Globe Trekker Zero Torsion Subframe

[@HelicoolsHelipad]

I've seen that guy somewhere before, but I just can't put my finger on it. Awesome system... truly.

[@vyshus7629]

thanks a lot your your videos.

[@seegte1704]

Genial saludos cordiales desde Patagonia Chile.. Muy bien explicado mi amigo

[@RVGlobeTrekker]

Eres muy bienvenido mi amigo. Seguirán más cosas buenas, así que asegúrese de sintonizarnos. ¡Muchas bendiciones!
You are very welcome my friend. More good stuff is following so be sure to tune in. Many blessings!

[@trentblaine1768]

Hey, I think I know that guy! LOL!

[@EWOverland]

How you resolve the zero torsion

[@RVGlobeTrekker]

The torsion is resolved with two side brackets and a pivoting crossmember for the 3-point subframe, and two pivoting crossmembers for the 4-point subframe. Check out this video... ruclips.net/video/n5iTAHMfcws/видео.html
Then check out the 4 part how-to build videos.

[@coachgeo]

Zero torsion subchassis IMHO absolute overkill for an LMTV UNLESS the box is built of light material that rips apart easier..... which may be the case. So far there has been zero reported M1079 issues (that I know of). Hopefully a long term FMTV mechanic will offer .02

[@RVGlobeTrekker]

We are glad that you agree with our design. Overkill, as you put it, is exactly what many folks who want to protect their investments over the long term are looking for. Many have used old mil. box conversions which are chained down to the bed of the truck. Our stance was to drop the massive 2400 pound M1078 dead-weight truck bed. We engineered our purpose built zero torsion sub-frame AND 18.5' habitat to be light weight and durable, just over400 pounds more than the old truck bed itself. Others that have ditched the truck bed have generally taken one path; they recreate the stiffness of the bed and either bolt/weld that subframe to the truck frame, or do some kind of spring compression arrangement. Neither of these options are compatible with maintaining the off-road capabilities originally designed into the truck and why overland expedition enthusiasts choose the FMTV chassis over lesser capable or outrageously expensive other options.
When it comes to engineering strength and durability over time in a light weight package, you need an FMTV engineer to design it. We have two.

[@coachgeo]

@@RVGlobeTrekker your information is not accurate. very few mount there habitat in any way similar to the bed. Happen to only know of one out of all the builds out there out of the just shy of around a dozen of LMTV based campers who mounted like bed. Just keep in mind..... there is only a small percent who can afford "overkill" Hard to make profit of very few sales. Maybe offer both options? Kinda a Nissan version and a Lexus version / a Ford version.... and a Lincoln version.... you get my point. Just something to mull over in your business model.

[@RVGlobeTrekker]

@@coachgeo other than those that attempt to build a zero torsion from like Globe Trekker, many build a very robust subframe/habitat floor, whether they are incorporated together or are separate, the principle is the same.
As for the affordability, the ability to DIY the project has been engineered into the products. Go ahead and get a quote for a sub-frame and box from a competitor (we should note all current competition panels are substandard to Globe Trekker's 2 1/2" thickness, three layers of Azdel, two layers of FRP, PUR hot foam insulation, and thermal-break extruded aluminum), add in a brush guard system and PV panel mounts and you will find we beat their prices hands down and by a lot. Now, throw in the labor costs for someone to fabricate all this for you. With our design, two guys with no special equipment can assemble the subframe and box in a weekend. Impossible? Stay tuned for further video proof.
It is not that we are trying too hard to prove a point, we are simply doing what is right to change the game and improve the industry.

[@scpowered]

Dave? Is that you?

[@RVGlobeTrekker]

Yes, it is me. Hi Sam!

[@vyshus7629]

thanks a lot.

[@RVGlobeTrekker]

Most welcome! Come back any time.

[@OOOOutdoorOffGridOverland]

Never understood why people spend time and money to remove the 0 torsion bed to spend time and more money to build a 0 torsion subframe.

[@RVGlobeTrekker]

The "0 torsion bed" weights almost 2500 lbs., and it is only "0 torsion" because it is bolted to the frame and does not allow for movement. This causes a very stiff truck frame suspension, tricycling, and the subsequent loss of traction. I explain all this in this video. ruclips.net/video/1WpJHEiJoO0/видео.html If you remove the dead weight of the old truck bed, you can have a true Zero Torsion subframe and habitat shell for about the same weight. That is why people spend the money.

[@OOOOutdoorOffGridOverland]

@@RVGlobeTrekker yeah what you show in your explanation video is not relevant: Cabin is on air bags so itself do move, then you show a 1079 wich does not have the 1078's stiff bed.
Suspension is designed for the stiff frame and transmision mounts are also designed for non twist frame, now if you eliminate that...
Then is nice just to be able to convert back in minutes the truck and leave the shelter and drive away an off road capable flat bed.
So in my opinion is a waste if time amd money.

[@RVGlobeTrekker]

@@OOOOutdoorOffGridOverland definitely entitled to have your own opinion. Though the cab is mounted to the truck frame, and the airbags are only there for personal comfort to cushion the ride. The transmission is mounted with flexible mounts... designed to be flexible, and the suspension has no problem whatsoever dealing with frame twist, as these trucks were designed for 10 or more different variants; not all had the stiff flatbed design. For most experienced overlanders, dropping the dead weight for a light weight engineered Zero Torsion solution is the only way to go, and well worth it. But, to each their own... it's not the only way, just the in our opinion, the best way.