Photos of mid-sized vehicles - Post Here

[DT75FLH]

So you were over the trailer weight limit and running larger than OE tires. Was your tongue weight in spec? I’m not surprised that your warranty claim was rejected. Those maximum limits are set for a reason. You chose to play outside the design limits of the vehicle, and you are now paying the price. I don’t see GM’s fault in this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

did you read the post?..

the truck is rated to tow 5000 lbs.....they recommend trailer brakes over 2k ...like any manufacturer would...and i highly doubt 1in taller tire affected the frame, but ok...that is 1/2 in on the bottom and 1/2 in on the top....and the tounge weight was 347 lbs...if rated to tow 5k then it should safely handle 500 to 750 lbs of tounge weight.... half inch of tire is equivalent to bald tire vs brand new ones...

the truck does not have so much as a scratch under or outside the truck...and it otherwise bone stock. no lift or anything as i like to keep the factory ext warranty i purchased....so much for that

the photos i posted were right after it occurred, i also have a pic of the tounge weight if you would like to see it.

 

[TwinStick]

This is VERY concerning to me. Loving our ZR2 Diesel so far. I have had ours loaded up to the max. Hope this doesn't happen to us. I was actually thinking as I was taking delivery & doing the walk around: "well, ain't that a dumb ass place to put an oval hole in the frame. "

I guess we can thank the engineers and the C.A.F.E. mandates that the government put on the auto industry for this COLOSSAL blunder. It think, plain and simple, this is a design flaw. Clearly this can be nothing else. They necked the frame from 6" to 3", where the truck is designed to take all the load, AND they put an oval hole in the frame, where the stress from a load would be greatest ! Wonder what design engineer school teaches that ?

I wish they would have told me that I actually bought a car ! Lol Can't do nothing but laugh. We can't afford to trade it in already. On a fixed income now. The new Rebel with rear locker and the diesel is looking good right about now.

 

[6gun]

So you were over the trailer weight limit and running larger than OE tires. Was your tongue weight in spec? I’m not surprised that your warranty claim was rejected. Those maximum limits are set for a reason. You chose to play outside the design limits of the vehicle, and you are now paying the price. I don’t see GM’s fault in this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

GM's fault (like all other manufacturers) is cutting corners on a product marketed towards a heavy use market. ZR2 is an off road package, and in that world comes bigger tires and hard use. Warranty claims are rejected because manufacturers would rather lose a customer than money. Victim blaming never gets old to people who feel superior to others.

 

[DT75FLH]

This is VERY concerning to me. Loving our ZR2 Diesel so far. I have had ours loaded up to the max. Hope this doesn't happen to us. I was actually thinking as I was taking delivery & doing the walk around: "well, ain't that a dumb ass place to put an oval hole in the frame. "

I guess we can thank the engineers and the C.A.F.E. mandates that the government put on the auto industry for this COLOSSAL blunder. It think, plain and simple, this is a design flaw. Clearly this can be nothing else. They necked the frame from 6" to 3", where the truck is designed to take all the load, AND they put an oval hole in the frame, where the stress from a load would be greatest ! Wonder what design engineer school teaches that ?

I wish they would have told me that I actually bought a car ! Lol Can't do nothing but laugh. We can't afford to trade it in already. On a fixed income now. The new Rebel with rear locker and the diesel is looking good right about now.

I thouht the exact same thing....but believed the hss hydroformed frame talk....I also have a 2018 and Chevy has a recall for side curtain airbag deployment ...while driving fast on dirt roads some owners have had the side curtain airbags deploy...My truck has not had the recall done yet and my air bags did not deploy. .again I was not driving fast at all.

at least ford stepped up when they issues with the raptor...anyone who bent the frame at the bumpstops had there frames replaced...Im sure the aftermarket might find a nitch market to make a reinforcement kit..but it has to be bolt on as it cannot be welded to these frames,they are very thin.

up to his the point i was very happy with the truck, performance, shocks, and mpg.

The zr2 is also avle to drive in 2wd with the rear locker on up to speed limiter...similar to the raptor...so yes..it is marketed to drive spiritly on dirt roads

 

[DaveInDenver]

I’m taking a guess here, really weak frame? I’ve never seen that before.

True, but bent frame... come on that’s not good.

This is VERY concerning to me. Loving our ZR2 Diesel so far. I have had ours loaded up to the max. Hope this doesn't happen to us. I was actually thinking as I was taking delivery & doing the walk around: "well, ain't that a dumb ass place to put an oval hole in the frame. "

I guess we can thank the engineers and the C.A.F.E. mandates that the government put on the auto industry for this COLOSSAL blunder. It think, plain and simple, this is a design flaw. Clearly this can be nothing else. They necked the frame from 6" to 3", where the truck is designed to take all the load, AND they put an oval hole in the frame, where the stress from a load would be greatest ! Wonder what design engineer school teaches that ?

I wish they would have told me that I actually bought a car ! Lol Can't do nothing but laugh. We can't afford to trade it in already. On a fixed income now. The new Rebel with rear locker and the diesel is looking good right about now.

