What actually CAUSED the famous, Toyota frame rust problem???

All over the web, after all of the discussions about the infamous "Toyota frame rust" problem, the one thing I've NEVER heard is...what actually caused the problem in the first place??? Was it simply that Toyota didn't coat the frame with enough undercoat material, or was the undercoat material, somehow, substandard, etc., etc., etc. Subsequently, what's DIFFERENT about the frames that are being provided by Toyota as replacements? Are they the very same frame, only brand new, and if you had a frame rust problem before you'll probably have it again? Ed

 

(lack of) Frame coating and salt I imagine.

 

X2

 

Allegedly it was poor steel manufacturing by dana

 

They probably didn't change anything. Just paid out a ton to toyota for replacements and said eff-it

 

So that "begs the question"...is there anything different (i.e., improved and the problem was solved?) about the frames that a lot of people have had replaced on their vehicles?

I'm probably O.K., because I live in California, but I wonder about a lot of y'all who live in the "salt-belt" states. Do you think you'll have the same problem all over again someday?

Ed

 

The thing that makes the most sense is that Dana was using steel that didn't have the right chemistry for resistance to rust perforation or painting. If the newer frames are made with the right steel there should be no more issues. I live in Canada and I just make sure to wash off the frame regularly. I might start using fluid film next year. That being said I know lots of people with ten year old trucks where the frame is fine so I'm hoping Toyota got it right this time.

 

Sub'd because also not one place on the internet does it state that they switched to better frames to prevent this issue from continuing. So it seems they are still using the same garbage rotting frames, even on my new 2015.

 

That's the same as the Tundra IRL with the 5.7 L and 4.10 rear end. I get ~18 mpg with my blower. There is something seriously wrong with your truck .

Thread hack over.

 

In my personal opinion it has to do with the longevity of the Tacoma's and no preventive maintenance. You don't see other trucks lasting as long as ours and any steel in a salty environment will rust out over time. You see guys in the salt belt with no rust on their frames from proper maintenance every fall and spring. Id be willing to bet the frames rusting out are never treated in the spring and are covered in salt for months at a time.

I think if the big three had trucks that lasted 10 or even 15+ years they would have bad frames as well if neglected. I don't thinks it's a Toyota problem it's a salt and lack of preventive maintenance but that's my 2c.

 

In addition to the purported sub-standard materials and processing Dana employed; the frames of earlier 2nd gens had large holes for salt and debris to enter into the front box section causing them to rust from the inside. At least now Toyota factory plugs these larger frame holes.

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]For rust prevention/treatment discussion and alternatives see:
http://www.tacomaworld.com/forum/2nd...on-thread.html [/FONT]

 

Two things caused the rust problem in my opinion, the combination of the poor steel and the boxed frame. There is something that most manufacturers put into the steel for a frame, not sure what it is, that makes it last. My old 71 chev was 40 years old when I sold it and the frame was fine and much stronger than almost any new frame out there. It also wasn't boxed, it was open along its full length and seemed to hold up quite well, still on the road. I haven't heard anything about Toyota changing the manufacturing process and a look at the newer trucks reaffirmed my decision to keep away from Toyotas after mine finally becomes to bad to fix.

 

From the pictures I have seen, it appears to be de-lamination. From my days in the Heat Treating business and ASM (American Society for Materials), this normally occurs from the combination of having many impurities in the material and poor practices in the rolling mill (such as speed, pressure, and temp). The combination causes layers of unstable material in the cross-section which readily allow for corrosion when an inadequate coating is applied. If I was sitting on one these frames I would use Rustoleum primer and top coat and add in some Penetrol into both to seal it up. Salt simply speeds the corrosion, as the water causes it; the salt adds a galvanic charge to speed things up.

 

Just FYI frame coating with a thick polymers, like Rhinolining or other products, is usually a bad idea. They tend to flake when rocks hit it and allow moisture underneath. That moisture gets trapped by the Rhinolining and causes the frame to rust faster than without the Rhinolining.

 

I have owned several vehicles over the years and never had to crawl under the damn thing to slosh a bucket around to coat this and coat that twice a year. Build the fucking thing right in the first place and the problem will go away. People saying Toyota is losing money on this and it's costing about 12,000 to do the frame swap. Toyota is not in the business of losing money.

 

100% agree. My frame is fine and I live in Canada, on the ocean. Salty roads and salty air.

 

I would agree that preventative maintenance does make a difference. But there is other brands out there just as old that don't have holes rotting through the frame and flaking like the Tacoma frames. And that's with zero maintenance. They're rusting, but still strong with no worries of causing a safety issue and needing replaced. I see them all the time around here.

 

I wonder how widespread the frame rust problem actually was. Dana paid Toyota $25 million in 2011 to settle the buyback and frame replacement campaigns for 1st gen Tacomas: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/12/retire-us-dana-idUSTRE70B7KZ20110112 Tacoma sales were about 150,000 per year, so about 1,500,000 1st gens sold total. Assuming the following hypothetical scenario:

• Toyota and Dana negotiated a 70/30 liability split - Toyota was 70% at fault and Dana 30% at fault (i.e. total cost of the campaign was around $85 million).
• Each buyback or frame replacement costs $8000.

Then 10600 trucks were either bought back or had the frame replaced – 0.7% of total.

 

I disagree. There arent nearly as many mid 90s-early 00s trucks out there from other manufacturers. You sure dont see many 90s rangers or dakotas around because they all fell apart. Even with all the Tacomas they crushed there are still more left than others, including full-size and cars.
The only car from the mid 90s I see more are accords, tegs and civics. How many 1997 Ford Escorts do you see out there? None.

Yes, toyota has frame problems but one of the reasons we see them is because those older toyotas are still around for people to see.

 

I never said there are as many. But they are out there. And the frames are in far better shape than ours without any maintenance . Everything else attached to that frame might have fallen apart or rusted, but it's still in good shape.