Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

I continue to waffle about this decision. I like the idea that the bolt-in crossmember would add strength to the repaired frame area without welding in doubler plates. Also, I realize my welding skills are less than I had imagined. Funny how that works! I also like that they come with the adjusters for ride height. I think the Fatman kit I bought from Dan would supply everything else to finish the front suspension. I asked Chassis Engineering about this and they couldn't say definitively say yes. I have seen where people have installed this crossmember on AD trucks. I tried searching , but could not find anything specific to Task Force.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

If it is just your concern about your welding skills and you have a decent welder I'd suggest fitting and tacking it in place and double checking the fit and getting a skilled welder to weld it together.

Back in the mid 70's when I built my T bucket I wold tack pieces together with my little 110 volt welder from Monkey Wards (still have it in the shed) and then take the tacked together pieces to a local welding shop or later to my buddy down the street for him to weld it up. That cost me a few cases of Bud over the years.

I remember back in the late 80's when RB Obsolete in Arlington Wa was first selling those crossmebers and I looked one over for a long time at the Goodguys in Puyallup.
They solved a lot of issues as you only needed a good tape measure, 1/2 inch drill and a few wrenches to install one.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

It's partly my welding skills and partly a desire to get on with the project in the easiest path forward. The additional reinforcement of the frame is a plus, since I welded up some 3-4" long cracks . I was planning to weld in plates in those spots. I am still considering frame boxing plates back to the front cab mounts too. Once I got the truck in the garage and started looking at the whole project again, it occurs to me that I may not have the number of years it will take to get this done. Running a one man shop was fine when I was younger and stronger! There were other people working in the maintenance shop too, and I could usually find someone to lend a hand with the heavy or awkward stuff.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

I personally like the idea of a bolt in unit because it allows the builder to get on with the build by themselves without scabbing the welding on a pretty significant item of safety, it will get the geometry correct as it was engineered and also it can allow them to compensate for a few things like rake angle after it is all assembled and driveable. the builder can slot the holes or whatever and when it is correct THEN weld it all in if the need arises. just my opinion, which has been proven to not worth the 2 cents due to inflation. haha.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

there is something to be said for mr48's theory as well. if you set it up and tack weld the parts on the frame where needed then take it apart so a pro welder could come and do the actual welding for you then you could assemble it again for the final time before alignment.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

I can understand that part, I am 76 and don't get near the stuff done that I did a few years ago.

My thought still is that if you already have the fatman kit sitting there The measuring part is going to take close to the same amount of time and if you fit the crossmember and upper control arm mounts in place and tack them in place and do your checks it shouldn't be that hard to find someone to to the actual welding.

I'm not one of those clowns that thinks you have to do it all yourself or you aren't a real hot rodder or customizer or car guy for that matter, You do what you can do best on it and you get others to do what you either don't trust your skills on, don't have the equipment to to do or just flat don't have the available time to do it. I have a real issue with these charactors on the net who shout that you have to do it all yourself or you aren't a real car guy but you never see the car that they "built" Their Avatar is usually some 60's rust bucket to boot.

I see this bolt on on Ebay eBay item number:115492544206

Or for 50.00 less eBay item number:166354421523

Or the same kit from Speedway for 100 more https://www.speedwaymotors.com/1947-...g-2,50961.html

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

just beware that any crossmember you install, if the truck is going to sit lower than stock, the axle center line may need to change otherwise the wheel looks to be too far back in the opening. it is best to have a wheel and tire the size you want to run when done, for mock up purposes. when doing the conversion place the truck on stands at the rake angle you want and also level side to side. a digital level is good for this but they can be pricey for a long one. what I have done is use the digital torpedo level sitting on top of my regular 4ft bubble level. a digital torpedo level is not gonna break the bank and will give the same reading no matter wht angle you look at it. a bubble level is really only accurate if read from straight on.
the factory assembly manual is a free download from the trifive site. it will have the frame and body drawings to show the factory axle centerline. most of the aftermarket cross memberts will have you measuring off the center of the front spring forward mount hole so a center punch mark at that location will likely help you later when locating the cross member. what I do is use a combination square from the clean frame to mark the fore and aft edge of the hole in the frame or the spring pin bushing hole. then find the center between those marks, punch a mark on the frame at that spot and use that as a standard reference mark. do both sides. most will say to move the axle center line ahead an inch or more, depending on how much your new suspension will drop the truck and also the size of tire you will run. larger diameter tire will show the difference more than a small diameter tire.
I highly recommend to read up on the independent front suspension geometry before you start so you know how what you are doing will affect the new steering characteristics of the truck. one reason why a bolt in unit may be better because the upper and lower control arm pivots are usually already placed in the correct spot compared to some weld in units where you will need to place those and hopefully get the dimensions and angles correct for anti dive and control arm angles and pivot point spacing

