Ladder Frame vs. Monocoque - SUVphiles, Kanino Kayo?

**chronophile** · December 12th, 2003 08:52 PM

It's common knowledge that 99% of passenger vehicles are monocoque for economic and technological reasons as well - Cheap for mass production. Inherently good crash protection. Space efficient.

On the other hand, ladder frames. . . Well, many people think it has not much advantage anymore and that they typically produce a stiff ride and have poor torsional rigidity compared with monocoques.

Newer SUVs these days have migrated to the monocoque mold. Will the ladder frame SUV become extinct one of these days?

What about your own experiences over the years, mga peeps? From an offroad purist's (not me, I admit, hehehe) perspective, dapat bang manatiling ladder frame ang offroad-centric rigs (as opposed to soccer-mom-centric rides)?:D

**OTEP** · December 12th, 2003 09:22 PM

I like ladder frames. They're big, heavy and makes my rig squeak and rattle as I drive over road imperfections. :D

Yes, it has poorer torsial rigidity. Everytime I drive off-camber (diagonally opposed wheels both being compressed), I hear the body groan in agony. However, unlike other frames, a Pajero (GEN I and II) has a fully boxed frame (something that Ford will only put in its F150 during the coming 2004 model year) so it is still stiffer than most.

The main advantage of body on frame is in its natural ability to flex. It can sometimes mean the difference between getting out and getting stuck. There are situations when we run out of suspension travel and that little bit more we get due to flex can re-establish traction. On my Pajero, when a wheel is pushed in by the terrain, the chassis will also flex as evidenced by the bumper going out of alignment. It will stay out of alignment until I am back on flat ground. In a monocoque body (with very little flex), you risk having permanent damage by doing those antics (permanently misaligned doors, creased roof, etc.).

The ability to throw away the body and just use the frame is also a big help to DIY-ers and customizers building their rigs. Remember the AMC Hammer? It rides on a Patrol Platform. If the Patrol was monocoque, they could not use it for their product.

I don't think the ladder frame SUV will just die a natural death. As long as the market demands it, it will stay. As long as there is a third world, war zones and isolated places then the ladder frame will stay.

**KCboy** · December 12th, 2003 10:52 PM

very well said mr rivera!!!!!!

**OTEP** · December 12th, 2003 11:09 PM

Hehehehe. KCboy, ha. :D kala ko ba working ka ngayon? Bakit nasa Tsikot ka?

**OTEP** · December 12th, 2003 11:52 PM

Naalala ko sa Hi-Peak: We were flexing Phil G's Frontier so hard. Kapag naka-tire lift siya hindi napantay yung bed sa cab. Ngiwi na. Nasan na ba yung mga pictures nun?

**tebs** · December 13th, 2003 01:46 AM

eto ba yun otep?

**OTEP** · December 13th, 2003 01:51 AM

http://www.geocities.com/tebanman/pi...5.DSCF0115.jpg

Yup. hehehehe. Hindi na pantay yung guhit ng bed sa guhit ng cab. Astig.

**tebs** · December 13th, 2003 01:59 AM

sinilip ko pa nga muna sa mga pics ko sa computer e. astig talaga ang ladder frame.
pag nabulok ang body, gawing jeep! hehehe

**wiretap_md** · December 13th, 2003 02:09 AM

Suspension modifications are easier on a body-on-ladder type design. Plus, you could do a body lift as well...something which isn't possible on a monocoque.

**Jeepcruizerph** · December 13th, 2003 01:57 PM

mayroon po ba kayong drawing ng Monocoque body or picture

hindi ba mas nakakatakot pag nabangga to, kasi walang ladder frame to support?

**Ungas** · December 13th, 2003 02:20 PM

The Pajero GenIII is the perfect sample of monocoque design SUV. While the Pajero GenII is the chassis-ladder frame sample.

Pajero monocoque body

Pajero chassis

**mbt** · December 13th, 2003 05:18 PM

glenn,

generally mas matibay ang monocoque design kesa body-on-frame design... the whole body shell IS the support

**chronophile** · December 13th, 2003 05:51 PM

Interesting. Seems even offroaders are split between the two???

My two cents on this issue is that manufacturers that sell large SUV volumes are better off economically with monocoques. I mean, these large volumes never set foot on trails anyway, so Sir Otep's very valid concern, from an offroader's perspective, for flexing/traction of ladder frame designs most likely have no bearing on the market's buying decisions who are only buying SUV's for their sheer size/mass.

But for niche players like Land Rover, now that's another matter. But then again, even the new Range Rover is already monocoque. Hmmmmm. Wondering if the Defender is next.

**1.8T** · December 14th, 2003 02:49 AM

my 2001 suzuki grandvitara xl7 has the ladder frame and I'm happy with it.

**splerdu** · December 14th, 2003 03:30 AM

I think it's unlikely for the Defender to go monocoque... The biggest customer for it is the British military, and they want the vehicle to stay the same... On the other hand, most civilian buyers do want something that is more usable on-road, in which case they can opt for the Range Rover or the Discovery.

**kimpOy** · December 15th, 2003 09:40 AM

i want my off road rig to be ladder frame, solid live axle and coils on all four with cherrry on top thanks you.

**Ungas** · December 15th, 2003 09:50 AM

kimpOy::: You forgot to list your factory spec rear lockers. :D

Well, as most of my comrades agree... underpinnings of an LC80 and GQ Patrol will be enough for me. :D

**kimpOy** · December 15th, 2003 10:27 AM

UNGAS yun yung cherry on top, factory spec rear lockers.

**Ungas** · December 15th, 2003 10:32 AM

Ah okies... kala ko kasi si Cherry yung tinutukoy mong on top sa iyo. :bwahaha: :bwahaha: :bwahaha:

**pajerokid** · December 15th, 2003 11:01 AM

I like both simply because they both have advantages in certain situations.

The Largest Car Forum in the Philippines

Ladder Frame vs. Monocoque - SUVphiles, Kanino Kayo?

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

Hybrid View