Crossmember Notch instead of Z

[milehightoyz]

I have read countless numbers of threads on this board about zing and sectioning xmembers and notching xmembers (for framerails only). There is alot of great info but I still have a few questions.

A common underlying problem with all methods seems to be the steering issues created once everything is moved up, whether it be xmember sectioning, xmember notching for frame rails, or zing. Zing seems to address the steering issue best of the 3 methods listed due to moving the entire steering assembly up in conjunction with the suspension components.

I read through a recent thread by HOTRODYJ who moved his entire crossmember up 5" without zing his frame which I guess would best fall under the crossmember notch method. I dont need that much of a drop as I do have dropped spindles but the thought of moving everything up higher into the rails without having to cut the frame is very appealing.

I was originally planning on doing a 1.5" xmemver drop in conjunction with a 2" z to get where i need to be. After reading his thread I am considering just moving my crossmember up inbetween the frame rails 3.5" as opposed to the combination of xmember dropping and zing. This sounds to me like less work and not having to put two cuts in my main frame rails for a z.

The only problem I can for see is steering which I believe could be addressed with a rack and pinion set up of some sort. Am I overlooking anything else that could create problems using this method other than motor/trans placement? Thanks in advanced.

[kdrodworks316]

What about a stock floor body drop? The body will be bone stock, but you cut the frame under the cab length wise and remove 3"-4" of height from the frame. With the 2x3 tubing added into the inside of the frame and then plated and the cab mounts dropped, it will be just as strong as stock and all of the steering and suspension stays where it is. Just a thought

[milehightoyz]

thanks for the reply. im actually working on a 67 short fleet. im not looking to lay the frame but would leik to get it pretty close within an inch and a half. im running a 245/40/20 up front and a 285/35/22 out back. my pinchweld and frame are in pretty close proximity of one another negating the need for any kind of body drop. the main issue i am trying to address are the low hanging LCAs.

[jlaird]

I think the main reason most people shy aware from the rack and pinion/stock xmember combo are from the complexities of setting up the steering geometry correctly.

[rotgg]

i would just do a 3.5" Z if i was doing it

[milehightoyz]

Originally Posted by jlaird

I think the main reason most people shy aware from the rack and pinion/stock xmember combo are from the complexities of setting up the steering geometry correctly.

I guess I dont understand how it would be any more complicated to set it up when its moved up 3.5" as opposed to stock other than having to clearance the frame rails for the rack/rod ends/etc? Or am I missing something else? Thanks for the input.

[PBFAB.COM]

Originally Posted by milehightoyz

I guess I dont understand how it would be any more complicated to set it up when its moved up 3.5" as opposed to stock other than having to clearance the frame rails for the rack/rod ends/etc? Or am I missing something else? Thanks for the input.

The difficult part is where the rack would need to mount... it would be impossible to use the factory u-bolts, safely, to clamp the lower control arms in place. The u-bolt and mounting nut would interfere with the rack body.

[johnboyon20s]

i sectioned my xmember 2 inches and moved my stock steering up 1 inch notched my driver arm for clearance, i have about 1/2 clearance from ground to xmember, i would say u could go 1.5 inch xmember section and run a bottom cup and upper plate since u say u dont wanna lay out


also, when i went to heatwave i seen a c-10 that had his xmember sectioned and he had rackand pinion steering and he had custom motor mounts

[kdrodworks316]

Originally Posted by porterbuilt

The difficult part is where the rack would need to mount... it would be impossible to use the factory u-bolts, safely, to clamp the lower control arms in place. The u-bolt and mounting nut would interfere with the rack body.

Not to disagree with you nate, but the good thing about using a rack and pinion is you can move the whole steering system around a bit for the proper clearance and still retain proper geometry. I am not an expert by any strech, but I have used r&p in places people said it will never work. Or you can fix the whole problem by purchasing a Dropmember kit from Portebuilt (shameless plug for ya nate)

[HotRodYJ]

Same here, not to argue but the U-bolts are back into the crossmember quite a ways from the steering geometry. I had no issues at all with the R&P getting into them. Here's a pic of mine as an example of where the U-bolts are. I did move the R&P centerline forward a touch from where the stock drag link wouold have been but the vertical location as the steering moves with the suspesnion is pretty much dead on where the stock drag link would have been.This is a 77 C10 crossmember...

[PBFAB.COM]

Better clarify myslef...

Anything can be done without enough time, money, and knowledge. As for installing a rack and pinion on a C10 factory crossmember and setting it up to yield "optimum" steering geometry. It is extremely difficult. It takes, as KD mentioned, moving some of the other pivot points of the suspension components around to harmonize the suspension arcs and eliminate bumpsteer. Different rack bodies and inner tie rod pivot dimensions play a major role. It's not something you can just throw in there and expect it to work well. There is a lot that goes into it.

The easiest way to resolve the steeering, when Z ing the frame or sectioning the crossmember, is to move the steering box and idler arm up the same distance as the Z or the section.

[johnboyon20s]

this site helps me better understand about steering

http://www.carbibles.com/steering_bible.html

[kdrodworks316]

Originally Posted by porterbuilt

Better clarify myslef...

Anything can be done without enough time, money, and knowledge. As for installing a rack and pinion on a C10 factory crossmember and setting it up to yield "optimum" steering geometry. It is extremely difficult. It takes, as KD mentioned, moving some of the other pivot points of the suspension components around to harmonize the suspension arcs and eliminate bumpsteer. Different rack bodies and inner tie rod pivot dimensions play a major role. It's not something you can just throw in there and expect it to work well. There is a lot that goes into it.

The easiest way to resolve the steeering, when Z ing the frame or sectioning the crossmember, is to move the steering box and idler arm up the same distance as the Z or the section.

Couldn't have said it any better myself, now I agree with Nate.

[milehightoyz]

thanks for the input guys. now another question i have is, as far as the difference between sectioning the crossmember (pancaking) as opposed to just notching the rails for the crossmember to move up higher into the rails. is the only advantage to doing the section over the notch to preserve the original motor mount placement?

[Frizzle Fry]

That and pan clearance.

[gringoloco]

Originally Posted by Frizzle Fry

That and pan clearance.

Started yours yet?

[Frizzle Fry]

The donor truck is down to the point where I just need to pull the engine and yank the xmember out and have the rest scrapped. I'm using a spare to minimize down time.

[gringoloco]

How much you gonna do? I was thinkng 'bout a 1". This is also the train of thought I was on when I bought the DM...

[Frizzle Fry]

I have 1" now between my tires and modd'ed fenders, so I'll probably do 7/8". I know it's a lot of work for only 7/8" but it will set the front end exactly where I want it and won't add any more negative camber like arms would. The other thought I had was to do 1" or 1.25" and add bumpstops as needed.