Why can't university professors have this level of detail and clarity in their lectures? To stare at a white board for a youtube video and not lose interest is freaking awesome stuff
one thing is...you watching this video means you interest in this topic and you search of this video means that you actually want to learn what it is...meanwhile during university most of the student actually doesnt really care about studying..and they doesnt really interest to learn those stuff their professor teaching..but i cant deny some professors really has bad teaching methods..but most of the time its student fault...just tell me when you going to university just how many that actually really care to study? maybe less than 10% in the class...the other 90% they just wandering around in their head what to do next or what to go on date or whatever
@@slyztercoreveanged3175 Disagree completely. You have no idea what you're talking about.. There were some modules during my engineering studies which were boring a/f due to the way it was taught with no real world relevance or examples shown in class or practical experiments to put theories to the test. Now, 10 years after graduating, I'm revisiting all those modules one by one on youtube and I'm super interested and absolutely annoyed at the fact that most of the tutors/profs I was taught by had absolutely no business being there. I hope to god these yt videos have resulted teachers upping their game..
Professors are Professors because they can't cut it in real life. They are part of the bloated, entitled, overpaid money making bureaucracy known as universities.
@@emrage 10 years ago there weren't nearly as many "self taught" intellectuals, so the people who were qualified to teach a subject were very serious people simply due to the nature of the pursuit of knowledge years ago. 10 years ago, if someone was 40 years old, that means they were born in the early 70s, so they lived for about 30 years before the internet really took hold, and they had go get all of their knowledge from very serious sources, and so likewise they taught in a very serious way. Now that knowledge is freely available to anyone and everyone, we have lots of charismatics like EE who can break subjects down into everyman's terms, because there is demand for that. But make no mistake, if it weren't for people like your "boring" university professors, EE wouldn't have a platform in the first place, because as far as I understand, he hasn't founded any new schools of thought or shed light onto some new area of the physical properties of the universe, he simply repackages the work of more "boring" people as entertainment. Further, you received a college education in engineering, one course at a time. I doubt you could find one UA-camr that has released a string of videos that could replace a semester of college, in a similar amount of time
The benefit to body on frame over Unibody off road is that the body doesn't flex. Lots of people off road unibody xj's and they eventually wind up with doors and hatches that can't open or close because the unibody has distorted from the off road abuse. Whereas a body in frame vehicle usually doesn't have this issue.
+Joe Schigel This one comment answers my confusion about why vehicular aficionados demand that their big trucks (Explorer, pickups, etc) be body on frame if they go off-road. I never could figure out why BOF was so much better, but this makes perfect sense. Thanks.
FYI, the only benefits now for body on frame are the ability to customize the body (ie cab configurations, bed, flat bed, box), and its cheaper to manufacture. Companies don't want you to know that though so they can continue making huge profit margins - currently averaging about $10k per truck.
***** Me hate GM? lol. I'm more of a fan boy than anything. That doesn't mean I can't point out that people buy vehicles for the wrong reasons. Its estimated that 90% of Ford's GLOBAL PROFITS come from F-series sales in the US alone. Ford makes $13,000 in profit with every F-150 they sell.
I don't usually leave a comment so I just wanted to say that I love your entire catalog of videos. They are always very informative and to the point. No wasting time with intros or outros, I know that if I watch a 5 min video from you that I'm going to get 5 minutes worth of information. Keep up the great work!
If a unibody vehicle gets into a terminal collision, the majority of the body becomes scrap metal. With body-on-frame, most of the body can be salvaged and used for repairs. Other advantages are the ability to remove and replace panels, whether for modification or repair, and lower end-consumer costs in the long-term.
Car's job is not to be the best at surviving a terminal collision. A car's job is to make the *OCCUPANTS* inside of the car survive a terminal collision. So a unibody is way superior than body on frame in this regard.
@@angrysocialjusticewarrior In actual crash tests, the difference is negligible. A body-on-frame design from the 80s is pretty comparable to contemporary unibody in terms of safety. But the car won't crumple like tin foil if you bump into something. I could literally make origami out of the "fenders" on my Nissan. The only reason they exist is to make the car less ugly. Meanwhile the same type of collision that caused me to replace half the front end on that was repaired with dish soap on the Panther body. As far as I'm concerned, it's an excuse to increase profit and force repairs by making your car out of tin foil and plastic.
+Engineering Explained Great video and explanation as always, keep it going. The drawing is good too, but you can improve it even more. Remeber to keep lines parallel - front to back, left to right, window to window etc. It makes for a perfect drawing. The unibody drawing is perfect though!
nice video, as an avid "offroader" id like to point out a few advantages that a framed vehicle has. 1: you really cannot have too much articulation when tackling obstacles, frame flex can give you the little bit of extra flex you need. 2: a unibody will flex as well, and when it happens it will flex things like the doors and panels that have glass in them and it will damage the body instead of just the frame. 3: its a lot easier to attach bumpers rock sliders and roll cages to a solid steel frame.
Great comment... I'm in the market for a vehicle but don't need to off road it.. do need space and occasional all wheel drive. I'll get a Bronco when I'm rich and a Bronco sport for now. If I have extra money I'll get a dirt bike
Have you ever done a video on what to look for when buying a car? I love to understand how the insides of cars work but a high level explanation going over the things to consider when buying a car would be awesome.
