Payload in Tacomas- Canopies and Suspension Question

[Dalko43]

I sprayed the inside of my boxed section with the green version of that Eastwood stuff.

http://www.eastwood.com/eastwood-internal-frame-coating-14oz-aerosol.html

I don't know how it will last and honestly it's tough for me to really think it will last because my truck was 7 years old when I got it and I could only clean out so much much debris. But I did two coats and what I can see seems to still be there.

The first thing I did to my truck was clean the frame, wire wheel whatever looked bad and painted the whole thing. I also do a Fluid Film on my whole frame twice a year.

View attachment 414778

View attachment 414777

I use fluid film as well...not sure if it's really working, but I suppose it doesn't hurt to put that stuff on as a precaution.

How many cans of that Eastwood stuff did you use for your frame? Was there any primer to apply prior to the paint? I might be tackling a frame cleaning and paint in the near future.

 

[DaveInDenver]

I use fluid film as well...not sure if it's really working, but I suppose it doesn't hurt to put that stuff on as a precaution.

In my experience Fluid Film does help. I applied it to my old frame on the '91, which I sold in 2015 with about 287K on it (photos are the ones I took when advertising it). It looked fine and I didn't start becoming really diligent about it until about 2004 or so. Up until then all I did was washing the mag chloride off a few times in the winter and the occasional summer wash. So the original paint was good and perhaps the metal was higher quality, so I'm not suggesting Fluid Film is the sole reason but my corrosion did slow down using it.

How many cans of that Eastwood stuff did you use for your frame? Was there any primer to apply prior to the paint? I might be tackling a frame cleaning and paint in the near future.

I used a high pressure wand as best as I could inside the boxed section, let it dry and vacuumed what I could. No primer, none recommended on the can. I used 5 cans total, the first 3 got what looked like an even coat on both boxed sections (on a Tacoma this is roughly mid front doors up to the bumper). I followed the next day with 1 can per side. The coverage recommended 3 cans for a full frame and that might be a little low. For your 4Runner I'd think 4 cans would give you full one coat. I wasn't stingy with the stuff.

You want to tape the heck out of every weep hole and access port because the stuff is very thin and will run. It cures more than dries (it's epoxy apparently, in marketing speak - it's said to encapsulate rust with a zinc-rich resin) so if it gets on sheet metal or your garage floor it's tough to clean. It's not a rigid finished product, it's a little flexible so I do think it's more than just green paint.

 

[Dalko43]

In my experience Fluid Film does help. I applied it to my old frame on the '91, which I sold in 2015 with about 287K on it (photos are the ones I took when advertising it). It looked fine and I didn't start becoming really diligent about it until about 2004 or so. Up until then all I did was washing the mag chloride off a few times in the winter and the occasional summer wash. So the original paint was good and perhaps the metal was higher quality, so I'm not suggesting Fluid Film is the sole reason but my corrosion did slow down using it.

View attachment 414826 View attachment 414827 View attachment 414828



I used a high pressure wand as best as I could inside the boxed section, let it dry and vacuumed what I could. No primer, none recommended on the can. I used 5 cans total, the first 3 got what looked like an even coat on both boxed sections (on a Tacoma this is roughly mid front doors up to the bumper). I followed the next day with 1 can per side. The coverage recommended 3 cans for a full frame and that might be a little low. For your 4Runner I'd think 4 cans would give you full one coat. I wasn't stingy with the stuff.

You want to tape the heck out of every weep hole and access port because the stuff is very thin and will run. It cures more than dries (it's epoxy apparently, in marketing speak - it's said to encapsulate rust with a zinc-rich resin) so if it gets on sheet metal or your garage floor it's tough to clean. It's not a rigid finished product, it's a little flexible so I do think it's more than just green paint.

Thanks for the tips. I've only used fluid film for a season or two, so it's hard for me to tell what it has or hasn't done for my 4runner. As for the eastwood stuff, how does it compare to something like a POR-15? I believe that POR stuff requires some surface cleaning and prep before application.

I think when I do get around to tackling my frame, I'll go all out: wire wheel, angle grinder, degreaser to clean the frame (as much as possible); a primer of some sorts; and then a rust mitigation coat (POR-15 or Eastwood's stuff). I haven't figured out if I need a topcoat of paint after all of that. Would like to get an applicator gun, but the POR-15 stuff seems to work just fine being applied by brush, so I might forgo that.

 

[DaveInDenver]

POR-15 is applied over prepped metal. It doesn't require cleaning to shiny metal but any flaky rust will yield a void in the finished product. The frame coating stuff is supposed to cover and seal off rust, more of preventing air and moisture than an actual base coat. AFAIK it doesn't etch or anything. I didn't coat my insides with anything additional, just Fluid Film.