This is getting to be a real concern with modern vehicles. The designers have better analysis tools and can tailor the frame to better detail, which is used I think primarily to make trucks ride better (what Toyota North America's Mike Sweers refers to as "compliancy" in the Tacoma, to soften the ride) and to meet rear impact crash test goals.

I doubt the frame on the U.S. Colorado truck is all that different from the overseas truck. They may have tuned it for a softer ride and perhaps the material is very slightly thinner or they changed the geometry of the hole in question. I'd have to think that hole is not completely new. But I don't know the platform well enough to say for sure. My expectation would be any changes are actually small comparatively.

And this problem exists on global platforms.

https://4x4earth.com/forum/index.php?threads/bent-chassis-on-new-utes.26275/

http://www.myswag.org/index.php?topic=44221.25

http://rveethereyet.com/dual-cab-utes-bend/

The Navara (and thus Frontier) are currently known to have suspect frame integrity.





But it also happens to Raptors...



and Tacomas.



And isn't new, this being a 6th gen Hilux, so could be a late 1990s Toyota, when they were supposed still be bulletproof.



It's even happening to Land Cruisers, so it's not just midsize utes/truck/pickup.

https://4x4earth.com/forum/index.php?threads/another-bent-chassis-discussion.40039/

 

[DaveInDenver]

FWIW, on a 2001 Tacoma I owned for a short time the rear of the frame was obvious to me not as substantial as the 1991 I owned and wanted to replace with it.

With the WilderNest mounted it was pretty flexible and I hadn't yet full built it out. So I reinforced it right away. This is something of a cottage industry for 1st generation (1995-2004) Tacomas. At the time (about 2013) several companies were making plates to do this. I used the CBI plates personally.

Current Tacomas aren't as easy to beef up since the shock mount moved to the outside of the frame rail. As a result most of the reinforcement people are doing is to box it in, welding a plate on the inside of the frame.

None-the-less adding these plates made a big difference in rigidity. I added the smaller plates ahead of the shock tower to reinforce where it appeared to me would need it once the rear was stiffened, something had to experience more stress and I didn't want it to concentrate in that spot. This bend ahead of the axle and where the forward spring hanger sits is where these frame transitioned from fully boxed to open-C. It's a critical spot.

The point I would make is that manufacturers are building vehicles for the market that uses them. We are an exception despite the marketing. Most people never go 4 wheeling or pile building materials in their truck. The majority use them like cars. Even of the people who do use them as trucks the number who load them as we do and 'wheel them hard is small. Lots of mall queens with all the stuff but never taken on anything more than a graded dirt road.

So it's the same as it ever was. You have to find the weaknesses and build the truck. That has always been the case, it's just more obvious now I think.

 

[Baldazzer]

This is getting to be a real concern with modern vehicles. The designers have better analysis tools and can tailor the frame to better detail, which is used I think primarily to make trucks ride better (what Toyota North America's Mike Sweers refers to as "compliancy" in the Tacoma, to soften the ride) and to meet rear impact crash test goals.

I doubt the frame on the U.S. Colorado truck is all that different from the overseas truck. They may have tuned it for a softer ride and perhaps the material is very slightly thinner or they changed the geometry of the hole in question. I'd have to think that hole is not completely new. But I don't know the platform well enough to say for sure. My expectation would be any changes are actually small comparatively.

And this problem exists on global platforms.

https://4x4earth.com/forum/index.php?threads/bent-chassis-on-new-utes.26275/

http://www.myswag.org/index.php?topic=44221.25

http://rveethereyet.com/dual-cab-utes-bend/

The Navara (and thus Frontier) are currently known to have suspect frame integrity.

View attachment 522857

View attachment 522858

But it also happens to Raptors...

View attachment 522859

and Tacomas.

View attachment 522861

And isn't new, this being a 6th gen Hilux, so could be a late 1990s Toyota, when they were supposed still be bulletproof.

View attachment 522860

It's even happening to Land Cruisers, so it's not just midsize utes/truck/pickup.

https://4x4earth.com/forum/index.php?threads/another-bent-chassis-discussion.40039/

View attachment 522856

I believe this confirms my assertion that issues are not confined to Chevy. There are no flawless vehicles. You can use google yourselves and find Raptors and Tacos etc. that broke and people pissed about denied warranty claims. You can also watch videos at 420Motors YouTube channel of his ZR2 jumping dunes intact whilst Raptor frames get bent doing the same. One or two isolated instances of failure and/or warranty disputes is no reason to discard a vehicle from consideration, as you would be discarding all vehicles. That’s all I am trying to say here. I also know better than to accept as complete truth only one side of a story within hearing the other side. It’s called being “pragmatic”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DaveInDenver]

I believe this confirms my assertion that issues are not confined to Chevy. There are no flawless vehicles. You can use google yourselves and find Raptors and Tacos etc. that broke and people pissed about denied warranty claims. You can also watch videos at 420Motors YouTube channel of his ZR2 jumping dunes intact whilst Raptor frames get bent doing the same. One or two isolated instances of failure and/or warranty disputes is no reason to discard a vehicle from consideration, as you would be discarding all vehicles. That’s all I am trying to say here. I also know better than to accept as complete truth only one side of a story within hearing the other side. It’s called being “pragmatic”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I completely agree. The only trucks that have every really been "strong" from the factory IMO are something like M35, M39s, Unimogs and maybe the trucks like the Scouts and FJ40s in the 1960s. By the 1970s and certainly in the past 20 years any vehicle (car, truck, SUV, whatever) designed primarily as a passenger vehicle is going to be starting from a compromise by regulation or design.

