better than I, but might any of the holes be for stress relief or to calibrate stiffness under torsion?
Amen to that !This thread increases my awareness that there are people who think that the structural members size (thickness, thinness, height, weight etc) , shape (channel, box, tubes or I-beam), connection points and methods of connection etc are all picked by some random guy with a welding torch. These things are very well engineered with load limits and load placement parameters. (they actually went to school for this. just sayin.) :elkgrin:
It's not an issue of the product being designed by a knucklehead, it's that every design is a compromise between many competing objectives. How strong do you want it to be? How heavy do you want it to be? How expensive do you want it to be? You optimize the model by chosing "as strong as it needs to be", "as light as possible", and "as cheap as possible"Yeowza. I am not aware of any situation where drilling a hole in a beam makes it stronger in any way. But hey I have been wrong before.
This thread increases my awareness that there are people who think that the structural members size (thickness, thinness, height, weight etc) , shape (channel, box, tubes or I-beam), connection points and methods of connection etc are all picked by some random guy with a welding torch. These things are very well engineered with load limits and load placement parameters. (they actually went to school for this. just sayin.) :elkgrin:
Holes in a member are usually there for two reasons. 1) to make an item lighter. 2) to provide for mounting locations, or pass through locations etc. In either case the holes are accounted for in the strength of the member. Typically holes are 'allowed' if by including them the ultimate design strength of the member is not compromised (under the load parameters) . They are accounted for in the analysis of the member.
Yes and history (ancient and modern) has shown us that in order for that 'anyone' to build it strong enough they first had to build one or two that collapsed.- "Anyone can build a bridge that's strong enough - but it takes an engineer to build a bridge that's JUST strong enough"