Lunchroom arguements! holdens and chassis

[Tiapan]

hey fellas a very large arguement which tuned into a fight in the lunch room today was based around the claim that commodores dont have a chassis,?!?! i thought the chassis was the structual part of the car, consisting of the rails underneath and the frame of the car. many others (holden fans getting veery defensive about the vn platform apparently being used up until the VE commodore)

at this point i realised i knew very little about chassis and its components but decided to argue anyway because of what had just happened to lowdnes and i was angry at holden fans.

they were saying only the utes have a chassis and all commodores have no chassis...they have a "subframe" they said its only a chassis if you can unbolt all the panels and have a rolling skeleton ?!?!! WTF?

is this an outrageous statement or am i just a stubborn idiot?

[superroo]

far as what i know, the rails in the older cars used to be the chassis. however since they are now part of the car, the body/shell is the chassis. however you'll find that the manufactures refer to it as a subframe assembly.

Cheers

One last thing "all commodores have no chassis", since when is the holden ute no commodore?

[GXL078]

Ford no longer make a true Falcon ute. They make a tray back cab chassis. Holden ute is a true "coupe utility" and the one tonner and Crewman are tray back with a half chassis, like the Ford.

[superroo]

technically the ford ute is a pick up, since the tray is separate. Holden only has the 'true' ute style still.

[fairmont1998]

Falcons and Commodores are of a monocoque construction. No seperate chassis.

[Tiapan]

what is monoque?

[fairmont1998]

mon·o·coque /ˈmɒnəˌkoʊk, -ˌkɒk

2. Automotive. a type of vehicular construction in which the body is combined with the chassis as a single unit.

[starkersEB]

Originally Posted by superroo

far as what i know, the rails in the older cars used to be the chassis. however since they are now part of the car, the body/shell is the chassis. however you'll find that the manufactures refer to it as a subframe assembly.

Cheers

One last thing "all commodores have no chassis", since when is the holden ute no commodore?

Bloke at work reckons his VS ute is just a "holden ute" not a "commodore ute" so yeah they would be right unfortunatly.

[Psycho Chicken]

Very few cars have a true chassis anymore. 4WDs (real ones) are about it.

[Walkinshaw]

falcons & commodores never had "chassis" so to speak

[XR Martin]

Also the Falcon has always been a Monocoque, one of the first Fords to be so.

[XR Martin]

One tonner Commodore Utes and AU-BA Utes have a half chassis, the rear part is a typical old-school frame, the front is your typical car monocoque.
Standard Commo Utes are complete monocoque.

[Pedro]

Originally Posted by Tiapan

hey fellas a very large arguement in the lunch room today was based around the claim that commodores dont have a chassis,?!?! i thought the chassis was the structual part of the car, consisting of the rails underneath and the frame of the car. At this point i realised i knew very little about chassis and its components

Take it easy Tiapan, chassis died out after the 2nd world war when car manufacturers discovered it was more cost effective to manufacture a semi-monocoque body shell with subframes to support the engine and front and rear suspensions.

Nowdays with "crumple zones" being an integral part of passenger safety, chassis are not feasible and apart from trucks and the odd neanderthal 4WD there are very few chassis manufactured today.

[Full Spectrum]

I was told the Holden utes were based on the LWB models not the SWB.

[FGX-351]

Originally Posted by Slick_Aussie

I was told the Holden utes were based on the LWB models not the SWB.

Yeah thats definetly true for the current generation utes and wagons.

[Bossxr8]

Its really a bit of a grey area. Although technically the chassis isn't really used anymore the underbody/floorpan area is still refered to as a chassis.