Am I losing my mind??!?

[**grumpy**]

Ive had lots and lots of old cars and trucks. Ive had 2 AD chevy trucks, a 54 and a 48.
Ive never owned a 60-66 stepside. Although Ive had numerous fleetsides.

Im making myself crazy because I swear my rear wheels look too far back..

Ive been under it. Looked at everything.

I originally thought the driveshaft was bottomed out and forcing the RE back. But these pics Im posting here are with driveshaft not bolted up.

Then I thought the ubolt nuts were too loose and letting it move. So I tightened them babys up til my 360 lbs couldnt get'em any tighter...

So here it sits. Im at a loss..

I looked at the recent 60-66 stepper thread, and some of those look the same. Others dont.

All this and I havnt even gotten to the master cylinder problem yet...

[lakeroadster]

Grumpy,

That's the way they were from the factory. Since the rear end is on a swing arm the higher you raise the truck the more the rear tire moves forward in the opening, the lower your truck is the more it moves back on the opening.

Check out this thread and my avatar photo to the left........

http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=409621

[markeb01]

You are not alone in thinking the spacing is inconsistent. Some of it is perspective, as shown in the following two shots. Straight on the wheelbase looks relatively centered, from an angle it looks like the entire bodywork is too far forward. With stock wheels the effect is worse.





Lowering the suspension seems to exacerbate the offset. I’m assuming this is caused by the trailing arms being at a flatter angle to the ground, effectively lengthening the arm and moving the rear end farther back. By way of exaggerated comparison, if the rear axle was raised a foot higher, the rear axle would move substantially forward due to the increased angle of the arm swinging forward as it moves down.

Many times I’ve thought both my front and rear wheels where mounted too far to the rear, while other trucks are not. I’ve also found the effect can be worse on one side than the other depending on how square the bed and body are mounted on the frame. The mounts allow for a lot of adjustability. Makes me wonder what kind of production tolerances GM used when they assembled these trucks.

[**grumpy**]

Wow. really...
Im not a fan.
Hmm..well at least Im not crazy.

Wonder why the fleetsides are so less noticable..

Bummer. I dont like it.

Thank you. I appreciate the info..

[lakeroadster]

Originally Posted by markeb01

With stock wheels the effect is worse.

Mark,

Really? Seems to me the bigger the diameter the more noticeable it is?

[markeb01]

Hi John, my thinking was the flatter and thinner the wheel, the more tucked up under the truck it is, giving the appearance it is even more ill fitting, like in this example. I see your point too. I must admit I can't remember ever owning another vehicle of any type where the tires didn't sit in the middle of the wheel well.

[sixtyfour]

Maybe it has something to do with longbed or short? Here's my longstep at stock height and lowered. Looks different from yours grumpy...

[Chevy Fleetside]

This is with a 4" drop and the truck was originally a Fleetside. The Fleetside bed is going back on by the way. You also have to remember that the beds were on the older trucks also. They didn't redisign them untill 67. So these truck really belong on 55 to 59 trucks.

[markeb01]

Originally Posted by Chevy Fleetside

You also have to remember that the beds were on the older trucks - these really belong on 55 to 59 trucks.

That is no doubt a very basic answer to the stepside wheel well misalignment question. The styling of the cab was designed to blend with the new fleetside bed. The stepside bed was an afterthought, what happened to be available in inventory. I don't suppose a great deal of thought went into where the axle ended up from a design standpoint.

I read somewhere GM did not intend to replace the 1955 stepside bed for the new 67 models either. A designer took it on his own to design and build a clay model and presented it to management. They liked it so much a new budget had to be added to allow it to be built. I wish they had done the same with the 1960 redesign as well. It would have been interesting to see what a harmonizing stepside bed would have looked like.

[likaroc13]

Originally Posted by markeb01

That is no doubt a very basic answer to the stepside wheel well misalignment question. The styling of the cab was designed to blend with the new fleetside bed. The stepside bed was an afterthought, what happened to be available in inventory. I don't suppose a great deal of thought went into where the axle ended up from a design standpoint.

I read somewhere GM did not intend to replace the 1955 stepside bed for the new 67 models either. A designer took it on his own to design and build a clay model and presented it to management. They liked it so much a new budget had to be added to allow it to be built. I wish they had done the same with the 1960 redesign as well. It would have been interesting to see what a harmonizing stepside bed would have looked like.

with all the great metal fabricators/designers out there (some in this forum), someone should come up with a stepside bed that truly works for these trucks...i loved my '93 fullsize stepside, but i like fleetsides best on these trucks simply because the styling fits better IMO

[Malibob]

Mine is the same Grump

[Keith Seymore]

I think what you are seeing is "parallax error", which is when the relationship between two objects changes based on the angle of viewing. It is made worse when the two items are not in the same plane.

This is the same phenomenon that causes your wife to yell at you because she thinks the gas gage is on empty, but when you look it shows a quarter of a tank....



BTW - I'm not debating that the tire looks too far rearward in the opening (statically and when viewed directly from the side), just saying that it is further complicated by parallax.

K

[lakeroadster]

"Parallax Error" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax

I learned something today. Man I just love this website! Thanks for the post Keith.

[markeb01]

X2. Knew the concept, never knew the name until today. Thanks!

[**grumpy**]

Thanks guys. Even those using big fancy words..

Im thinking maybe I'll pull the 15x8 steelies and 275-60's off, and replace them with 15x6s with 215-75s..

Maybe pulling the wheel in will hide the look somewhat.

Well, at least I know Im not crazy now. At least from this issue...lol

[lakeroadster]

Tim,

For what it's worth, IMHO, your truck looks fine the way it is.

I think you will find that going with narrower rims and narrower tires is a step backwards, again in my opinion.

[REDNOSE65]

Funny...I thought the same about mine a couple of weeks ago.

Crack kills!!! LOL

[**grumpy**]

Originally Posted by lakeroadster

Tim,

For what it's worth, IMHO, your truck looks fine the way it is.

I think you will find that going with narrower rims and narrower tires is a step backwards, again in my opinion.

Well, I did try some new shoes on the old truck today..
Im thinking I'll leave these on til after Columbus Goodguys next week.

Or rather, I hope it sells better with these on..haha.

I hope to drive it the 170 miles down there, and hitch a ride home. I have my eye on something I really want, but da truck has to sell before it can happen.

Plus I think Im feeling the smaller tires and 15x6 wheels and painted steelies better..