This video answered a lot of questions for me. In the past, I needed a large pickup truck capable of going off road. Now, I'm retiring and downsizing, and won't even be driving on an unpaved surface. I still; however, would like to be able to carry in my vehicle more than just a few bags of groceries. A new small truck will be out soon that checks off a lot of boxes for me on a unibody frame. This video helped with my decision. Thank you for this informative presentation.
Body on frame is cost effective, for example 1991-96 Caprice body was sitting on a frame from 1977...The new BMW i3 is body on frame...in a totally modern way but the idea is still the same.
+Kobbetop with the body on frame, they could house the weight of the battery, use an extremely lightweight body and maintain a low weight, and have an isolated driving experience.
The isolation with body on frame is useful with heavy duty towing, hauling, or serious off-roading situations. Any situation that could cause a lot of flexion in the vehicle will create problems with unibody vehicles. Windows crack, body panels warp, and doors won't open/close when too much flexion is put on a unibody design. Of course this is only applicable in serious situations.
Thank you for this! I'm reading about the differences in a book but the illustrations are so unclear. 5 seconds into your video and I immediately saw the difference.
Pull a 70 Chenille sitting for decades out of field vs a Camaro and see which once is the better restoration candidate. Most vintage unibody cars from the muscle car era that have been neglected are usually in pretty bad shape.
The advantage of a body on frame design for trucks and large SUV's, is of course for towing and a higher payload for trucks, because the stresses are not applied to the body, only the frame. Also for 4x4's, a frame gives strong mounting points for the suspension, especially on the front, where all real body on frame trucks and SUV's with independent suspension, have the upper control arm attached to the frame as well. Unibodies that have an upper control arm, have it attached to the thinner metal of the unibody. Most unibody 4x4's, as well as the Honda Ridgeline have a less durable MacPherson strut, instead of an upper control arm that is attached directly to the unibody.
another disadvantage of unibody is that if they want to make the frame more rigid for offroading, they will make the frame pillars much more thick, the new models range rover vogue have really big pillars that you won't notice from outside.. as a result the windows are small and obscure visibility also that pillar will take more space inside the car..
Body on frame mpv, is surely durable. Like my toyota Innova, really tough for a super rough daily route from home - office - home. I agree of what you said, "Depends of how you engineer it".
The last Chrysler Imperials (1964-1966) before the move to unit construction were such tough motherfuckers, still banned from demolition derbies to this day.
Good vid. answered some of my questions. I used to hate unibody (rust can destroy the vehicle since the unibody provides structural integrity whereas rust on the frame can be repaired much easier). Had to junk a car just because of rust on the floor pan...not happy. I don't necessarily hate unibody anymore but, still, I don't like having to buy cars because of BS like floor pan rust.
I'm still giving the win for off-road use to body-on-frame vehicles. If you're building a 4x4, the body can be drastically altered to accommodate larger tires/more suspension travel without affecting structural integrity of the vehicle itself. In addition, because the frame is easy to access and rigid, you have much more freedom in mounting new suspension components, whereas you're limited to the factory hard points with a unibody.
people generally like body on frame better for off-road because they usually have less frame flex or it can be easily taken out and it also also for more suspension mounting points. for example if you were to install a long arm kit you would be able to easily put new mounts on a frame rather than a unibody.
One thing I find is that getting a jack under a body on frame is just way easier so it allows a garage repair that is safer in that I have nice easy sturdy places to place jack stands and jacks. This lowers repair cost by DIYs.
Coming to this vid from the far future helped me understand why I shouldn’t care about how there’s so many “truck guys” sh*tting on unibody Trucks since the only advantages in a BOF are on things I’ll never use and the advantage in better crash performance of Unibody for occupant safety more than makes up for a possibly slightly lower towing capacity (that I generally don’t need to pay attention to anyhow) and off road performance if I randomly find myself teleported to the wilderness in a truck I plan to use for working.
The 4runner is a perfect example of why BOF is just a better design for longevity, as well as expense to repair. We had a trailer tire fly off the highway and hit a Mazda CX-9 between the B and C pillar, because of that a 40k dollar car will likely be unrepairable because not only did you lose the roof and the door but now the entire vehicle is structurally unsound aside from the subframes and suspension. BOF can have a body swap and potentially avoid a catastrophe like that.
the biggest advantages to off roading is the duality of a body on frame. typical after lots of rock crawling unibodys twist and the doors wont shut. also the ability to add a "body lift" basically put taller spacers between the chassis and body to allow more tire clearance
I'm restoring a unibody car and if I ever do it again it will be a frame car. Bizarre shapes and everything is connected. so it makes it a HUGE pain to replace and repair.
I think what they mean when they say body on frame or cab chassis as its called in Australia being better off-road is that the vehicles will generally be built with a suspension layout that is a lot more capable in an off-road environment such as solid axle type suspension where as a monobody or monocoque set up will normally have independent suspension which is hopeless in comparison
Can't wait to hear you following up this video with the new Cybertruck and all of its engineering advantages. Definitely a truck that went fully after function over form.
hi Jason, I think you may also include that its popular with Hot Rodders since you can pull a desired body off a standard chassis and drop it onto a specially built racing chassis. This could be useful for a car with a rusty chassis i.e. can be easily swapped thus saving the body - environmentally friendly ;) Also, the modular design of the frame and body allows the car to essentially be built parallel in 2 sections hence the body can be painted, interior and wiring fitted whilst the suspension and drivetrain are being installed onto the frame - the 2 sections ultimately being married at the end of the line thus speeding up production. I know this method is now used during the assembly of modern unibody/monocoque cars now but I believe it started with the body-on-frame cars. thanks for the video! +Engineering Explained
First time I am learning about their difference thank you! One nooby question.. doesnt the lower centre of gravity due to weight being at the bottom of the body on frame mean its less likely to flip when off roading?