If Chevy, Toyota, whomever built a body-on-frame truck that could actually carry GVWR for its whole life over poor roads it would be flatly panned in media and on forums like this because it would handle like a prairie schooner, be murder on the eggs in the grocery bag, be slow as molasses, would fail every crash test thrown at it (the truck would survive, you wouldn't).

ETA: Just thinking about this, the Hilux is still pointed to as an "unsafe" vehicle for its propensity to roll compared to other vehicles and frame rigidity must surely be a variable on how a vehicle handles.

 

[DT75FLH]

I believe this confirms my assertion that issues are not confined to Chevy. There are no flawless vehicles. You can use google yourselves and find Raptors and Tacos etc. that broke and people pissed about denied warranty claims. You can also watch videos at 420Motors YouTube channel of his ZR2 jumping dunes intact whilst Raptor frames get bent doing the same. One or two isolated instances of failure and/or warranty disputes is no reason to discard a vehicle from consideration, as you would be discarding all vehicles. That’s all I am trying to say here. I also know better than to accept as complete truth only one side of a story within hearing the other side. It’s called being “pragmatic”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree...but ford did warranty there frames...i have 2 friends with them...i also agree about taking somebody's story with a grain of salt.

my point was that Ford did end up paying for their warranty claims and Chevy has not.... especially if you take into consideration that people on this forum are in the 5% that actually use their vehicles off-road, it would be such a small group to have their trucks repaired and not have me go through my insurance company..

caveat emptor

I post here, because people use there trucks as designed. .which is why i purcahsed a zr2 and not a reg 4x4..

And for the above poster, unless you build a reinforcement that bolts on or around the frame you cannot weld to them,they are very thin wall high strength steel.

when I went to the national highway traffic safety administration page, they did not do a rear-end crash test so I do not believe those holes were put in as a crumple Zone... but they are for sure a weak spot with a three and a half inch tall frame rail and you take up over an inch with those holes.... the current Tacoma frame is it least 5in to 6in tall where the bed is..

 

[Lost Roadie]

I feel for you DT, I've seen your posts in various ZR2 relevant forums, usually in the photos threads.
By posting in these threads and not tagged photos instead of starting your own with a searchable title you're essentially making your story invisible to all search engines. And taking photo threads into long discussions about your very specific and rare situation.
I got no love for GM after my airbag incident, but if you search for chevy zr2 airbag you'll find my photos, threads, media coverage, etc. Getting issues out there can help force change, as we saw with the airbag fix. That is if this is a design flaw and not operator error - that's easier to do if people can find others who've had this issue.






I'll step down off my pedestal and just post photos now.

 

[Dalko43]

I think the moral of the story is:

• every brand its fair share of lemons (or bad apples).
• Don't go over GVWR, and you're vehicle (and frame) should be fine.

 

[Explorerinil]

I think the moral of the story is:

• every brand its fair share of lemons (or bad apples).
• Don't go over GVWR, and you're vehicle (and frame) should be fine.

Ok... I’m sure 100 lbs extra caused that frame to break. But yes your right, make sure you within the vehicles limits.

 

[DT75FLH]

I feel for you DT, I've seen your posts in various ZR2 relevant forums, usually in the photos threads.
By posting in these threads and not tagged photos instead of starting your own with a searchable title you're essentially making your story invisible to all search engines. And taking photo threads into long discussions about your very specific and rare situation.
I got no love for GM after my airbag incident, but if you search for chevy zr2 airbag you'll find my photos, threads, media coverage, etc. Getting issues out there can help force change, as we saw with the airbag fix. That is if this is a design flaw and not operator error - that's easier to do if people can find others who've had this issue.






I'll step down off my pedestal and just post photos now.

i enjoy your post, and pics and even copied some ideas...i also remember your airbag incident. ..after this trip, it was scheduled to have the recall done

 

[DT75FLH]

Ok... I’m sure 100 lbs extra caused that frame to break. But yes your right, make sure you within the vehicles limits.

I just want to be clear..I was NOT over gvw...the 100 lbs over is for gm and trailer brakes ....the trailer was 2100lbs. and the ZR2 is rated to tow a 5000lb trailer

and sorry for cluttering up this thread. ill stop now

 

[Dalko43]

Ok... I’m sure 100 lbs extra caused that frame to break. But yes your right, make sure you within the vehicles limits.

I'm not saying that the other guy was over GVWR. But I do think that a lot of truck owners go over GVWR through the course of modifications...you can't blame the truck for failing if you exceed the recommended limits.

Also, you can go find frame failures for almost any brand and any truck. Just because one Zr2 owner had an issue with the frame doesn't mean the issue is widespread.