It wouldn't be possible to use POR-15 inside boxed sections and even if you rigged a spray gun with a long reach nozzle without any prep POR-15 would just adhere to flakes and be useless. I suppose you could media blast the insides, so it's maybe not impossible but refinishing the insides of boxed profiles isn't a simple affair.

For a surface you can prep it will be much better to clean, degrease, prime and paint. POR-15 fits in like a primer on steroids and needs a top coat (it has no UV resistance, for one). I prefer to do more traditional, clean, degrease, etching primer and paint top coat. I personally use the industrial Rustoleum. It's cheaper and when (not if) it gets scraped, chipped, flakes, develops rust it's a lot easier to clean back to metal and start over.

My experience with POR-15 is the stuff works most of the time but if not or you want to grind and modify it's a SOB since it clogs your abrasives. It's a viable option, though, it does seem to do well if you take the time to prep well.

 

[Adventurous]

Thanks for the tips. I've only used fluid film for a season or two, so it's hard for me to tell what it has or hasn't done for my 4runner. As for the eastwood stuff, how does it compare to something like a POR-15? I believe that POR stuff requires some surface cleaning and prep before application.

I think when I do get around to tackling my frame, I'll go all out: wire wheel, angle grinder, degreaser to clean the frame (as much as possible); a primer of some sorts; and then a rust mitigation coat (POR-15 or Eastwood's stuff). I haven't figured out if I need a topcoat of paint after all of that. Would like to get an applicator gun, but the POR-15 stuff seems to work just fine being applied by brush, so I might forgo that.

I think top coating all of that would be to your benefit. POR-15, without the UV top coat, is susceptible to degradation in the areas exposed to UV light. A coat of paint on top should help protect things underneath. From my limited experience brushing it on is just fine, it does a decent job at self leveling and adhering provided you did a decent job with the prep portion (getting rid of the loose stuff and degreasing).

Right now the frame on my 2015 is doing okay with a little bit of surface rust on the welds. I've been sanding that all down, spraying with a rust encapsulating primer, and top coating with some VHT enamel paint. I imagine I'll get into the boxed sections before this winter with the Eastwood stuff and then Fluid Film just to be safe. Luckily compared to what I grew up with on the east coast rusting in CO is a laughable fraction of what I'm used to.

I hate to be the cynic in scenarios like this but part of me thinks that some of this is just due to planned obsolescence. Granted their planned life isn't in line with what I want, but still planned nonetheless.

 

[DaveInDenver]

Luckily compared to what I grew up with on the east coast rusting in CO is a laughable fraction of what I'm used to.

This is changing now that CDOT is spraying salt brine as a snow event pre-treatment. We're gonna get the Iowa/Wisconson/New York/etc experience soon enough.

BTW, get outside, the eclipse just started.

 

[Clutch]

BTW, get outside, the eclipse just started.

It was cool, made for some great shadows on the ground. Tried to take some photos through the glasses with the phone, but it didn't work.



Made some burgers and salad for lunch, timed it just right to be eating on the back porch when it was the darkest. Temperature dropped, birds got quiet, the crickets started to chirp. The light had blue tinge to it, and the sun on my skin felt cool.

 

[IdaSHO]

Well so much for putting me on the ignore list.

I'm living on the edge.

I agree a C-channel is easier to clean than a boxed frame.

No, not easier to clean, but inherently easier to KEEP clean.

There is a difference. The simple design of an open-c simply doesnt collect junk as readily as a box section.

Dont know why you have such a hard time understanding that.

But claiming that rust is much worse on a boxed frame vs a c-channel is not simple fact.

never did I say rust was worse. What I did say is that rust becomes more of a problem on boxed frames, due to its design.

Most people don't clean their frames at all, regardless of whether they're c-channel or boxed.

More to my point of an open C being easier to keep clean.

I've seen boxed frames last just as long as c-channel ones...anecdotal on my part for sure...but since you're the one claiming to have a fact on your side, why don't you give me some actual statistics for how long a boxed 4runner frame lasts versus how long a Tacoma c-channel one lasts? I'm willing to bet that your own experience on the issue is anecdotal as well.

How about you provide some statistics to counter?

Im not going to spoon feed you.

Yes, but my opinion has confirmation of sorts in that Ford now uses a fully boxed frame for the Super Duty, as do most other pickup's and BOF SUV's...I suppose there must be some reason why that frame type is so prevalent within the 4x4 vehicle segment.

Your opinion carries as much weight as any other member on this forum.

That said, yes, Ford has pushed to a fully boxed frame. And until you provide proof of anything contrary, Ill continue to assume it is due to cost and marketing.

