Vehicle frame repair more difficult now than ever

Replacing or repairing a frame on a modern-day vehicle has never been more difficult, according to industry trainer Toby Chess.

Chess, an education committee member of the Society of Collision Repair Specialists (SCRS), discussed the topic during his committee report to the SCRS Jan. 23 in Palm Springs, Calif. He made a similar presentation at the Collision Industry Conference meeting Jan. 24. To see a video of his SCRS presentation click on frame replacement.

Chess began his presentation with two dramatic videos. First, a 2001 Ford F150 was shown slamming into a barrier at 35 mph. The frightening collision produced massive damage to the vehicle as parts appeared to flying everywhere.

Next, he showed a 2011 Ford F150 hitting a barrier at 40 mph, the same model 10 years later at an additional 5 mph. Despite the violent collision and significant damage, the damage to other parts of the vehicle was less widespread. For example, the doors on the 2011 vehicle actually could be opened after the crash.

The message from these videos is that vehicles are safer today due to advanced manufacturing techniques and an increased use of high-strength steels that protect vehicle occupants better than ever during crashes. While that’s great news for consumers, it’s not so great for collision repairers who want to fix the car according to OE standards.

In fact, for the collision repairer, it’s a whole new ball game when it comes to frame repair and replacement, Chess said.

Some vehicles, such as the 2010-2011 Toyota 4Runner, have four different types of high-strength steel used in the frame, including 780 MPa ultra high-strength steel.

“You can’t section this vehicle to repair it and you can’t use heat to repair it due to the welds,” Chess said.

The same rules apply to the 2008-2011 Toyota Sequoia, which has two different types of high-strength steel.

A safe and effective repair starts with getting the right information, Chess said.

“Data is available off the OEM websites,” Chess said. “GM and Chrysler offer free information through OEM1Stop.com and Ford and Toyota charge only $10 to use the repair information for three days. There is no excuse not to have the correct OEM procedures.”

Navigating the OEM websites and getting the correct information may take time to those who aren’t familiar with the process, but repairers need to familiarize themselves with this information-gathering process because repair procedures no longer are a “one size fits all” process.

Chess then showed about 40 slides that documented the OEM-recommended frame repair procedure. This was done as much to show that it can be done correctly as to document the procedure for educational purposes, Chess said.

Repairers who go through this painstaking exercise will have another challenge on their hands – getting paid for their work. The P-pages list both included and not-included operations under frame assembly removal and repair. However, the list takes up less than one-half page.

“The P-pages are missing too many non-included operations,” Chess said. This will drive up the cost of the repair beyond what most insurers are expecting to pay. As a result, frame damage on today’s vehicles is likely to lead to more total losses, and a shrinking pool of vehicles to repair.

Chess said repairers who choose to make frame repairs that are not recommended by the OEM procedures in order to appease insurance adjusters do so at their own peril. For example, applying heat to (welding) original OEM spot welds weakens the weld, which could result in the repair failing. Repairers who make faulty repairs would be liable for any damage or injuries caused by their improper repair.

Aaron Schulenburg, executive director of SCRS, said Chess’ presentation, which was recorded by Collision Hub and will be available on their website and on abrn.com, will be valuable because it will educate both repairers and insurers. Paul Val, SCRS education committee chairman, agreed.

“Understanding the highly specific requirements that automobile manufacturers expect of repair facilities should foster an appreciation for the level of complexity involved in these types of repairs,” said Val. “Toby and the committee have done a great job compiling information that exists in the marketplace and sculpting it into a presentation that should hopefully eliminate some of the tension that exists in this area by broadening the understanding of necessary procedures and equipment.”