Unibodies suck

[drummer]

Why is it that the 05 is unibody? Im sure its cheaper but unibodies do not hold up to crashes as well as true frame cars. I always thought my stang was framed but I guess not.

 

[TomServo92]

Why is it that the 05 is unibody? Im sure its cheaper but unibodies do not hold up to crashes as well as true frame cars. I always thought my stang was framed but I guess not.

Mustangs have always been unibody going all the way back to the original 1964 model.

 

[Evil5oh]

The Mustang has been a uni-body car since day one in 1964. Unibodys are just as good, and alot lighter if built right.

A framed vehicle holds up much better as in amt. of visible damage yes, but for passanger saftey having a car that crumples in the right spots to absorb the impact is light years better.

 

[jmk97GT]

We've had this discussion before.

Most cars now are still unibodies.

The main reason they're still unibodies is that they're a lot lighter than true frames. They only put true frames on full size cars like Crown Vics. If you're that worried about it, just get some subframe connecters...not that big of a deal.

 

[351CJ]

We've had this discussion before.

Most cars now are still unibodies.

The main reason they're still unibodies is that they're a lot lighter than true frames. They only put true frames on full size cars like Crown Vics. If you're that worried about it, just get some subframe connecters...not that big of a deal.

There is no place to put sub-frame connectors on an '05 nor is there any need for them. The '05 floorpan has quasi frame rails that run the length of the floor pan from the front and rear suspension attachment points. The '05 unibody is 50% siffer in twisting and 30% stiffer in bending than a 99-04, which is far stiffer than a 99-04 with even the best sub-frame connectors welded on.

Unibody cars are actually stiffer than body on frame cars. As someone ponted out they are designed to crumple in specific places in an accident. The idea is to sacrifice the car to save the occupants.

 

[jmk97GT]

There is no place to put sub-frame connectors on an '05 nor is there any need for them. The '05 floorpan has quasi frame rails that run the length of the floor pan from the front and rear suspension attachment points. The '05 unibody is 50% siffer in twisting and 30% stiffer in bending than a 99-04, which is far stiffer than a 99-04 with even the best sub-frame connectors welded on.

Thanks, 351CJ, for the enlightenment. I did not know any of that

 

[Mr_K_Code65]

trivia question - what was the first production unibody car in the US?

 

[jmk97GT]

was it the corvair?

 

[dannygat]

this has to be the stupidest title ever "unibodys suck" you really no nothing about cars do you. Aside from Trucks can you name any car that is not unibody made in the last 20 years?

 

[drummer]

this has to be the stupidest title ever "unibodys suck" you really no nothing about cars do you. Aside from Trucks can you name any car that is not unibody made in the last 20 years?

BLAH BLAH BLAH I do da cha cha like a little girl. Dont be disrespectful please. I was just saying that I thought only compact cars were unibodied but I stand corrected as I have recently conducted research mmmk?

 

[jmk97GT]

research before post

 

[Mrgreen94gt]

name any car that is not unibody made in the last 20 years?

Crown Vic.

 

[Mr_K_Code65]

answer first unibody car was '34 chrysler airflow. but you all probably knew that already.

 

[RangerMan]

Aside from Trucks can you name any car that is not unibody made in the last 20 years?

Chevy Corvette

 

[Svtpilot]

... Aside from Trucks can you name any car that is not unibody made in the last 20 years?

Himm so that brings us back to 1984... The Chevy Caprice, Buick Roadmaster, Caddy Sedan Deville, the already mentioned Crown Vic and it's twin the Grand Marquis (which are still body on frame.) The Pontaic Grand Prix, Chevy Monte Carlo, Buick Regal and Olds Cutlass were all body on frame until 1986(or was it 87)