![](source/plugin/floweregg/images/flower.gif) 鲜花( 0) ![](source/plugin/floweregg/images/egg.gif) 鸡蛋( 0)
|
转贴一个, 给大伙提供点信息: BODY-ON-FRAME VS UNIBODY9 Q7 A. Z" G! }2 H3 ^
0 h6 Q" F+ i1 ^0 k! K; VA few things I would also add to what some have mentioned previously....! h7 e4 b- h7 a% [6 l1 w' |5 e6 F
& D5 O3 ~( N3 g' A1 ^ ]
BOF "Body on Frame"... Just imagine the whole body, seats, dashboard, benches, doors/roof, all just being pulled upwards, and placed on a frame which hs the mechanicals...shocks, engine, tires, etc.
9 p/ R1 {1 t3 R! V% B* F; U j+ a2 @6 o3 r' `0 C7 Y) ?
Unibody, it's a complete skeleton like most cars... currently there's only one passenger car which is "Body on Frame" that is the Ford Crown Victoria, Grand Marquis, Town Car. They are build on a frame, which is why they are popular with taxi fleets, police depts...you can throw one on a curb, and not think twice about it...you can't do that with an Impala or Magnum. So if your in a situation where you must HIT a vehicle, don't pick this, pick a Toyota or Kia. \$ i) }8 ?- y$ N) H; d1 ]
) g# M) _1 O! F4 b) B* T1 w6 uBut overall like anything else, they both have their advantages, and disadvantages. The truck is much more durable, specifically if the frame is open "C" channel, or fully boxed. A good example if the Ford F-150, it's totally boxed. Now the new Tundra, chose to go with an open "C" channel, which isn't really recommended for serious work, and as it is, it only got 4 stars in the governments crash testing days ago.; N6 c+ r. i% z" w3 x6 H
! e9 H5 @. c7 ~9 j+ a6 T1 zAlso, the tighter and solid the frame, the quieter and much more solid the shocks work. Less shake/flex in the body, just a much more durable and quieter product...which is why the F-150 leads in quietness and handling.1 ]) D' Y. n& O+ F1 P% D8 d
5 Z" z: w$ f+ b! k& s' qNow as comparison, take a Honda Ridgeline which is car based unibody, which supposedly Honda's news release tried alot of spin saying it's not a car platform, but I've disected the vehicle, and yes...it's an Oddysey with a few more structural members. What happens is, to get the vehicle to be a bit more rugged, the Unibody construction requires much more reinforcement...in turn, causing what otherwise would be a platform of a car that weights around 3000lbs, increase a good 1500lbs more and still, it's no where near as capable. Case in point, the towing/hauling capacity is almost carlike, reports of shock failures are pretty high, etc.
- u8 O1 ~. m! a- z) }1 j: h- |# `% }/ W0 z/ ^
Also, Body on Frame construction is cheaper to produce overall. Ford is making about $10-15K profit on each F-150, while the Ridgeline is not meeting sales expectations, requiring rebates and it's cheapest model is around $5-6K more than a regular BOF truck, not allowing Honda to post much of a profit to where they have been thinking of possibly discontinuing the vehicle in 2-3 years.+ g+ v- I5 o% Q
; X7 a' u, |! B) h* ~* f) YI'm going to give you a link, which compares the F-150 with many of the competitors and the video is pretty interesting, in small 2 minute video scenes, which describe the benefits of it's frame, how it compares to others...everything down to showing you what the frame is, what it looks like, the bolts used, etc. It's pretty interesting learn. |
|