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

Thanks! I have the axle centerline marked, subject to rechecking. I used a plumb bob to find center and marked it with a punch. I like the idea of how to mark the center of the spring mount hole. I will want to look at the assembly manual again and see if I can find that measurement. The quality of the picture I had was not very good. I expect to have to move the crossmember forward some to get the right look. I should be able to clamp it in place and mock it up before drilling any holes. I don't have the wheels I plan to use handy yet. I will be able to "borrow" a couple of S-10 Wheels for the front. The rear end is out of a big Pontiac and has a 5x5" lug pattern. I picked the front suspension as my starting point because I had to start somewhere. There is so much to do. I have not made a comprehensive list yet, but I did start a journal . Anyway, I appreciate all the feedback!

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

using the plumb bob idea works but could be off a little depending on if the frame was set level at the time.
when doing the cross member it is important to have the frame set up on stands that will hold the frame true no matter what kind of work you are doing. sometimes installing a cross member can mean some muscle work gets done and things can move a little when that happens. I usually recheck the frame several times as I go through the procedure just to be sure. I will say again that a digital level is the way to go here. I used a bubble level and it looked fine, or so I thought when setting up, but when I put the digital on top it was off by several degrees. I realized that it can look different, as far as what you think, when you look at the bubble and the lines around it from different angles. the digital level can't lie that way because it is an LED readout screen.
I used a set of jack stands with the sliding bar removed, a plate tacked on the top with a hole in it, like a washer, and then used 3/4" threaded rod sitting on that with a couple of nuts (one to set the height and the other as a lock nut )and the other end of the rod attached to the frame. the top end of the rod had a 3/8 bolt welded to it which went through an existing hole in the frame with a nut on the other side that got snugged up once the frame was where it needed to be. level it side to side and then set the rake angle you want for the fore to aft angle. grab a sharpie and write the angle on the frame so you don't forget over time as these things can take your memory for a ride with all the numbers, lol. try to place the stands where they won't be in the way for removal or installation of the old and new. when levelling the new cross member be sure to take the levelling across the lower control arm pivot bolts and not off the top of the bent steel part as it can be off in comparison simply due to the way it was all made. I will see if I can find a few pics of some I have done and post them for you to check out.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

a digital torpedo level is really handy for getting the accurate values of things like the lower control arm angles, the brake disc angles etc. they are usually magnetic so they will stick those items well. they can be placed across a longer straight edge to span the distance of the frame rails, etc etc
here are a couple of pics with some possible ideas and showing how the side to side level of the cross member can be checked more accurately by installing the lower control arm pivot bolts but leaving them sticking out far enough so the straight edge can be placed across the span and then the digital level can be placed on that to check.
disregard some of the obvious issues on that unit. it was installed and removed a couple times due to being the incorrect unit for the truck (probably boxed and labelled wrong)
you can see that threaded rod can be quite handy for helping you set things up as you do your mock ups.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

I downloaded the 55-59 assembly manual and I will see if I can find the front axle centerline measurement to a known spot on the frame. Heidt's and TCI specify 20 7/8" from center of front spring pin hole to the center of their crossmember. I'm sure that would not be the same for Fatman or Chassis Engineering.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

finally found a pic showing my version of the jack stand mod with threaded rod. this is a mock up and the whole thing got lowered down before the thing got serious because there was still some sway in the stands at that height. you get the idea though.
another thing the pic shows is how I cross braced it before I removed any of the original cross members were removed. an X shape works well for that, somewhere in the middle so it is out of the way when doing work like front end or rear suspension. I also like to set the frame width with some braces before removing any stock cross members. this frame has been fully boxed as well. after sandblasting and filling all the holes that weren't needed. if doing a full box front to rear really think about where all the wiring and brake lines will run and how the cross members will affect placement of that. some builders put the brake and fuel lines inside the boxed frame. nice and clean but not serviceable.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

post up some pics of what you have and what you plan to use. love to see your work coming along.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

Yes. I need a digital torpedo level. I bought a digital angle finder from Harbor Freight. It's kind of small and hard to find a flat spot on the frame to use it. I modified some trailer jack stands with 3/4" allthread and a 3/8" bolt welded on top. I should be able to get it level with that.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

Okay, I will post up some pics!