But isn't it funny that they don't offer a fully boxed frame on F450 and up?

How common is "common?" Are you basing this off a few internet threads or do you actually have some NHTSA TSB's and recalls to prove your point? Were these vehicles stock or over GVWR? Again, my anecdotal side here, but I've seen plenty of 10 year old FJ's, both stock and modified, on the road and I haven't seen any common issues with that frame failure.

Again, I wont spoon feed you..

Again, how common is "common?" FWIW, Toyota was a company that was noted for having frame rot issues, and all of those affected vehicles (Tacoma, Tundra, Sequoia) had C-channel frames: https://www.autoblog.com/2016/11/14/toyota-3-billion-settlement-rusty-truck-frames/

That seems to stand in direct contradiction to your conventional wisdom on the merits of c-channel frame construction. In my opinion, the quality of construction and finish at the factory has more to do with premature rust issues than does the type of frame used.

Huh, a few post back you were preaching that it was all DESIGN related.

Yes, the Toyota chassis fiasco was an open C based chassis. But if you actually do some research, you will find it had nothing to do with the design or fit and finish. It was a "simple" manufacturing problem related to the steel used.

The entire chassis was effected, and if you've seen the problem first hand youd know that the frame rotted in such a way that the chassis actually starts to de-laminate as rust takes hold.

Toyota has issued similar recalls in the past due to bad steel. One is a significant lead spring recall.

 

[IdaSHO]

It was cool, made for some great shadows on the ground. Tried to take some photos through the glasses with the phone, but it didn't work.

I tried the same, through a #16 welding lens.

No dice.

Still too much exposure for the Iphone camera to know what to do with. :Wow1:

 

[Clutch]

I tried the same, through a #16 welding lens.

No dice.

Still too much exposure for the Iphone camera to know what to do with. :Wow1:

Totally forgot about trying my welding helmet...too busy trying to time cooking burgers. Figured there will be a plethora of photos from much better photographers.

Think I was more mesmerized that sun felt cool to my skin than the actual eclipse itself. That and the blue hue of the light.

Tell ya, they waaay over hyped the amount of turistas we were going to get, roads were dead for the most part...think they scared most everyone that they stayed home.

 

[IdaSHO]

I didnt go anywhere, but I heard much the same that did travel. Not much to worry about with regards to traffic.

We had 95%+ here. Pretty cool, but never did get very dark.


FYI, had a bunch of peeps trying to use cheapo auto-tints. No go. They seem to require a "flash" to trip.

My good miller auto tint worked fine, with the sensitivity set high, so the wife got that one. I stuck with a simple fixed #16 from an old mask.

 

[Dalko43]

No, not easier to clean, but inherently easier to KEEP clean.

never did I say rust was worse. What I did say is that rust becomes more of a problem on boxed frames, due to its design.

It seems that it is a recurring problem where you write sentences that are inherently contradictory. I'm not going to waste time arguing about these statements with you.

How about you provide some statistics to counter?

Im not going to spoon feed you.

Spoon feed me? You're the one making unsupported claims about how the FJ's frame is prone to cracking and how certain Jeep frames are inclined to rust out. If you want such claims to be taken seriously, you should support them....with evidence. I'm not going to search the internet figuring which of your claims are true and which are utter nonsense.

I'll tell you that I'm more than a little familiar with the FJ and its history, and cracking frames is not a common issue with that platform.

That said, yes, Ford has pushed to a fully boxed frame. And until you provide proof of anything contrary, Ill continue to assume it is due to cost and marketing.

So you're suggesting that the Ford Super Duty switched to a boxed frame purely because it was cheaper and marketed better with the consumer? That's a bit of a stretch, figuratively, especially on the cost side of things. Does the same apply for the Defender, LandCruiser, Jeep, LC Prado, Hilux, Ranger and most other global 4x4 platforms...those vehicles were given boxed frames purely for lower cost and better marketing?

But isn't it funny that they don't offer a fully boxed frame on F450 and up?

I'd imagine that's to cut cost and also because Ford can get away with that. The F-450 is intended for commerical/industrial buyers who likely don't care how the truck performs in rough terrain or whether body panels shift or doors won't close...it's a work tool that will see use for a certain amount of time and then will be discarded.

Huh, a few post back you were preaching that it was all DESIGN related.

Yes, the Toyota chassis fiasco was an open C based chassis. But if you actually do some research, you will find it had nothing to do with the design or fit and finish. It was a "simple" manufacturing problem related to the steel used.

The entire chassis was effected, and if you've seen the problem first hand youd know that the frame rotted in such a way that the chassis actually starts to de-laminate as rust takes hold.

Toyota has issued similar recalls in the past due to bad steel. One is a significant lead spring recall.

