Galvanized steel body

[Terror_Tree]

Does anyone know if Ford Australia used galvanized steel car bodies? If so when did they start?

[aussiblue]

Was this question prompted by this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0fP...ertJohnCadogan

While I am generally a fan of Johns I am also not convinced about his claims that the adoption of galvanising means modern Australian cars since the 1990's no longer rust. He obviously does not know about the salt affected roads in rural WA and what that does to cars. See https://southwestsnapshot.com.au/pro...d-agriculture/ etc not only does it damage the roads and bridges etc it damages cars especially in some ares where it mixes with clay mud to bake itself onto the bodywork and attack it. When I worked in the WA Education Department' Transport Branch n the 1970's school bus contractors were paid a significant per Km rate extra where the serviced routes with declared salt affected roads and despite often getting high spec mining industry level rust preventative treatments their school buses didn't last long failing their annual safety inspection due to corrosion. The extent of salt affected roads has only increased since then.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Terror_Tree

Does anyone know if Ford Australia used galvanized steel car bodies? If so when did they start?

Ford, GM and Chrysler began using double sided galvanised steel North America in the mid 1980s,
other divisions followed quickly after that.

[simon varley]

plus e-coat which means even better protection

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by simon varley

plus e-coat which means even better protection

Did Toyota and other Japanese carmakers switch to galvanised steels earlier than Detroit?
By the 80s, Japanese vehicles already had a good name for quality and not rusting out

[Citroënbender]

Very different alloys from my observation. You notice it when they need substantial repairs. I think they are more corrosion prone after re-work than European passenger car steel.

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Did Toyota and other Japanese carmakers switch to galvanised steels earlier than Detroit?
By the 80s, Japanese vehicles already had a good name for quality and not rusting out

Google Tacoma chassis rust...
Toyota bought a heap of them back because they were so bad

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by XR Martin

Google Tacoma chassis rust...
Toyota bought a heap of them back because they were so bad

While that’s an issue, I was referring to Toyota cars from the late 70s and early 80s,
they seemed to be good quality compared to Detroit three cars of that time.

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by jpd80

While that’s an issue, I was referring to Toyota cars from the late 70s and early 80s,
they seemed to be good quality compared to Detroit three cars of that time.

Probably all the great steel that was in the warships that was given them to as scrap.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by XR Martin

Probably all the great steel that was in the warships that was given them to as scrap.

More likely from Australian iron ore, you know the stuff we sold them over the last 50 years...

[oldel]

Well most falcons and terrys still rust up to BA. Some AUs are shocking as were the ones before that. My BA has rust, if someone doesn't think there's does check behind lights and under the rubber seal on the A pillar door frame. MY EL was bad too.

E: look at these google links for AU. https://www.google.com/search?client...st+thread+ford

80s japanese cars were still bad too, I've never had an 80s japanese car that isn't starting to rust in the sills/windows areas.
Same for euros. EG BMWs rusted, and clearly didn't have good galvanising until about 89/90.

Around 90 for euro and Japanese, around BF era for falcons was when you don't get major rust as much

[happy1]

Naked steel in humid conditions will rust with up to 1 millimeter a year. So when a car body isn't much more than a millimeter thick it obviously need some coating and under body protection to get the desired life of up to ~ 10 years out of it.

You are probably right that some steels used by various auto manufacturers have different properties, for example Fiat in the 1980s had bad reputation for rust in odd spots, such as in the middle of the door, where no other cars rust. Maybe there were unprotected cavities there, or maybe it was bad steel who knows,

When Simon mention E-coating, that is where the whole body shell get dipped into a primer that has good protection properties, probably contains zinc. Electrical current is part of the dipping process to ensure it goes into all seams etc.

I have done crash repairs on BA, BF, FG and Territory enough to know in detail how poorly they are protected against rust, compared with Euro brands such as BMW.
The Australian Fords came from the factory with NO cavity wax applied, and very little seam sealers. In comparison when you look at a for example a BMW E90 from 2005 onwards, it is designed with a lot more seam sealers, cavity wax, plugs, and even underbody plastic panels protecting the body a lot more for exposure of water and dirt onto the sheet metal underbody panels.

I have always added cavity wax to my Aussie Fords as soon as possible when buying one or repairing one. It annoyed me that I got a rust hole in the turbo bonnet on my Territory. I must have missed a spot when applying cavity wax to it.

Ford will probably argue that their build standard was sufficient for Australian conditions.

I collected a repaired 1 year old Mitsubishi from a panel shop in Perth two weeks ago on behalf of a relative. and I argued with the panel shop that they had completed the repairs WITHOUT ANY cavity wax on the new panels that had been fitted. They insisted that Mitsubishi had not specified that there should be cavity wax inside panels on their vehicles, therefore it wasn't necessary for the panel repair shop to apply any rust protection either.. what idiots..