Cool. I got to this site looking for to see if I should use stabilizing bars on a unibody frame. I got my answer by pulling together info from a few sites: it depends on the weight. In my case, I will be pulling an 1800 lb trailer and my Model X weighs 5000 lbs, so it is not a good idea as it could bend the frame. Great details. Liked and subscribed!
Where do car's like the classic VW Beetle fit in, they have a body that separates from the chassis, but it is not a frame. It's transmission tunnel provides the strength of the car, made more rigid by the sills/heater channels when the body is attached. This design seems to fall between the unibody and body on frame designs and is light weight too
You mention durability, but just relate it to off-road performance or towing. There's another consideration; damage from an accident, as mentioned below. The beauty of having a body-on-frame and a very durable frame is that in many cases, a truck can be driven away from an accident, rather than having to be towed. Though the collision testing does not very this, I chose to put my family into a body-on-frame vehicle because they could take a substantial hit and come out just fine. This has been proven out in our case several times. Our old SUV is battered, but it still keeps on going and has always been able to drive away from accidents. Once the crumple zone on a uni-body has crunched, you are pretty much out-of-luck. You will survive, but your car won't.
What about the criticims of unibody that they are harder to repair if there is rust damage and they dont last as long ? And if you want to lower a body on frame vehicle does that make it less likely to roll over in a crash with a new lower center of gravity, ,and can it be done in a way that does not harm it's towing and off road abilities ?
In towing and heavy cargo u need 2 have flex or the frame wilk snap, thats why unibody r not used for heavy duty use, it is 2 stiff for that and will breack, if u see a 18 wheeler when it takes of hard u will see it flex, this helps distribute the load and desipate the impact, hope i could help, it is just another benifit so people could untherstand why it is used pick ups and truck, sorry about my english it is not my first language.
A couple of days ago I drove over a significant transverse "bump" on the road (more like a slightly smoother speed hump) at about 40mph. As far as I remember, the suspension didn't bottom out and I didn't hit anything with the frame, but I'm still concerned about the body flexing under the stress. We're talking about a unibody hatchback here (new Mazda3). Is my fear justified or is my OCD getting the better of me?
Not sure if you check comments in older videos like this, but what would you call the system VW used on their air-cooled cars? It's not a unibody, but it's also not a body-in-frame. A body-on floorpan, perhaps?
Engineering Explained Secrets - Revealed: This was filmed the same day as the suspension spring video, hence the involuntary popped collar. The little frat bro on my shoulder wouldn't let it fold down. I'm as embarrassed as you are. ua-cam.com/video/hGZRairqHNI/v-deo.html
+Engineering Explained Would you be able to do a video on the requirements for turning a late-model car/sedan into an off-road vehicle? Discussions on chassis-swap vs. suspension upgrade vs. custom chassis fabrication etc. As an example - I have a 2007 Charger R/T that will be undergoing a chassis swap with a truck shortly. Think, modern (streetable) version of the FastFurious7 off-road charger.
+Engineering Explained Body on frame is better than unibody for towing in the long run, as the stresses run through the frame rather than the body, no matter how strong you make a unibody, its still got that fundamental design issue. Also for off-roading, it is an advantage to have a frame, as it can flex like you said, but not primarily for articulation, but rather to bend so that the body doesnt have to. Try opening the door on a unibody when its on an axle twister, quite often some doors wont be able to open even on brand new cars. Its better in the long run. Maybe you can prove me wrong! :)
+Engineering Explained I wonder where and if they differ in regards to safety. Everything being equal, my mind tells me that unibody is supposed to be safer, but i would welcome the views of other people.
It's hard to save a Unibody vehicle in the Rust Belt....... Once you get rust damage it just spreads . With a Frame you can do repairs . Or replace Body or Frame. Yes people save and Restore things. Rarely unibody.
What if you got in an accident with a Unibody Vehicle, even if your not at fault? Your screwed. The entire structure has been compromised and the car instantly becomes a right off.
What about safety during a bad collision? Will the un crumble and absorb more force (making it safer) than a body on frame (which is so good at being sturdy that it will transfer the impact of the collision to the vehicle occupants)?
It really depends on the car some modern body on frames utilise some crumple zones thru use of welds that are designed to break away on a impact but unfortunately a unibody will perform generally better In a crash as the car is basically a roll cage but the force won’t be transferred thru to occupants normally to the other end of the frame but a lot of advances in body on frame has been made in 20 years it really depends one thing to note is how unibody by design will divert the impact around you.
I was looking at an F-53 chassis. And I can not understand how a Pace Arrow body can attach since it is so much wider. So I'm thinking a Frame is not the same as a chassis. And that there is a frame that connects to the F-53 chassis that the rest of the RV body connects onto. Is my logic sound?
the reason why the body on frame idea was first used...its because most manufacturers tought of it on trucks and suv thats the main reason otherwise there was no point for them to put a sedan or coupe body over a separate frame just think of that.
Towing should be in the advantages section of frame-on. Sure.. you "could" have a unibody built at the same weight that would allow it to be equal, but nobody does that. Frame-on is generally always better for towing.
That is the first time I've seen a pickup with the cab connected to the rear box. Don't pickups have the front bumper connected to the frame and the rear connected to the box with the tow bar connected to the frame?