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

the assembly manual is a bit convoluted in the diagrams but I think the axle centre line can be found using a couple of other dimensions added up or subtracted from.
the new axle centre line is more based on the tire outside diameter and the ride height you like. lower ride height will mean the centre line may need to go further forward compared to a taller ride height but not so far as to have the tires rub on the fenders when the wheels are turned etc. it is a personal preference thing so you gotta do some mock ups. I left the cab on and hung a fender off the cab with the front of the fender sitting on a wooden block set up and then put the tire in the wheel opening to see how it looked. put tape on the fender, hung a plumb bob to the wheel centre and then marked the tape where I liked the wheel sitting. you really need to have the tires and wheels you will use in the end or else have plywood cutouts of the diameter you want and have the wheel bolt pattern and centre cut out so they can be bolted onto the rotors for mock up. heck, some guys roll the frame around on them, lol. set the cross member up in the frame at the dimension for axle centre line used by TCI and Heidts and clamp it there, then assemble one side of the suspension enough so you can get a brake rotor in place and wheel on to see how it looks. set the lower control arm level to the ground, side to side and fore to aft at the pivot point when you do this and you will see your new ride height as well.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

you kids and digital levels, angle finders and calipers. i had a digital caliper years ago, i used it frequently and always had a dead battery, then i used it rarely and still always had the dead battery issues. no one need a digital either one. if the dead battery doesn't do it in the fragility of dropping one will.

i've owned the same vernier and dial calipers for 40 years, both still work flawlessly. same with bubble levels, i own a couple torpedo, 2 foot and 6 foot levels. built a lot of stuff with them, including a couple of houses and a couple of hotrods.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

yup, you said it ogre, your OLD tools work flawlessly. trouble is the new stuff isn't as well built. take a bubble level for instance. there is a bubble between a couple of lines. in the old tool line the bubble fit distinctly between the two lines. on newer stuff, unless you pay a lot more, the bubble is smaller than the space between the 2 lines, so there is room for error. when you look at the bubble in the level straight on or from straight above you will see the bubble isn't quite in the middle but if you look at it from a bit of an angle you could easily be fooled. a digital level has no room for error, the screen says what it says from whatever angle you are looking from.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

Here is the Fatman crossmember. I marked it for center and added some more reference marks. It barely is as wide as the frame and sits up against the frame. No gussets. Also a pic of the jack stands I put together. I'm not sure if the base is as big as I would like. I do not have the wheels and tires I would like to use, but I have a couple of Pontiac wheels for the back and a couple of old 235/75R-15 tires. The S-10 tires are the same size. Unless I am mistaken, They should be 5x4.75" lug pattern like I will need for the front. I don't mind digital devices one tiny bit, although I have a digital micrometer like Ogre that kills the battery in between uses. And on cold days may need a warm up to work.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

How much was the Craftsman digital torpedo? The Amazon cheapies start a little over $30.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

Just a heads up that the cast rv style stands aren't rated for a lot of weight. I've had a pair break on me before. If you're gonna be under the project maybe you wanna have a stack of lumber under there with you.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

A safety net is never a bad idea!

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

Dont remember totally but around the 30 dollar mark CAD. always more up here for some reason. It works great and has a laser set at 1 1/8 above the base. Dunno why that dimension but that's what it is. Comes in handy for checking things for straight tho.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

do you have the complete MII kit? a couple of pics of what you have would allow the rest of us to advise if you are missing something.

Re: Has anybody here used a Chassis Engineering bolt-in crossmember on a Task Force?
 

check this build for a couple of pics of how I did my jack stands and a few other things that may help you out

https://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/...d.php?t=796475