oldblue05
PIN IT TO WIN IT!!!
makes my truck sound like a vespa
Let's talk Superduty. F-Superduty, that is!
- Thread starter austin
- Start date
fordf350dually
ih power
same here. and i got a 1 ton. but it will be no good for hauling when im done making her flexy 
there's no doubt, they are built freaking stout. your cab will be shredded at the 500k mile mark, intermediate steering shafts are eaten like candy, and the operator is peeing blood thanks to the buckboard ride.
what you do get if it's properly equipped with a ZF5, is a truck you can take into the backcountry, able to climb up the side of a mountain, stop on a dime no matter how steep the grade is, be loaded at gross and more all the time, all that and brings you back to tell the computerized trucks all about your adventure for the day.
one more thing about missing cupholders, you won't need them. drinks in the truck are a no-no if you don't like to wear yourdrink as you're bouncing down the road.
GOOSE
Happy IDI'er
I remember GM using add on frame supports on their HD versions of this class truck. Am I correct in saying that Ford did not? The F-superduty is a frame specifically designed and built for that truck, right?
pennsylvaniabo
Full Access Member
I believe you are correct goose.
oldblue05
PIN IT TO WIN IT!!!
I'll agree with anything makin gm look bad haha
GM HD3500's frames had a nasty habit of breaking in two just rear of the cab.
that's what got me into my first F450. dimensionally, the frames between the F350 and F450 is the same. but the thickness of the frames is different.
it's different enough that the RBM(resistance bending movement) numbers is significantly higher on the f450 vs. the f350. that is quantified in the "truck bodybuilder handbook" that is sold to body upfitters so they can calculate the strengths on the frames they mount vocational equipment onto.
that's what got me into my first F450. dimensionally, the frames between the F350 and F450 is the same. but the thickness of the frames is different.
it's different enough that the RBM(resistance bending movement) numbers is significantly higher on the f450 vs. the f350. that is quantified in the "truck bodybuilder handbook" that is sold to body upfitters so they can calculate the strengths on the frames they mount vocational equipment onto.
GOOSE
Happy IDI'er
there's no doubt, they are built freaking stout. your cab will be shredded at the 500k mile mark, intermediate steering shafts are eaten like candy, and the operator is peeing blood thanks to the buckboard ride.
I'm guessing these are based on expierence
MidnightBlade
Shiftin' Smooth
And now the new "Superduty's" are about as heavy duty as a 78 F-150
No bed, no load, 2wd, and dry to boot. I've got pictures of the rear diff, if I can find them. The old school SuperDuty was built hell for stout. 4 wheel disk, hydroboost, and 4.63 gears.
Here's a crappy pic of the truck.
You must be registered for see images attach
t...and the operator is peeing blood thanks to the buckboard ride.
Come now towcat, you get that weight up a little north of 20,000 and they ride kinda nice...
P.S. We cheated, once all was said and done ours weighed 15k or 16k + every time it hit the road.
890k/mi logbook miles worth of experience.
1 truck bought in jun 1993, prior service history unknown. was a sokal AAA truck. roughly 150k/mi reported. start new logbook. Total parts replaced....
2 front bumpers, 1 valance panel, 1 front clip, 1 cab, 2 motors, 5 clutches, three transmissions, 1 front axle, and 4 brake jobs(pad and rotor replacement). Still original.... leaf springs, frame, Century 17.5ft alum carrier bed, Dana 80 rear.
Consumables....LOF's, bench seats, wiring harness(complete)batteries and alternators.
i'll agree with you about the nice(r) ride when grossing way heavy.
Diesel_brad
Dunce
This 96 F-superduty weighed in at 7,ooo. PSD 5spd 161" W.B. 10' steel body w wood floor
You must be registered for see images attach
their downfall.........2wd only.
DRW sucks for traction compared to SRW,i dunno how people used the giant sinking ships on wet grass,let alone a little mud or snow that makes mine sit and not even think about moving forward without locking the hubs in.a feller would need a hydraulic winch on 'em for anything but pavement use,that's for sure.
DRW sucks for traction compared to SRW,i dunno how people used the giant sinking ships on wet grass,let alone a little mud or snow that makes mine sit and not even think about moving forward without locking the hubs in.a feller would need a hydraulic winch on 'em for anything but pavement use,that's for sure.
Similar threads
