Make it handle

[SBTork]

Originally Posted by lolife99

Hey Rob,... Congrats on winning the Truckin Throwdown.
Amazing truck and driving job.

I will second that. Also, the article on project JoeTouring was very cool too

[KMACD71]

Here's my shot at the body mods using RogueMoe's very nice truck(hope he doesn't mind) as a reference. It's all subjective trying to estimate 2 inches here and 4 here. This was the best picture I had saved on my computer to attempt it. I posted the original picture for reference.

[robnolimit]

Hey. I think you did a great job! Nice truck to start with. We have pencil/line art drawings to scale, but it's nice to see a pict in color. I think most of it looks pretty balanced, but not so sure about the front wheel opening. We will be running a smaller wheel, 18" & 19", and we need full turning at ride hight, without any tire scrub.

[robnolimit]

Here are some pictures of a 57 chevy chassis that we are building.

[robnolimit]

More 57 Chevy Chassis pictures

[amodedude1]

That's some very impressive work, brake booster and cylinder placement is amazing, that's the first time I've seen something like that, I would assume it is for better weight distribution? That's just awesome!

[robnolimit]

thanks Dude, these Big-10 chassis are much wider than stockers, even though the stock body fits right on. This design change allows us to plan the placent of each component to maximize performance.

[robnolimit]

50,000 views!!!!! thanks for all the interest. We've got some cool stuff coming up, I excited to get a few new projects started.

[SCOTI]

The rear of that chassis looks familiar. Silver Bullet-ish....

[ItsRandy]

Originally Posted by robnolimit

thanks Dude, these Big-10 chassis are much wider than stockers, even though the stock body fits right on. This design change allows us to plan the placent of each component to maximize performance.

Hey Rob, are you selling the rear sway bar like the one on your shop truck. I stopped by your shop when you were out of town and (I can't remember his name...hell I can't remember my own name anymore) your guy in the shop let me check out the shop truck. He said the sway bar was not in production yet...I sure would like one, please.

[robnolimit]

Scoti yep, all big 10 chassis share the same suspension front & rear. The 'bullit was/is used as a test bed for chassis development, spring and shock testing, ... so that our results can be duplicated on every chassis that goes out. It's the whole "we race - you win" thing, and it's good for everybody. We will always be willing to share our results, good or bad to help out.
ItsRandy Yes, that swaybar will be avail soon. I'd say mid August. I'll keep you all posted.

[amodedude1]

I just noticed this/ Whats up with the WHOLE rotor being painted braking surface and all, did they come like that or are they some special material or something? jw

[robnolimit]

HA HA, you'd have to ask Wilwood that one. About a year ago, they went to the new 'black face' rotor. The used to be silver zink coated. The black is some kind of industrial ink, and yes, it wipes off with a few good stops, just like the zink did. I'm not sure which looks better, but neither the black ink, or the zink, seam to clog the pads, so brake performance is not bothered. Personally, I think it was a cost+ vs. marketing decision. - but, who knows for sure.

[SCOTI]

Upkeep as well as it's much easier to hide brake dust on a dark surface vs. a light color surface. Rob, you can bring back that old advertising slogan from the late 60's/early 70's for the Big-10 chassis.....

Race to win on Sunday . . ..... Sell on Monday!

[33shooter]

Are you guys going to make a big 10 chassis for the 67-72 c10 guys? Specifically a long bed? That would save me a BUNCH of work, and I think the price wouldn't be too bad actually.

[BigDan3131]

Rob, could you explain why the rearend is in a boxed area with no way to remove it except by taking all the brake parts off and sliding sideways out? It doesn't seem very practical especially for something that sees road time. Sure we don't expect to bend an axle tube but stranger things have happened.

[robnolimit]

33shooter We do make a chassis for the 63-72 C-10 arleady. It isn't a Big-10 style, there isn't room for that under those trucks. It's a 2 x 6 x .188 wall formed tube chassis, using our Wide-Ride IFS, and Fatbar 4-bar. I'll put up some picts.