Hello Sir, My 2001 Corolla is all rusted in bottom. Canada as you know. I want to change the bottom frame only. As it is unibody frame, can i change the bottom frame? Please guide as the engine is butter, and i don't wanna scrap such a good engine.
I'm a bit surprised you didn't mention that unibody vehicles can also be safer. Crash tests have shown a consistent improvement in safety in a unibody compared to a body on frame vehicle. This isn't to say that all body-on-frame vehicles are unsafe, it's just something to point out that the body on a body-on-frame doesn't need the same structural integrity as a unibody to support itself, hence the body being an "afterthought" for crashworthiness. Of course, today's trucks and other body-on-frame vehicles are becoming as safe as unibody vehicles due to stricter regulations and more-advanced crash testing.
This guy is explaining it as if the build is always done like this. Its not. Car CEOS force the engineers to save AS MUCH cost as possible....so they make the unibody SSUUPPPEERRR thin and CHEAP metal that lasts 5 to 8 YEARS before rust forces major repairs. No space to work on them urself so it makes mechanics happy. Older trucks like 95 and lower had a competition on whos truck was more amazing so they made everything to LAST LONG, from 70s to 90s the quality goes down and cheaper parts go in. NOW days the car corps have ZERO competition and are all inagreement on the format: Build, UPSELL, fix, recycle, so they can be as cheap as they want to. So you want somethin that will stick around, go older.
I have seen crash tests where a cement truck is run into various vehicles. The unibody gets smooshed in all but the largest unibody SUVs. Body on frame seemed to perform WAY better. I'm not sure about side collisions though. In that test a F-350 was nuts how good it withstood that impact.
So if unibody hit by Suv and truck at high speed, the driver in the unibody will take more of the impact? And is the unibody as safe after a repair to rear panel and frame stretching, etc.
what do you think about the crash / safety data of unibody vs BOF? I suspect the conclusions are skewed to make BOF worst because 1) govt wants better mpg vehicles 2) if BOF offers better crash protection, then the "other" crash vehicle with unibody design would have more injuries/fatalities ? what are your thoughts?
You’ll never understand the beauty of unibody until you’ve seen someone drifting a body in frame vehicle, and the body literally separating from the frame entirely, sending the driver and body skidding away LOL
I really like your videos ... But Dude you seriously have to remake this one... There is no way in HELL a uni-body vehicle is "stiffer" than that of a vehicle with a frame! (unless your playing with words and trying to say a uni-body is stiffer than the body of a framed car without the frame then yes, sure I guess you could make that statement.) Uni-bodies twist and that's what makes them less effective as dragsters. Not to mention the weak transfer of weight to the rear wheels which come not having a frame. When GM was making their first front wheel drive vehicle they took out the bump for the transmission and the Damn thing folded in half when the first ones rolled off the line... I remember dad laughing when he came home from work that day. Uni-bodies are better in crashes and that's what lead to crumple zones. No one set out to design crumple zones they discovered them when they started using the Uni-bodies. Heck you didn't even mention that! Also while I'm on my soap box ... Any car company that tells you they "pioneered" crumple zones is lying out their exhaust.
Why can't university professors have this level of detail and clarity in their lectures? To stare at a white board for a youtube video and not lose interest is freaking awesome stuff
one thing is...you watching this video means you interest in this topic and you search of this video means that you actually want to learn what it is...meanwhile during university most of the student actually doesnt really care about studying..and they doesnt really interest to learn those stuff their professor teaching..but i cant deny some professors really has bad teaching methods..but most of the time its student fault...just tell me when you going to university just how many that actually really care to study? maybe less than 10% in the class...the other 90% they just wandering around in their head what to do next or what to go on date or whatever
@@slyztercoreveanged3175 Disagree completely. You have no idea what you're talking about.. There were some modules during my engineering studies which were boring a/f due to the way it was taught with no real world relevance or examples shown in class or practical experiments to put theories to the test.
Now, 10 years after graduating, I'm revisiting all those modules one by one on youtube and I'm super interested and absolutely annoyed at the fact that most of the tutors/profs I was taught by had absolutely no business being there.
I hope to god these yt videos have resulted teachers upping their game..
because they want u to fail
Professors are Professors because they can't cut it in real life. They are part of the bloated, entitled, overpaid money making bureaucracy known as universities.
@@emrage 10 years ago there weren't nearly as many "self taught" intellectuals, so the people who were qualified to teach a subject were very serious people simply due to the nature of the pursuit of knowledge years ago. 10 years ago, if someone was 40 years old, that means they were born in the early 70s, so they lived for about 30 years before the internet really took hold, and they had go get all of their knowledge from very serious sources, and so likewise they taught in a very serious way.
Now that knowledge is freely available to anyone and everyone, we have lots of charismatics like EE who can break subjects down into everyman's terms, because there is demand for that.
But make no mistake, if it weren't for people like your "boring" university professors, EE wouldn't have a platform in the first place, because as far as I understand, he hasn't founded any new schools of thought or shed light onto some new area of the physical properties of the universe, he simply repackages the work of more "boring" people as entertainment.
Further, you received a college education in engineering, one course at a time.
I doubt you could find one UA-camr that has released a string of videos that could replace a semester of college, in a similar amount of time
The benefit to body on frame over Unibody off road is that the body doesn't flex. Lots of people off road unibody xj's and they eventually wind up with doors and hatches that can't open or close because the unibody has distorted from the off road abuse. Whereas a body in frame vehicle usually doesn't have this issue.