See, this comment here has really convinced me that you're not reading what I'm writing or what you're even writing. A few posts back I said quality and finish at the factory is likely a leading cause of rust issues on most trucks. So in essence, you're agreeing with something I've been saying from the start; that the Tacoma's, and Tundras/Sequoias, had rust issues because of bad quality control on the components being used at the plant (and yes, using a bad batch of steel would qualify as "quality" issues).

My point in bringing up their c-channel frames wasn't meant to imply that C-channels are more prone to rusting out, but rather to illustrate that your "boxed frames rust out quicker than c-channel ones" theory doesn't match the historical realities of this topic. You're spending all this time and effort criticizing boxed frames for having more rust and failure issues (without providing any proof I might add), and yet the biggest frame recall conducted in recent history was for a bunch of vehicles with C-channel frames.....do you not see the irony in that?

I think you're still angry over our last conversation from another thread and you're just hell-bent on arguing on everything.

 

[Clutch]

I didnt go anywhere, but I heard much the same that did travel. Not much to worry about with regards to traffic.

We had 95%+ here. Pretty cool, but never did get very dark.


FYI, had a bunch of peeps trying to use cheapo auto-tints. No go. They seem to require a "flash" to trip.

My good miller auto tint worked fine, with the sensitivity set high, so the wife got that one. I stuck with a simple fixed #16 from an old mask.

We stayed home too, had a couple friends who did travel and texted me that it wasn't bad at all. Most of the schools are starting this week, so maybe that is it too.

99.6% here...got dark enough for the motion sensor was set off on the porch spot lights while I was moving about. Tried taking pictures of how dark it was, but the iphone wouldn't have it, still looked bright through the camera.

I was talking about using my welding helmet with clients this past week....day of... "totally" "spaced" it. ba dum tssssh...

 

[IdaSHO]

It seems that it is a recurring problem where you write sentences that are inherently contradictory. I'm not going to waste time arguing about these statements with you.

Not contradictory at all.

THIS is contradictory, considering your position

The frames on 4runners and LC's have been proven to be long-lasting despite being boxed, as long as you use the proper upkeep and cleaning techniques.

------------------------

Most people don't clean their frames at all, regardless of whether they're c-channel or boxed.

I'll tell you that I'm more than a little familiar with the FJ and its history, and cracking frames is not a common issue with that platform.

Woah.... internet tough guy here.

:smiley_drive:

So you're suggesting that the Ford Super Duty switched to a boxed frame purely because it was cheaper and marketed better with the consumer?

Considering the coverage that this topic has had in the past decade or so, ABSOLUTELY.

As I've already mentioned though, I just hope Ford did it up right.

See, this comment here has really convinced me that you're not reading what I'm writing or what you're even writing. A few posts back I said quality and finish at the factory is likely a leading cause of rust issues on most trucks. So in essence, you're agreeing with something I've been saying from the start; that the Tacoma's, and Tundras/Sequoias, had rust issues because of bad quality control on the components being used at the plant (and yes, using a bad batch of steel would qualify as "quality" issues).

So you honestly think that a frame manufactured by a 3rd party using faulty steel, is a "fit and finish" issue??

Uh, okay!

My point in bringing up their c-channel frames wasn't meant to imply that C-channels are more prone to rusting out, but rather to illustrate that your "boxed frames rust out quicker than c-channel ones" theory doesn't match the historical realities of this topic.

Maybe that's where you went off the rails. Never did I say that Box frames rot out quicker.

What I did mention was concerns with box frames, related to corrosion.

Which is 100% justified, as we have sorted out. They are simply more difficult to keep clean.

You're spending all this time and effort criticizing boxed frames for having more rust and failure issues (without providing any proof I might add), and yet the biggest frame recall conducted in recent history was for a bunch of vehicles with C-channel frames.....do you not see the irony in that?

Again, the Toyota recall was a manufacturing problem.

Beyond that, corrosion issues are simply not common with open C



And no, Im not mad.

Youll have to try much harder than that.



have fun.

 

[IdaSHO]

here you go for some simple Jeep rust related chassis issues...

FYI, you wont find these products for open C framed vehicles, as the problem isnt common enough.

But as I mentioned, Jeep box frames do have this problem.

Some models more than others.

https://www.quadratec.com/categories/jeep_body_frame/frames_accessories/frame-repair

nearly ALL replacement pieces for frame repairs due to rust.

And a quick quote....

Over time, moisture and silt gets trapped inside the frame rails causing severe rust through.

And another

Over time, moisture gets trapped around the leaf spring bushings while dirt and debris gets trapped inside the frame rails causing severe rust through.

hey, that sure sounds familiar!