The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network







Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.

Go Back   The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network > General Truck Forums > Suspension

Web 67-72chevytrucks.com


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-01-2015, 04:14 PM   #1
Tree-50
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 120
Crossmember question/shocks

Why does everyone just run the flat plate for the upper bracket up front? Why doesn't anyone make a step style one that would allow the bag to go up inside the crossmember for a few extra inches? Would it weaken the structure if you had to widen it a little bit? I don't care about losing the lift if that's why it's not done?


To the guys running the 1950s mercury shocks, what mercury model/year or part number? Are you using these INSTEAD OF or WITH a relocation kit?

Bags and tank will be here next week, already have valves and most of the electronics, just need a few elevel harnesses and i'm set! Getting excited.
Tree-50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2015, 04:27 PM   #2
SCOTI
Registered User
 
SCOTI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 21,914
Re: Crossmember question/shocks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tree-50 View Post
Why does everyone just run the flat plate for the upper bracket up front? Why doesn't anyone make a step style one that would allow the bag to go up inside the crossmember for a few extra inches? Would it weaken the structure if you had to widen it a little bit? I don't care about losing the lift if that's why it's not done?


To the guys running the 1950s mercury shocks, what mercury model/year or part number? Are you using these INSTEAD OF or WITH a relocation kit?

Bags and tank will be here next week, already have valves and most of the electronics, just need a few elevel harnesses and i'm set! Getting excited.
They run the flat upper plate vs alternatives because they're easy & available. Cutting a pocket into the x-member can be done but it takes fab work vs just drilling 4 holes & moving on to another part of the install.
__________________
67SWB-B.B.RetroRod
64SWB-Recycle
89CCDually-Driver/Tow Truck
99CCSWB Driver
All Fleetsides
@rattlecankustoms in IG

Building a small, high rpm engine with the perfect bore, stroke and rod ratio is very impressive.
It's like a highly skilled Morrocan sword fighter with a Damascus Steel Scimitar.....

Cubic inches is like Indiana Jones with a cheap pistol.
SCOTI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2015, 04:32 PM   #3
Tree-50
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 120
Re: Crossmember question/shocks

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCOTI View Post
They run the flat upper plate vs alternatives because they're easy & available. Cutting a pocket into the x-member can be done but it takes fab work vs just drilling 4 holes & moving on to another part of the install.
Excellent, then that's what I plan on doing; widening it enough to drop it an extra 2-3" from fitting inside the upper spring mount hole.
Tree-50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2015, 09:25 PM   #4
PGSigns
Senior Member
 
PGSigns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Hayes Va
Posts: 4,569
Re: Crossmember question/shocks

With the flat plate and cupped lowers my cross member sits on the ground. The bags have plenty of room to completely reach there deflated height. No need to tuck them in the upper.
Jimmy
__________________
60 to 66 Chevy and GMC window decals
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=661131
Good friends, good food and a hotrod what else do you need?
1966 BBW long fleet Daily driver
1965 BBW short fleet Sold and going to a good home
1965 Suburban
2003 3500 Duramax
2005 Ultra Classic
PGSigns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2015, 05:12 PM   #5
Tree-50
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 120
Re: Crossmember question/shocks

Quote:
Originally Posted by PGSigns View Post
With the flat plate and cupped lowers my cross member sits on the ground. The bags have plenty of room to completely reach there deflated height. No need to tuck them in the upper.
Jimmy
Do you have any pics, stance and of suspension? I only ask because I see tons of guys and while they're bagged they don't look any lower than a decent coil set up...like 5+" off the ground still.

I was going to ask what people are using for steering stops when they box/cup?
Tree-50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2015, 05:37 PM   #6
SCOTI
Registered User
 
SCOTI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 21,914
Re: Crossmember question/shocks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tree-50 View Post
Do you have any pics, stance and of suspension? I only ask because I see tons of guys and while they're bagged they don't look any lower than a decent coil set up...like 5+" off the ground still. I was going to ask what people are using for steering stops when they box/cup?
The bags can get it lower but are likely @ a similar height vs a coil truck because that's what it needs to travel w/o hitting anything. The x-member (lower a-arm pivot points specifically) get real close to the pavement @ 6+" of front drop. Bags can also provide some lift if necessary (handy when it comes to rolling a jack under the front end vs a dropped coil set-up).

Where I see the benefit of changing the upper or lower mounting position (pocket heights) is that it could help put the bag @ its ideal pressure range @ ride height if the traditional plate method doesn't allow it.
__________________
67SWB-B.B.RetroRod
64SWB-Recycle
89CCDually-Driver/Tow Truck
99CCSWB Driver
All Fleetsides
@rattlecankustoms in IG

Building a small, high rpm engine with the perfect bore, stroke and rod ratio is very impressive.
It's like a highly skilled Morrocan sword fighter with a Damascus Steel Scimitar.....

Cubic inches is like Indiana Jones with a cheap pistol.
SCOTI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2015, 08:00 AM   #7
PGSigns
Senior Member
 
PGSigns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Hayes Va
Posts: 4,569
Re: Crossmember question/shocks

My static dropped truck ride height and the bagged truck are about the same. Low enough to look good tall enough to get in and out of parking lots. They are both riding on stock front crossmembers. Any lower for a ride height and the control arms become an issue with hitting the ground. Last thing I want to do is tear a control arm off the truck with the roads we have around here. Also to go much lower with the stock subframe would start to get the tie rod angles higher than I would like and induce more bump steer. If I wanted to go lower then I would need to go to a sectioned front cross member or a setup like a drop member. This will get the suspension raised up in the truck to get good geometry and ground clearance.
Jimmy
__________________
60 to 66 Chevy and GMC window decals
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=661131
Good friends, good food and a hotrod what else do you need?
1966 BBW long fleet Daily driver
1965 BBW short fleet Sold and going to a good home
1965 Suburban
2003 3500 Duramax
2005 Ultra Classic
PGSigns is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1997-2022 67-72chevytrucks.com