+Joe Schigel This one comment answers my confusion about why vehicular aficionados demand that their big trucks (Explorer, pickups, etc) be body on frame if they go off-road. I never could figure out why BOF was so much better, but this makes perfect sense. Thanks.
+Joe Schigel That's comparing much older technology. As explained in the video, a modern unibody is far more resistant to flexing than body on frame.
Yeah I was wondering about this very topic as well!
FYI, the only benefits now for body on frame are the ability to customize the body (ie cab configurations, bed, flat bed, box), and its cheaper to manufacture. Companies don't want you to know that though so they can continue making huge profit margins - currently averaging about $10k per truck.
***** Me hate GM? lol. I'm more of a fan boy than anything. That doesn't mean I can't point out that people buy vehicles for the wrong reasons.
Its estimated that 90% of Ford's GLOBAL PROFITS come from F-series sales in the US alone. Ford makes $13,000 in profit with every F-150 they sell.
I don't usually leave a comment so I just wanted to say that I love your entire catalog of videos. They are always very informative and to the point. No wasting time with intros or outros, I know that if I watch a 5 min video from you that I'm going to get 5 minutes worth of information.
Keep up the great work!
+avsrule247 Thanks, happy to hear it! :)
If a unibody vehicle gets into a terminal collision, the majority of the body becomes scrap metal. With body-on-frame, most of the body can be salvaged and used for repairs. Other advantages are the ability to remove and replace panels, whether for modification or repair, and lower end-consumer costs in the long-term.
wow thats informative...thanks man:)
Car's job is not to be the best at surviving a terminal collision. A car's job is to make the *OCCUPANTS* inside of the car survive a terminal collision.
So a unibody is way superior than body on frame in this regard.
@@angrysocialjusticewarrior In actual crash tests, the difference is negligible. A body-on-frame design from the 80s is pretty comparable to contemporary unibody in terms of safety. But the car won't crumple like tin foil if you bump into something.
I could literally make origami out of the "fenders" on my Nissan. The only reason they exist is to make the car less ugly. Meanwhile the same type of collision that caused me to replace half the front end on that was repaired with dish soap on the Panther body.
As far as I'm concerned, it's an excuse to increase profit and force repairs by making your car out of tin foil and plastic.
@@angrysocialjusticewarrior no this is actually a scam by car manufacturers. they just want you to buy new cars
THanks man
Drawings 10/10 - would watch again! As always, great video!! :)
+MrandMrsHayday Means a lot, spent days perfecting the truck bed.
+Engineering Explained Great video and explanation as always, keep it going. The drawing is good too, but you can improve it even more. Remeber to keep lines parallel - front to back, left to right, window to window etc. It makes for a perfect drawing. The unibody drawing is perfect though!
nice video, as an avid "offroader" id like to point out a few advantages that a framed vehicle has.
1: you really cannot have too much articulation when tackling obstacles, frame flex can give you the little bit of extra flex you need.
2: a unibody will flex as well, and when it happens it will flex things like the doors and panels that have glass in them and it will damage the body instead of just the frame.
3: its a lot easier to attach bumpers rock sliders and roll cages to a solid steel frame.
Yup, frame flex is not a bad thing if designed for (like the gap between cab and bed on a tradition pickup).
Great comment... I'm in the market for a vehicle but don't need to off road it.. do need space and occasional all wheel drive. I'll get a Bronco when I'm rich and a Bronco sport for now. If I have extra money I'll get a dirt bike
in lots of cases when flex on unibody does happens probably you'll not be able to close the doors.
Have you ever done a video on what to look for when buying a car? I love to understand how the insides of cars work but a high level explanation going over the things to consider when buying a car would be awesome.
i got a trd pro 4runner body on frame. pretty accurate. quiet ride very smooth but has very extensive offroad capabilities. great video.
Thanks Jason. I honestly don't know where else I'd find well organized informational videos that get so much across in such a short amount of time.
Just the video I needed to see before choosing a car/SUV. Remarkable clarity.
This is first time watching Engineering Explained 10/12/24
Detailed explanation!! I couldn't choose any one, cause both have their disadvantages and advantages.
This video answered a lot of questions for me. In the past, I needed a large pickup truck capable of going off road. Now, I'm retiring and downsizing, and won't even be driving on an unpaved surface. I still; however, would like to be able to carry in my vehicle more than just a few bags of groceries. A new small truck will be out soon that checks off a lot of boxes for me on a unibody frame. This video helped with my decision. Thank you for this informative presentation.
Body on frame is cost effective, for example 1991-96 Caprice body was sitting on a frame from 1977...The new BMW i3 is body on frame...in a totally modern way but the idea is still the same.
+Kobbetop with the body on frame, they could house the weight of the battery, use an extremely lightweight body and maintain a low weight, and have an isolated driving experience.
ChinnuWoW vics were out of production in 2011
ChinnuWoW just saying because all the full frame sedans except the i3
And body on frame is easier to restore !
The i3 is undoubtedly a monocoque
The isolation with body on frame is useful with heavy duty towing, hauling, or serious off-roading situations. Any situation that could cause a lot of flexion in the vehicle will create problems with unibody vehicles. Windows crack, body panels warp, and doors won't open/close when too much flexion is put on a unibody design. Of course this is only applicable in serious situations.
This guys knowledge, skill and presentation --> CLUTCH! Droppin gems on this video
Thank you for this! I'm reading about the differences in a book but the illustrations are so unclear. 5 seconds into your video and I immediately saw the difference.
