Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Hendrickson360

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

2,021 profile views
  1. Thank you very much for this information! So it's always 2.15x850x4.5mm. So the measurements are pretty much the exact same as they where back in 2011 right? Also the steel quality sems to be the same. As i reacall the rear end of the Chassis cap used to be ridicoulusly overdimensioned, something that seemed to be taken out of an modern day 6500. So yeah it's tough, but quite a bit below the Ford, in terms of dimensions and probably steel quality overall (50-80.000, and i guess the 80 will go for the crucial areas). I also do not agree to the flexing argument, since there a lot of heavy duty vehicles like the MAN KAT military trucks or offroad cranes, who take a lot more stress than any average semi and they still are holding up over deacades. A flexing frame is just easier to built, upfit and made rustproof, but if done right, a stiff frame has huge advantes.
  2. Obviously there are bigger Issues, especially in America, but i think its noteworthy, that people seem to care more about 10feet of torque or the nicest leather finish compaed to he basis of their truck, which is exactly that, a truck, so the backbone is actually way ore important compared to a usual car.
  3. Hm so i guess nobody got any exact data from the new frame? because "beefed up" can mean pretty much anything. I know i got a link years ago fro this page, where you could look into the exact gm-data, it's where i got the number sof the 2011 frame from. Sad that those informations are becoming rarer it seems, if you check australian truck pdfs, the measurements of the frame are always included, as is the max. axial mass itself, with tires and without.
  4. I remember the old Open-C-Frames which of course flexed a lot, as one could see on the 2011 flexing video, but this is a longt time ago.
  5. Well in the end it's about comparision, i hate not beeing able to compare things and i think the hardware below the truck is often overlooked compared to any details about mpg, torque etc. when of course any engine in any HD truck can roughly "handle" the same task
  6. ^Nobody got some data about the new frame? I guess concering the front suspension Ford will be the clear winner, the F-450 uses the same Dana 60 Super in the front and it seems to be good for 7000lbs, quite a bit more compared to the GM suspension. Kinda weird if you consider the amount of military trucks with IFS that can handle so much more front&rear.
  7. Yeah it used to be way easier to finde such specs! Sometimes it's weird what they tell you and what not. For example you can finde detailes frame specs for the Ford F-150 here (page 40): https://madocumentupload.marketingassociates.com/api/Document/GetFile?v1=4683289&v2=011019013950&v3=60&v4=df22a3ddc37761e236a00a4944187d08f5932f396a1ded2daa77b24a&v5=False But right next to it, for the super duty, where i'd say it's much more important, there is almost nothing but the yield strenght and the matierla, i got my measurements from an owner. Page 48: https://madocumentupload.marketingassociates.com/api/Document/GetFile?v1=4448972&v2=082218092022&v3=60&v4=3a356440177318e6661ce4291a1c606943fd66e39b5e8d79ceb4e67b&v5=False
  8. I checked the document again and you are correct, 50-80.000 on the Ford, straight 60k on the GM. I also agree on the variables, but a whole inch of height on the rails would be a big difference, if the measurements are still the same. A rail this much smaller would have to be of a quite superior material or feature much thicker metal in the key areas to make up for it.
  9. Hello, as far as i know Ford had the strongest frame since 2017 with a massive 240x90x4.7mm frame rail (9.45x3.5x0.18, measured under the hood) made out of 80.000PSI steel, besting the GM frame of 2011 which had 215x85x4.5 (8.45x3.3x0.17) made out of 60.000PSI steel. The GM chassis cap used to be much much stronger in the rear, but i dont know if that is still the case, of course it will flex a lot moe because of the open frame rail design.. Now did GM change the new frame to get equal with Ford? Does anybody has any numbers or documents bout the dimension and steel quality? Also i guess the Dana Super 60 in the front of the Ford is still a bit stronger yet more uncomfortable compared to the Independant Suspension i guess? it used to be in the past, but i dont know if that can still be said, since there are really strong independant suspensions out there. Marcus
  10. Well that's the thing, in case of the F-4-750's you can find detailed spec sheets and upfitter info anywhere. For a European that's really inconveniant. Ok so most likely a D70, but isnt the Super60 actually the stronger axle with just a less high rating?
  11. Hello, i feels kinda weird, that there is so little information about these trucks, since afaik they are already beeing sold? For example: There is gonna be a 8000lbs driven front axle - what kind of axle is that? This exceeds the standard Dana super 60 Level right? Also the tare weight of the trucks, a naked 55000 4x4 with a short wheelbase for example, would be an awesome truckbase for an offroad camper, but what is the actual weight? Greetings
  12. Does anyone know if the rear end of the 3500 chassis cab is still this extreme huge piece of metal? The number on the link above: http://www.gmfleetorderguide.com/NASApp/domestic/graytabcontroller.jsp?graytabtype=7&rpoid=36178&vehicleid=12793&section=oi_def are no longer there, so maybe something changed. I guess with this massive rear end and the solid front end, the Chassis Cab frame is probably as strong as a HMMWV-Frame. The rear axle would probably be stronger than the IRS on the Humvee, which leaves only the front suspension as a weakpoint, so maybe with some front upgrades you could built a narrower offroad vehicle from that beast, that could rival a humvee in strenght....
  13. Awesome to see Chevy back at this class! Also nice to see, that there will be a 4x4 version and also one with a straight front axle. Since Chevy was the first/only one to go IFS on their HD-Trucks, i would not have been surprised, if they kept this concept even in the 4/55000 department. Wondering what kind of chassis this one will have. The aforementioned Ford HD went fully boxed with a massive frame. Thiw could be difficult for commercial upfitters in this weight class, but would set the chevy aside from alle the competition. Because as far as i know, the ford and dodge 4/55000 are NOT fully boxed.
  14. Thank you! Well it looks like (page 97) the basi c-channel frame is 233x58mm, sadly the thickness is not mentioned. The middle Part got a huge reinforcement piece bolted on which is 303x73mm and there is even a number for the thickness, which is a quite impressive 7.6mm. Well i'm not a big fan of this frame doubling, a straight c-profile of 303x73x7.6mm for the entire truck would have been at least as strong and much less prone to rust.
  15. Hello! First: I know there is a special forum about these trucks here: http://3500hd.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=eveglrq6b84n3e6r947fqsvhq2& But it seems like you need to wait a quite long time until the admin reacts to a registration and even then there are quite few posts from this year so. What i like to know: Does anyone know the width of one of those nice C3500HD? Especially if they got equipped with a dana 70 front driven axle? As far as i know those 4x4 conversions had been quite popular on this truck and since it is a 15000lbs machine, the dana 70 would make sense. As far as i know, all the modern aged bigger trucks like the Kodiak or a Dodge 4500 are supposed to be quite a big larger. Also: Which kind of frame does this truck use? From what i've seen i guess it is an open c front to rear, but what are the dimensions? Are they closer to the modern aged commercial 3500 rear end or the older Kodiaks of the era? Greetings
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.