I've heard this comment a few times about the Tacoma frames being weaker than the '84-'95 North American Hilux.

What actually makes them weaker? I looked at a Taco at the junkyard once and the frame appeared to be fully boxed like the one on mine. Thinner gauge metal used for the cross-section then?

 

They are not boxed all the way to the rear.

 

Hey Josh,

My frame isn't fully boxed to the rear-end either. There's like a 12" section on the back of the frame near the spare tire that's just a C-section on mine.

Maybe it's just the '84-'95 4X4 Hiluxes instead of the 2wd versions too.

 

The 4wd frames were fully boxed to within 3 or so inches of the end.

 

On a '96 std cab 4x4 4cyl. Tacoma The frame is only boxed under the cab, almost the entire length of the frame-rail under the bed is open on one side. We boxed it in on ours though. I am not sure about some other Tacomas, but I believe they are all this way. The older trucks (pre-Tacoma) were fully boxed however.

 

another angle...

 

fully boxed, extended and braced...

 

I think the real question pertains to is this in fact a problem? Sure it's not boxed, but if it ain't failing and ain't failing. It might not need to be boxed.

Does anyone know of the unboxed part of a Taco's frame failing?

Frank

 

I'm sure if you go to a salvage yard you'll find one or two pretty bent up.

 

True but the circumstances surrounding the bending would be left to speculate. I searched on Tacomaterritory but couldn't find any info on frames failing.

If it got rear ended or rolled a bunch of times, sure that might bend it good, but that's probably not the kind of failure that would say for sure it's frame is weak enough to really matter.

Frank

 

Yeah I know where you're coming from Frank. Maybe the old ones were over designed and heavier than they needed to be. The only Toyota truck frame I've seen fail was about 12 years old and it was a fatique crack that looked to me to have started at a factory weld and may have been propagating for years. It think we can say for sure that the new rack and pinion steering on the Tacos is weaker than it should be and is not as strong as the pretacos.

I think the move by Toyota to start using non-boxed frames is a step in the wrong direction. I hate the full-sized American pick-ups when they get off-road and a little crossed-up the frames flex so much that the bed is 1 or 2 inches out of line with the cab.

 

I'm figuring the older ones might have been overkill. Who knows, with fuel economy targets what they are I would not be surprised to see unnecessary metal being removed for the sake of weight savings.

On the up side, have looked under a 4th gen runner? I know it's not exactly the prettiest face but the rack is located in a position similar to the old styled steering, up and out of the way. I'm not sure if it is stronger, but it's location is better. Also, I believe Toyota went back to the fully boxed frame. Whether or not it was necessary we might never know but customer perception is important. Even Ford is on the fully boxed bandwagon.

The taco does have some legitimate shortcommings like the steering but I myself will hold judgment on the frame until I see some real world evidence either way.

Frank

 

i notice that when i articulate enough to pull a tire off the ground i have noticible bed twist, but my buddie with his '83 has none, so that non boxed rear on tacos makes a difference

 

Here is a Tacoma that had a bent frame. http://www.tankota.net/Misc/Bentframe/framebent.htm It seems like a really rare thing though.

 

The pics at the above link show that Toyota strengthened the Tacoma frame at the point where his older frame bent, so I guess they are acknowledging a problem. I agree though that sometimes flex can prevent breaking and actually be "stronger" so it's up in the air if a c-channel or boxed frame is stronger. I think it really depends on your application. We plan to launch our Tacoma up in the air and use large amounts of properly tuned suspension to cushion the landing (that's why we boxed it in) If we crash it will most likely be a high speed roll. Where as a crawler Tacoma might want that extra flex to prevent pulling the frame apart at the welds and if it rolls it will be at low speed.

 

You guys ever see the episode of Trucks! where they show the frame of a semi? They don't box the frames so that it can flex under load, thereby reducing the stress on the frame. If the frame is too stiff it will fail.

The old frames are definately stronger than the tacoma's, afterall, the older frames are a 1-ton frame. But, I'm not convinced that the tacoma frame is weak at all. 99% of the people, including off roaders aren't going to make if fail. They have been known to flex enough to make the bed hit the cab, but that's usually only if people jump them.

 

Yeah, I saw that episode of Trucks too. You would think the semi frames are boxed, but they're not for the reasons you stated.

 

my 99 tacoma reg cab 4x4 4cyl has the frame boxed on both sides all the way back to around the spare area.the only problems with toyota frames i have seen is older (late 80's early 90's) toyota's rusting through at the bend just fwd of the rear axle.

 

That's very interesting because the frame failed in the direction opposite what you'd expect. Typically frames fail by caving in where and the bed hits the cab. This was caused by a moment in the opposite direction. The only thing I can think of is all that stuff hanging way off the bed times the 4-5 feet from the rear bumpstop.

Just sitting there the static load is no big deal. However, you get into dynamic loads such as dune, jumps, whoops, dips, the dynamic loads can get really high really quick expecially when you bottom out the rear suspension. That frame could have seen a thousands of foot pounds of torque on it. The result is what you see there.

That said, if you don't have all that hanging off the back, you just aren't going to see that unique failure. In fact even if heavily over loaded, you are not going to get a failure like that. That truck's frame was used in a way it was not designed to be used. Good thing they stepped up and strengthened it though.

Frank

 

Well, I took a look at a couple of used Tacomas at the dealer the other day. Yep, sure enough the 2wd Tacos and Prerunners had C-section frames from the cab back. The 4wd PU's, I believe, have fully boxed frames to the point just before the spare tire carrier like the pre Tacoma 2wd Hilux. Also, the rear springs seemed to be alot softer than the ones on mine. When I pushed down on the rear bumpers of the 2wd Tacos and Prerunners, they went down pretty easily without too much effort. However, when I did the same thing to mine it was alot stiffer and took much more effort to push it down in the back.

I don't know about you, but I feel all Tacomas should have fully boxed frames under the bed like the previous Hiluxes. They're trucks after all. The frames should be overbuilt and strong. I'm certain this change on the Taco was purely a cost cutting measure on the part of Toyota.

Have you ever seen those older style Ford F150's pre '96? Whenever I see one it looks like it's bent in the middle. The bed is closer to the cab at the top than on the bottom. The cabs are straight and level, but the beds are tweaked up in the back at an angle. Yuck! LOL!

Sometimes when I get behind a 2wd '95+ Tacoma going over some rough railroad tracks, I can viually see the bed area twist from side to side relative to the front cab. On the other hand, the few times I get behind a pre-'95 Hilux PU, I really don't see as much movement of the bed, if at all, compared to the twisting I see on the later 2wd Tacomas. Has anyone else noticed this?