Pull a 70 Chenille sitting for decades out of field vs a Camaro and see which once is the better restoration candidate. Most vintage unibody cars from the muscle car era that have been neglected are usually in pretty bad shape.
The advantage of a body on frame design for trucks and large SUV's, is of course for towing and a higher payload for trucks, because the stresses are not applied to the body, only the frame. Also for 4x4's, a frame gives strong mounting points for the suspension, especially on the front, where all real body on frame trucks and SUV's with independent suspension, have the upper control arm attached to the frame as well. Unibodies that have an upper control arm, have it attached to the thinner metal of the unibody. Most unibody 4x4's, as well as the Honda Ridgeline have a less durable MacPherson strut, instead of an upper control arm that is attached directly to the unibody.
So concise. I love your diagrams and descriptions. You obviously prepare. Others obviously do not. Kudos.
another disadvantage of unibody is that if they want to make the frame more rigid for offroading, they will make the frame pillars much more thick, the new models range rover vogue have really big pillars that you won't notice from outside.. as a result the windows are small and obscure visibility also that pillar will take more space inside the car..
Body on frame mpv, is surely durable. Like my toyota Innova, really tough for a super rough daily route from home - office - home. I agree of what you said, "Depends of how you engineer it".
I made it halfway through the video before I realized his collar was sitting up the whole time lol
I didn't notice it until I read your comment.
@@jrdroptini Same here
Thumbs up for that cool 3D rendering of the unibody.
This changed my whole plan and belief of unibody frames wow amazing video
Note that all trucks from 18 wheelers to mini-pickups have body on frame - strenght. Also a body on frame is repairable by any weekend mechanic.
The last Chrysler Imperials (1964-1966) before the move to unit construction were such tough motherfuckers, still banned from demolition derbies to this day.
Good vid. answered some of my questions. I used to hate unibody (rust can destroy the vehicle since the unibody provides structural integrity whereas rust on the frame can be repaired much easier). Had to junk a car just because of rust on the floor pan...not happy. I don't necessarily hate unibody anymore but, still, I don't like having to buy cars because of BS like floor pan rust.
the offroad advantage is not really due to the frame's flex quality or lack thereof, but rather due to the ground clearance that ladder frame have.
I'm still giving the win for off-road use to body-on-frame vehicles. If you're building a 4x4, the body can be drastically altered to accommodate larger tires/more suspension travel without affecting structural integrity of the vehicle itself. In addition, because the frame is easy to access and rigid, you have much more freedom in mounting new suspension components, whereas you're limited to the factory hard points with a unibody.
people generally like body on frame better for off-road because they usually have less frame flex or it can be easily taken out and it also also for more suspension mounting points. for example if you were to install a long arm kit you would be able to easily put new mounts on a frame rather than a unibody.
One thing I find is that getting a jack under a body on frame is just way easier so it allows a garage repair that is safer in that I have nice easy sturdy places to place jack stands and jacks. This lowers repair cost by DIYs.
Coming to this vid from the far future helped me understand why I shouldn’t care about how there’s so many “truck guys” sh*tting on unibody Trucks since the only advantages in a BOF are on things I’ll never use and the advantage in better crash performance of Unibody for occupant safety more than makes up for a possibly slightly lower towing capacity (that I generally don’t need to pay attention to anyhow) and off road performance if I randomly find myself teleported to the wilderness in a truck I plan to use for working.
Great video. The body-on frame is an old concept. The ideal offroad car would have a bulky unibody.
The 4runner is a perfect example of why BOF is just a better design for longevity, as well as expense to repair. We had a trailer tire fly off the highway and hit a Mazda CX-9 between the B and C pillar, because of that a 40k dollar car will likely be unrepairable because not only did you lose the roof and the door but now the entire vehicle is structurally unsound aside from the subframes and suspension. BOF can have a body swap and potentially avoid a catastrophe like that.
This guy is a Genius! You Definitely know your stuff
I've noticed in pretty much every car I ride in that's not a truck or my vic, that I hear the tires and feel grooved roads a lot more.
Your channel name should be 'engineering well explained'!!!!Respect
You have already 300,000 subscribers? Didn't notice that. Well keep up the good work and drawings! :)
He has 2M now
He has 3.7m now @@kshitijvengurlekar1192
any question i have your channel always does a fantastic job of answering. Good work.
the biggest advantages to off roading is the duality of a body on frame. typical after lots of rock crawling unibodys twist and the doors wont shut. also the ability to add a "body lift" basically put taller spacers between the chassis and body to allow more tire clearance
I'm restoring a unibody car and if I ever do it again it will be a frame car. Bizarre shapes and everything is connected. so it makes it a HUGE pain to replace and repair.
Im a simple man, I see body-on-frame, I think Panther Body👀
Another great demonstration, love all your videos ,you brake it down on a level that is understood
I think what they mean when they say body on frame or cab chassis as its called in Australia being better off-road is that the vehicles will generally be built with a suspension layout that is a lot more capable in an off-road environment such as solid axle type suspension where as a monobody or monocoque set up will normally have independent suspension which is hopeless in comparison
An altogether great video because as always you're presentation of the material is dead on target. Thank you.
