Triton Double cab bent.

What was the story with your mate's Triton, Tim?

Towing, overloaded or bit of both? Looks terrible, can really feel for him. We've got close family with a triton, hope they get a better run out of it than this.

Thanks,
Bob.

I'm sorry, but I think you will find it has a lot to do with air bags.
You will find when some owners discover when their vehicles are fully or over loaded and see the back end hanging near the ground with the axle sitting on the bump stop they think, "we can't drive around like this" so they may decide to remedy the situation by fitting airbags to compensate for the ride height. The air bag effectively becomes a raised bump stop.

And once the car is level again he can continue to add more weight.

No it has a lot to do with the miss use and understanding of what "load assisting airbags" are designed for and failing to use the correct springs to suit you load because it is a fact that people do not want to upgrade their springs because they fear having a harsh ride when the vehicle is empty, that is the point at where people get confused and fail to understand their reason for having them then the easiest thing to do is to blame them when things fail due to owner error. If used correctly on a vehicle that has also been load correctly they will serve you well for yrs without causing any damage to your vehicle.
I understand what your getting at but some people may interperate it as to be the fault of the airbags which it isn't.

I have to agree with Batt on this, people blame Air Bags not the buyer for the misuse or lack of understanding of the product.

Well firstly it is the poor design of dual cab vehyicles with almost all of the load space almost cantilevered from above the axle. People load them to the hilt and then add passengers.
The ute then sags badly so owners say better put some airbags under that.

It then excerbates the problem as the chassis has been designed to have 2 load points at each end of a leaf spring. By putting airbags in the centre of the spring it has effectively put all the weight on one point of the chassis and made that the pivot point for the excessive weight thrashing up and down above it. Any wonder that it gives up and breaks, usually at that point, or as in the pictures of the one with the slideon at a point further forward simply by the weight hanging off the tail with no support.

Common sense that very uncommon thing would dictate that it is a problem just waiting to do its worst.

The best solution would be to make dual cabs with an extended wheelbase to get the axle at least under the centre of the load spce or as in a truck amost at the rear of the vehicle. Wont hold my breath.

I agree with what Tom has said. The manufacturers have taken their standard wheelbase utes added a dual cab and hung the load area behind that. Most of it behind the rear axle.
Then the purchaser loads it up to and in a lot of cases beyond it's carrying capacity.
To exacerbate that problem a lot of us then hang a caravan on behind with anything up to 350 kg ball weight.

OMG, the arse end is dragging on the ground. (:=0)

"Someone" then advises them that having the rear leaf springs beefed up will shake their fillings out if they don't drive around with maximum load on board at all times.
Air bags are the answer. So Joe Average finds that pumping up the bags basically levels his pride and joy back to it's former ride height.
Unfortunately that doesn't do diddly squat for the fact that 90% of his payload is still happily bouncing up and down behind the rear axle and a goodly part of that load is now being born by an area of the chassis that was never designed for the job.

Cheers
Pop

Batt's
You can fit air bags, heavier springs or even blocks of wood between the chassis and the axle to lift a sagging rear end and it won't make any difference. The chassis is still at risk if there is too much heavy material too far back behind the axle.

Look at this extreme example. Hook the bucket of a large back hoe over the tow ball and push it down to the ground. The chassis would break but assume it doesn't.The springs would compress, the whole car would pivot on the rear axle bearings and the front wheels would lift off the ground. Now install heavier springs and do it again.The springs will still compress, the car will still pivot on the axle bearings and the front wheels will still lift off the ground.

Heavier springs or air bags can not support the far end of the chassis. It is sticking out the back like a plank on the side of a pirate ship. It has been designed to take a certain amount of flexing that will be caused by the correct loads but give it too much and it will eventually break.

I think from memory this model Triton has a maximum carrying capacity of 930 kg. If you fill it with about 480 kg of people in the five seats, about 70 kg of fuel in the tank and the remaining 380 kg in the back with the heaviest items as far forward as possible, it will be fully loaded but the rear end will not be sagging.

The rear springs will be flat though. They are supposed to be so the roll understeer stability assisting feature of the rear suspension will work in corners.

That is how a dual cab is supposed to be loaded. You can't ignore the fact that those five seats are major load bearing areas. If you can't fill them to the maximum then you can't put the rest of its carrying capacity out the back. You have to accept the fact that you can't fully load the car without taking it outside its design limits.

If that weight distribution does not suit some owners then too bad. I am not aware of any cars that have adjustable locations for suspensions, engines, bodies or whatever so they can be altered to suit whatever the owner wants to do with them.

