fordmantpw Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 The 10 speed coming for the F-150 may not be suitable for a truck like the Super Duty. Well, obviously. The tranny in the Super Duty has to be built to handle more HP, torque, and sustained loads. From what I read on another forum the "new" 6 speed for the 6.2 F250 is just a beefed up F150 transmission, pretty disappointing to see some parts being downgraded in the new SD. I'm fine with that. I mean, what's the point in putting in a tranny capable of handling 1000 ft-lbs of torque if it only needs to handle 500. All it does is cost more and hurt fuel economy. The new Lariats from pictures I see do not have manual locking hubs either. Hmmm, I missed that. Maybe we do get IFS? I haven't seen any pictures underneath yet. I would find it hard to believe they would do away with the hubs with the manual override on SFA. I saw a video featuring Joe Hinrichs on Bloomberg and he referred to "heavier" suspensions. In take that to mean higher ratings-type may be the same-just more capacity as a result of heavier components. I was mostly referring to not having any revolutionary changes in the suspensions. Just updates to handle more load. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Not sure I'm a fan of the grill and headlight combo they are using. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Well, obviously. The tranny in the Super Duty has to be built to handle more HP, torque, and sustained loads. I'm fine with that. I mean, what's the point in putting in a tranny capable of handling 1000 ft-lbs of torque if it only needs to handle 500. All it does is cost more and hurt fuel economy. Hmmm, I missed that. Maybe we do get IFS? I haven't seen any pictures underneath yet. I would find it hard to believe they would do away with the hubs with the manual override on SFA. I was mostly referring to not having any revolutionary changes in the suspensions. Just updates to handle more load. Every truck I saw had a SFA, including the RWD F450 tow truck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Every truck I saw had a SFA, including the RWD F450 tow truck. Sadly, I figured as much. I knew the 350+ would have it, but was hoping for IFS in the F250. Maybe it will be an option and they just didn't show any yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Anyone across the new HD auto for the 6.2 and how much more tow rating it will have? Sounds to me like that combo in F250 could be very popular now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Sadly, I figured as much. I knew the 350+ would have it, but was hoping for IFS in the F250. Maybe it will be an option and they just didn't show any yet. Every truck there was an FX4 except for the chassis cab trucks and they all had SFA's. So we still don't know if the RWD F250 & F350 will have twin I beam IFS or something similar to the F150. The new super duty frame looks a lot like the F150's frame. So it wouldn't surprise me to see similar front suspension and possibly an 4x4 F250 with IFS as an option in the future. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Every truck there was an FX4 except for the chassis cab trucks and they all had SFA's. So we still don't know if the RWD F250 & F350 will have twin I beam IFS or something similar to the F150. The new super duty frame looks a lot like the F150's frame. So it wouldn't surprise me to see similar front suspension and possibly an 4x4 F250 with IFS as an option in the future. Gotta keep hope alive for an IFS 4x4 F250! I'm guessing the SD frame is likely just a beefed up version of the F150 frame with reinforcements added in a few special places. Oh, and RWD trucks don't matter to me. I only buy 4x4. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Fully boxed frame. That answers that question. I wonder how it differs from the F150 frame? For one thing, it'll be available with a longer wheelbase. They don't make a SuperCrew long box, but they sell quite a few SuperDuty Crew Cabs with 8' beds (and let me tell you, that's a big dang truck). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 For one thing, it'll be available with a longer wheelbase. They don't make a SuperCrew long box, but they sell quite a few SuperDuty Crew Cabs with 8' beds (and let me tell you, that's a big dang truck). Yeah, one of the guys who gave us a quote for driveway replacement was driving a SC 8' bed FX4 all jacked up. I asked him why he didn't get a bigger truck. Massive machine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Gotta keep hope alive for an IFS 4x4 F250! I'm guessing the SD frame is likely just a beefed up version of the F150 frame with reinforcements added in a few special places. Oh, and RWD trucks don't matter to me. I only buy 4x4. FMan I saw a link that had an exploded view of the SD frame- I'm sure there is no commonality of frames with 150. Looks like they are really building this thing as a true commercial chassis-very impressive. I'll try to find it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 (edited) Interesting--the Super Duty frame is fully boxed on the Pickup chassis, but only to the back of the cab on the Cab chassis (from there aft, it's open C channel). The Cab chassis frame looks like they're using a ladder frame aft of the cab. ETA: The Pickup Chassis frame page also specifically mentions the Twin-I-beam suspension. 2017 Super Duty pickup frame FINAL.pdf 2017-Super-Duty-chassis-cab-frame.pdf Edited September 25, 2015 by SoonerLS 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 The ladder frame makes it easier for upfitters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 The ladder frame makes it easier for upfitters. That's what the press release says. Well, it mentions upfitters, anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 (edited) Interesting--the Super Duty frame is fully boxed on the Pickup chassis, but only to the back of the cab on the Cab chassis (from there aft, it's open C channel). The Cab chassis frame looks like they're using a ladder frame aft of the cab. ETA: The Pickup Chassis frame page also specifically mentions the Twin-I-beam suspension. Ram and GM have used full boxed frames on their heavy duty pickups and combination boxed/C-channel frames on chassis-cabs for years. Woud have liked to see tubular cross members passing through the box section welded on both sides. VERY strong. A little concerned on the use of a E-coat on a boxed frame. Hope they can protect the inside of the box adequately. Toyota had problems here. Twin-I-Beam is ridiculous. That's a big reason why I will not buy one of these trucks, at least a 4X2. Overall an improvement for sure though. Edited September 25, 2015 by 7Mary3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 Any thoughts why they stuck with Twin I Beam? All I hear is complaints about it but admittedly don't know much about the details. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mackinaw Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 Any thoughts why they stuck with Twin I Beam? All I hear is complaints about it but admittedly don't know much about the details. What complaints? I'm not trying to be argumentative, just curious why some folks thinks it's bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 What complaints? I'm not trying to be argumentative, just curious why some folks thinks it's bad. Not you, I'm saying in general I hear a lot of negative comments regarding Twin-I-Beam. What is bad about it and if it really is bad, why do they continue to use it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 (edited) Not you, I'm saying in general I hear a lot of negative comments regarding Twin-I-Beam. What is bad about it and if it really is bad, why do they continue to use it? I've owned and driven many Ford trucks & vans either the twin I beam suspension. Personally, I'm a fan. For heavier duty applications, it's probably the best IFS option out there. The only problem with it, is that it's not good for 4WD applications. But, the 4x4 super duty uses a SFA, so that's not really an issue. Edited September 26, 2015 by NLPRacing 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 Typically, I see 12,000-15,000 mile tire life from a 4X2 F-250 vs. 20,000-25,000 miles on a comparable Silverado 4X2. 'Twin-I-Beam' has some serious geometry problems, there is a lot of lateral tread scuffing with suspension deflection, and it's more pronounced on the right side because the right beam is shorter. 'Twin-I-Beam' has a poor on-center feel and even with a lot of caster the steering wheel doesn't return well. Ford redesigned the steering linkage a few years ago, they got away from that long/short tie rod design with no idler arm(Haltenberger?) and went to an equal length tie rod setup with a center link and an idler arm (similar to GM and Ram IFS steering). It seemed to help a bit. At least the later 'Twin-I-Beam' is somewhat adjustable with eccentric sleeves on the ball joints. They seem to handle and wear tires better with a little toe-out and positive camber. In short, I think that 'Twin-I-Beam' rides O.K., but wears out tires fast and does not handle well, not as good as GM and Ram 4X2's. Road feel is poor and they can be fatiguing to drive because on many surfaces they need constant correction. I wish it was gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 (edited) Twin-I-Beam is durable and less troublesome than an "SLA" design that can handle similar loads. On Super-Duty, it is a fine choice....on 1/2 ton applications, it is thankfully gone as those trucks are more for light duty use and personal enjoyment and the SLA design more than meets those needs with minimal durability issues. Edited September 26, 2015 by twintornados Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 This is Ford lsitening to Super Duty buyer feed back and providing a balanced responce. Reduced weight, frame changes where needed, retention of rugged I-beam Front suspension. Around half of all Super Duty sales are the F250 and its's clear that Ford has made significant changes that affect this model, think those buyers are really going to take to this new truck, it basically gives them a lot of noticeable improvement compared to the existing F250 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 27, 2015 Share Posted September 27, 2015 Typically, I see 12,000-15,000 mile tire life from a 4X2 F-250 vs. 20,000-25,000 miles on a comparable Silverado 4X2. 'Twin-I-Beam' has some serious geometry problems, there is a lot of lateral tread scuffing with suspension deflection, and it's more pronounced on the right side because the right beam is shorter. 'Twin-I-Beam' has a poor on-center feel and even with a lot of caster the steering wheel doesn't return well. Ford redesigned the steering linkage a few years ago, they got away from that long/short tie rod design with no idler arm(Haltenberger?) and went to an equal length tie rod setup with a center link and an idler arm (similar to GM and Ram IFS steering). It seemed to help a bit. At least the later 'Twin-I-Beam' is somewhat adjustable with eccentric sleeves on the ball joints. They seem to handle and wear tires better with a little toe-out and positive camber. In short, I think that 'Twin-I-Beam' rides O.K., but wears out tires fast and does not handle well, not as good as GM and Ram 4X2's. Road feel is poor and they can be fatiguing to drive because on many surfaces they need constant correction. I wish it was gone. Wow, I got about 55k on the initial set of tires on my F250. It's a 4x4 wtih a SFA though. For my use, I would love an IFS F250. I only tow around 9-10k lbs, and only occasionally. The smoother ride, better handling, and more precise steering would be very welcome. I even get the occasional 'death wobble' on my truck, even though it is only in specific situations (a bump in the road in a right-hand turn), and it isn't horrible. Sounds like they have made improvements in this area, even though it is staying SFA. I can't wait to take one for a spin to see the improvements over mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted September 27, 2015 Share Posted September 27, 2015 (edited) Not a surprise, there is practically no camber change on a SFA! I wouldn't say it's any more durable than an SLA setup either. Radius arm bushings have always been an issue, and when they go you can really get some interesting steering issues due to excessive toe-out. Ford continues to use a non-greaseable plastic lined ball joint that can also wear prematurely, particularly if the truck has a diesel engine (more weight on the front axle). SLA does have more moving parts, no question. Edited September 27, 2015 by 7Mary3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 27, 2015 Share Posted September 27, 2015 Ball joints have always been a problem on the SD. I'm guessing I will be due soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted September 27, 2015 Share Posted September 27, 2015 It's an easy fix, when the OEM ball joints wear out, replace them with aftermarket ones. Most of the quality aftermarket ball joints have zerk fittings. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.