Can't wait to hear you following up this video with the new Cybertruck and all of its engineering advantages. Definitely a truck that went fully after function over form.
hi Jason, I think you may also include that its popular with Hot Rodders since you can pull a desired body off a standard chassis and drop it onto a specially built racing chassis. This could be useful for a car with a rusty chassis i.e. can be easily swapped thus saving the body - environmentally friendly ;) Also, the modular design of the frame and body allows the car to essentially be built parallel in 2 sections hence the body can be painted, interior and wiring fitted whilst the suspension and drivetrain are being installed onto the frame - the 2 sections ultimately being married at the end of the line thus speeding up production. I know this method is now used during the assembly of modern unibody/monocoque cars now but I believe it started with the body-on-frame cars. thanks for the video! +Engineering Explained
ahhh I've been waiting on this topic for a while. Great Vid as always!
First time I am learning about their difference thank you! One nooby question.. doesnt the lower centre of gravity due to weight being at the bottom of the body on frame mean its less likely to flip when off roading?
Very helpful. Thanks for this thoughtful video. 😊
Cool. I got to this site looking for to see if I should use stabilizing bars on a unibody frame. I got my answer by pulling together info from a few sites: it depends on the weight. In my case, I will be pulling an 1800 lb trailer and my Model X weighs 5000 lbs, so it is not a good idea as it could bend the frame. Great details. Liked and subscribed!
Awesome! Used this to explain unibody in Tesla Cybertruck discussions!
In the event of a collision which one is safer to be in?
Proud body on frame owner. Toyota Landcruiser toughness
Indeed. Toyota Crown owner.
Yeah buddy.. SportTrac.
Dude your drawing skills are on point
Thoroughly detailed and explained as usual.
Where do car's like the classic VW Beetle fit in, they have a body that separates from the chassis, but it is not a frame. It's transmission tunnel provides the strength of the car, made more rigid by the sills/heater channels when the body is attached.
This design seems to fall between the unibody and body on frame designs and is light weight too
Was a video ever made about this? I love air cooled vws and was just think about their "unibody"
Great video, well presented.
You mention durability, but just relate it to off-road performance or towing. There's another consideration; damage from an accident, as mentioned below. The beauty of having a body-on-frame and a very durable frame is that in many cases, a truck can be driven away from an accident, rather than having to be towed. Though the collision testing does not very this, I chose to put my family into a body-on-frame vehicle because they could take a substantial hit and come out just fine. This has been proven out in our case several times. Our old SUV is battered, but it still keeps on going and has always been able to drive away from accidents. Once the crumple zone on a uni-body has crunched, you are pretty much out-of-luck. You will survive, but your car won't.
one major omission: aspect ratios of more than 2:1 are possible with body on frame with lesser weight penalty than unibody
it sounds absurd but is there any way to identify whether its a monocoque or body on frame just by looking at the vehicle ?
Body on frame is less expensive to make, you can improve the body or the frame independently.
What about the criticims of unibody that they are harder to repair if there is rust damage and they dont last as long ? And if you want to lower a body on frame vehicle does that make it less likely to roll over in a crash with a new lower center of gravity, ,and can it be done in a way that does not harm it's towing and off road abilities ?
In towing and heavy cargo u need 2 have flex or the frame wilk snap, thats why unibody r not used for heavy duty use, it is 2 stiff for that and will breack, if u see a 18 wheeler when it takes of hard u will see it flex, this helps distribute the load and desipate the impact, hope i could help, it is just another benifit so people could untherstand why it is used pick ups and truck, sorry about my english it is not my first language.
THANK YOU!! I really wanted this exact thing. :-*
2:58 you were a t-rex
+Bee Vang Rawr.
this is hilarious....
🤣🤣😂😂😂
A couple of days ago I drove over a significant transverse "bump" on the road (more like a slightly smoother speed hump) at about 40mph. As far as I remember, the suspension didn't bottom out and I didn't hit anything with the frame, but I'm still concerned about the body flexing under the stress. We're talking about a unibody hatchback here (new Mazda3). Is my fear justified or is my OCD getting the better of me?
I LOVE Ur EXPLANATIONS ,FROM INDIA
Love the Dakota and crown vic
Beautifully explained.
Not sure if you check comments in older videos like this, but what would you call the system VW used on their air-cooled cars? It's not a unibody, but it's also not a body-in-frame. A body-on floorpan, perhaps?
Engineering Explained Secrets - Revealed: This was filmed the same day as the suspension spring video, hence the involuntary popped collar. The little frat bro on my shoulder wouldn't let it fold down. I'm as embarrassed as you are. ua-cam.com/video/hGZRairqHNI/v-deo.html
+Engineering Explained Would you be able to do a video on the requirements for turning a late-model car/sedan into an off-road vehicle? Discussions on chassis-swap vs. suspension upgrade vs. custom chassis fabrication etc. As an example - I have a 2007 Charger R/T that will be undergoing a chassis swap with a truck shortly. Think, modern (streetable) version of the FastFurious7 off-road charger.
Love your content. Keep it going. :)
+Engineering Explained why do you never deal with bikes..at all in ur videos Harley's or KTM's... and stuff ?
+Engineering Explained Body on frame is better than unibody for towing in the long run, as the stresses run through the frame rather than the body, no matter how strong you make a unibody, its still got that fundamental design issue. Also for off-roading, it is an advantage to have a frame, as it can flex like you said, but not primarily for articulation, but rather to bend so that the body doesnt have to. Try opening the door on a unibody when its on an axle twister, quite often some doors wont be able to open even on brand new cars. Its better in the long run. Maybe you can prove me wrong! :)
+Engineering Explained I wonder where and if they differ in regards to safety. Everything being equal, my mind tells me that unibody is supposed to be safer, but i would welcome the views of other people.
It's hard to save a Unibody vehicle in the Rust Belt.......