This particular car may have bent its chassis with just the things hanging off the back. Once again going from memory I think the maximum tow ball weight is 270 kg. Many manufacturers, mine included, say a WDH must be used for any weight above half the maximum. If Mitsubishi says that then those four jerries, the wheel and the carrier would weigh more than half the ball weight. Their location places them directly over the tow ball so the weight might as well be on it.

Of course when you are not towing anything you can't use a WDH so those things alone assisted by whatever is inside the tub right at the back could have caused the damage if the roads it has been driven on were rough enough.

So all you people putting the blame on air bags for bending dual cab chassis, what do you blame when air bags have NOT been fitted? I have personally seen bent chassis on D40s, as well as other makes, one D40 being the son-in-laws, where air bags were not fitted.
Air bags are an assist item, not a cure for poorly loaded/overloaded vehicles or poorly designed vehicles. The current breed of dual cabs that claim to be able to tow 3.5t and carry x amount of weight - rubbish!
People need to learn to load their vehicles (and caravans/trailers) correctly AND within the specs. And yes the manufacturers should share part of the blame for giving the impression that their vehicles are capable of things that they clearly not.

Yes splits I sort of already said something similar to that but used a lot less words but others may gain something from it.

Unfortunately tony i lots of people see pics like this and don't realise the chassis has bent in front of the spring mounts they jump on the bandwagon and blame airbags which haven't even been fitted. That's why I usually respond just to defend air bags without pointing out where the chassis has been bent hoping they will pick up on that themselves but most don't it takes a while to sink in it's usually only the odd person like yourself that can see what really caused the problem.

" it's usually only the odd person like yourself " Gee Batts, I'm 'odd' ? :) :)

Were all a bit odd in one way or another lol

"The current breed of dual cabs that claim to be able to tow 3.5t and carry x amount of weight - rubbish!"


I am not so sure about that tony i. They will tow a 3.5t fifth wheeler without any problems. They will tow a 3.5t dog trailer with its 20 to 30kg ball weight with ease but 3.5t caravan is stretching things a bit. Even after sorting out the ball weight with a WDH or a very light load in the rear, a van that size is quite capable of throwing a car of that size and weight out of the way in seconds if something goes wrong.

As I have said before, the manufacturers don't claim it will tow anything that happens to weigh the maximum. They just list a maximum possible weight.

Owners have to sit back and think and don't let the desire to own a particular car over ride common sense.

As for carrying their maximum weight: how many owners consider the weight in the seats? That is where the problem lies in so many cases. The owners go by the maximum weight but start loading with far too little up front.

I don't blame air bags entirely but they do make a difference. I have seen Tritons bent with and without them. Those with them compress the lower flange of the chassis just in front of the bags. Those with out them stretch the top flange of the chassis near the rear end of the cabin. A crack appears across the top and spreads down the sides.

Which way is more likely to damage the chassis first is a good question and best left to chassis engineers.

Another band aid fix that triton owners and Mitsubishi will be happy with instead of owners putting pressure on the car manufacturer to build a vehicle with a decent chassis in the first place.

Also there could be a good business opportunity for someone to start teaching people how to correctly load a twin cab when going off road or how to purchase a vehicle that is capable of carrying all their gear.

There is only one thing wrong with that Superior Engineering kit and that is the last bent Triton that I saw in the bush did not have air bags and was bent in front of the area that the kit covers.

It's a lot cheaper than the alternative happening if you plan on loading up and heading out bush you sacrifice some turning circle and ramp over but you'll get home in one piece.

And people wonder why their chassis bend.

Agreed. Don't load too much in the tub of a twin cab of any make, put as much in the rear seat area as you can. The rear seas in the Navaras fold forward to allow you to do just that.

So long as you secure that stuff inside the vehicle it's a good idea, i would hate to wear it if involved in an accident.
I decided to shorten the tray on my dual cab Landcruiser by 150mm from the normal 1800mm long, and mount the spare tyre inside the canopy on the front wall, that way I don't have the weight of spare tyres hanging on the very back of the vehicle. Fridge upfront on one side, spare tyre the other...keeps the weight forward over the rear wheels and light stuff is packed in the area that hangs past the wheels.

People should choose a single cab more often.

I towed a caravan around Australia for 10 months with a Triton ute, with no suspension/chassis problems. I did add an extra leaf to the rear springs, I put a fair bit of gear in the tub, with the heavier stuff on the back wall, though nowhere near what some of the photo's are showing, did quite a few tracks, some in excess of 600km's of rugged track, didn't drive crazy and took care to balance the C'van. It was the biggest fight me & the wife had, she seen open space in the van & wanted to fill it:)