Once you get rust damage it just spreads .
With a Frame you can do repairs .
Or replace Body or Frame.
Yes people save and Restore things.
Rarely unibody.
Body on frame is better for convertibles beacuse you don't need to reinforce the body.
What if we haf unibodies and body-on-frames in one vehicle?
What if you got in an accident with a Unibody Vehicle, even if your not at fault? Your screwed. The entire structure has been compromised and the car instantly becomes a right off.
What about safety during a bad collision? Will the un crumble and absorb more force (making it safer) than a body on frame (which is so good at being sturdy that it will transfer the impact of the collision to the vehicle occupants)?
It really depends on the car some modern body on frames utilise some crumple zones thru use of welds that are designed to break away on a impact but unfortunately a unibody will perform generally better In a crash as the car is basically a roll cage but the force won’t be transferred thru to occupants normally to the other end of the frame but a lot of advances in body on frame has been made in 20 years it really depends one thing to note is how unibody by design will divert the impact around you.
No you did a great job with the drawing and the explanation
I was looking at an F-53 chassis. And I can not understand how a Pace Arrow body can attach since it is so much wider. So I'm thinking a Frame is not the same as a chassis. And that there is a frame that connects to the F-53 chassis that the rest of the RV body connects onto. Is my logic sound?
Just awesome brother.
the reason why the body on frame idea was first used...its because most manufacturers tought of it on trucks and suv thats the main reason otherwise there was no point for them to put a sedan or coupe body over a separate frame just think of that.
Excellent video!
It cleared my concepts very well, thanks!
@@CallMePseudonymous I was working on a prototype for an electric foldable car during my college days.
Towing should be in the advantages section of frame-on. Sure.. you "could" have a unibody built at the same weight that would allow it to be equal, but nobody does that. Frame-on is generally always better for towing.
That is the first time I've seen a pickup with the cab connected to the rear box. Don't pickups have the front bumper connected to the frame and the rear connected to the box with the tow bar connected to the frame?
Hello Sir,
My 2001 Corolla is all rusted in bottom. Canada as you know.
I want to change the bottom frame only. As it is unibody frame, can i change the bottom frame? Please guide as the engine is butter, and i don't wanna scrap such a good engine.
You actually do want some flex in the frame on big trucks when towing a lot of weight.
I'm a bit surprised you didn't mention that unibody vehicles can also be safer. Crash tests have shown a consistent improvement in safety in a unibody compared to a body on frame vehicle. This isn't to say that all body-on-frame vehicles are unsafe, it's just something to point out that the body on a body-on-frame doesn't need the same structural integrity as a unibody to support itself, hence the body being an "afterthought" for crashworthiness. Of course, today's trucks and other body-on-frame vehicles are becoming as safe as unibody vehicles due to stricter regulations and more-advanced crash testing.
Great! Would love an explanation on how unibodies are actually made. Stamped panels bolted together?
I have 93 mazda 929. How i know if it is unibody or body frame are separate?
This guy is explaining it as if the build is always done like this. Its not. Car CEOS force the engineers to save AS MUCH cost as possible....so they make the unibody SSUUPPPEERRR thin and CHEAP metal that lasts 5 to 8 YEARS before rust forces major repairs. No space to work on them urself so it makes mechanics happy. Older trucks like 95 and lower had a competition on whos truck was more amazing so they made everything to LAST LONG, from 70s to 90s the quality goes down and cheaper parts go in. NOW days the car corps have ZERO competition and are all inagreement on the format: Build, UPSELL, fix, recycle, so they can be as cheap as they want to.
So you want somethin that will stick around, go older.
I have seen crash tests where a cement truck is run into various vehicles. The unibody gets smooshed in all but the largest unibody SUVs. Body on frame seemed to perform WAY better. I'm not sure about side collisions though.
In that test a F-350 was nuts how good it withstood that impact.
So if unibody hit by Suv and truck at high speed, the driver in the unibody will take more of the impact? And is the unibody as safe after a repair to rear panel and frame stretching, etc.
what do you think about the crash / safety data of unibody vs BOF? I suspect the conclusions are skewed to make BOF worst because 1) govt wants better mpg vehicles 2) if BOF offers better crash protection, then the "other" crash vehicle with unibody design would have more injuries/fatalities ? what are your thoughts?
You’ll never understand the beauty of unibody until you’ve seen someone drifting a body in frame vehicle, and the body literally separating from the frame entirely, sending the driver and body skidding away LOL
Back when his videos were short and straightforward.
Great video!
where do you get all the materials for study as I was unable to find that easly & ur explanation are good too...
Like the body on frame more
I really like your videos ... But Dude you seriously have to remake this one... There is no way in HELL a uni-body vehicle is "stiffer" than that of a vehicle with a frame! (unless your playing with words and trying to say a uni-body is stiffer than the body of a framed car without the frame then yes, sure I guess you could make that statement.) Uni-bodies twist and that's what makes them less effective as dragsters. Not to mention the weak transfer of weight to the rear wheels which come not having a frame. When GM was making their first front wheel drive vehicle they took out the bump for the transmission and the Damn thing folded in half when the first ones rolled off the line... I remember dad laughing when he came home from work that day. Uni-bodies are better in crashes and that's what lead to crumple zones. No one set out to design crumple zones they discovered them when they started using the Uni-bodies. Heck you didn't even mention that! Also while I'm on my soap box ... Any car company that tells you they "pioneered" crumple zones is lying out their exhaust.