[robnolimit]

BigDan3131 Well, while i see your concern, I don't consider it to be much of an issue. You see, I'm a numbers guy, and I know that in everything you do in life, there is a trade off. By using an 'underslung' frame rail design, the Big-10 chassis stays very strong all the way to the end of the rail. To match that in conventional construction, we would need to use 2x7x.120 wall tubing (not avail, so we would step up to 2x8) and form it, or fab a kick section. Both of these would be bulky and heavy, but the axle would drop out. Also, the bed floor would be even higher. there is the trade off. With an underslung or caged rear rail design, the rail is light and strong. We can also run fuel lines and battery cables through the lower rail tube. But, as you point out, to remove the rear end, you must pull off at least one brake assembly, and pull it out sideways. All of the other suspension would be unbolted anyway, and the third member fits through the rail opening. With this info in hand, make a fair comparison. *** Traditional construction - Heavy, bulky, higher bed floor, + easier to get the rear axle out. *** Underslung design, + light, strong, - must pull the rear axle out sideways. Before you make a quick desision, add this info in. 1. We use Currie thick wall H.D. 9" Ford housings and axles in all of our chassis. 2. How many axles have you pulled out of a built car/truck? or a driver for that matter? Anyway, everyone has the right to their own opinion, and therefor build style. We're after performance and ride quality first, hope that helps your decision.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by robnolimit

BigDan3131 Well, while i see your concern, I don't consider it to be much of an issue. You see, I'm a numbers guy, and I know that in everything you do in life, there is a trade off. By using an 'underslung' frame rail design, the Big-10 chassis stays very strong all the way to the end of the rail. To match that in conventional construction, we would need to use 2x7x.120 wall tubing (not avail, so we would step up to 2x8) and form it, or fab a kick section. Both of these would be bulky and heavy, but the axle would drop out. Also, the bed floor would be even higher. there is the trade off. With an underslung or caged rear rail design, the rail is light and strong. We can also run fuel lines and battery cables through the lower rail tube. But, as you point out, to remove the rear end, you must pull off at least one brake assembly, and pull it out sideways. All of the other suspension would be unbolted anyway, and the third member fits through the rail opening. With this info in hand, make a fair comparison. *** Traditional construction - Heavy, bulky, higher bed floor, + easier to get the rear axle out. *** Underslung design, + light, strong, - must pull the rear axle out sideways. Before you make a quick desision, add this info in. 1. We use Currie thick wall H.D. 9" Ford housings and axles in all of our chassis. 2. How many axles have you pulled out of a built car/truck? or a driver for that matter? Anyway, everyone has the right to their own opinion, and therefor build style. We're after performance and ride quality first, hope that helps your decision.

I understand the 'why' of the 'underslung' design. Couldn't the opening/s be built to accommodate pulling the rear end w/o removing brake parts?

[robnolimit]

Originally Posted by 33shooter

Are you guys going to make a big 10 chassis for the 67-72 c10 guys? Specifically a long bed? That would save me a BUNCH of work, and I think the price wouldn't be too bad actually.

We Do Make a Chassis for that vehicle, follow this youtube link to check it out. And here are a few pictures

‪1967-72 CHASSIS‬‏ -...

[andrewmp6]

You going to the street rod nationals in Louisville this week rob?

[Greywolf200]

[quote=Greywolf200;4799441]

Originally Posted by robnolimit

[/B]Greywolf[/B] the gain from the tall spindle is that it builds in a faster camber gain curve.

Thanks for the info, that was what I was thinking. What caused me to ask was an item on Ridetech's website. Listed in their 1963-70 front suspension system (pt. no. 11340399) is a spindle which is 1 1/2" taller than a standard spindle. I couldn't find it listed separately anywhere and wasn't going to bother them unless the gains were worthwhile.

Thanks again,

Have you been able to learn anything about the tall spindles? Also, what was the final drop you got on JT? Enjoying the build in Street Trucks.

Thanks,

[robnolimit]

Originally Posted by andrewmp6

You going to the street rod nationals in Louisville this week rob?

I would like to, but we are a bit too busy, need the time here at the shop.

[robnolimit]

[quote=Greywolf200;4823623]

Originally Posted by Greywolf200

Have you been able to learn anything about the tall spindles? Also, what was the final drop you got on JT? Enjoying the build in Street Trucks.

Thanks,

Yes, the tall spindles are "A" body, not truck, so, they aren't much help for us in hauler-land.
The JT drop is as follows - Front crossmember is raised 1 1/2", I notched the bottom of the frame and pushed the whole think up, then I had to notch in to the top side for oilpan clearance. I still think this was easier than the 'sectioned' crossmember plan. Next was 2 1/2 drop spindles, we use McGauphy's, I already had these. Finally, a spring that gave a 2" drop. These are a 3/4 t spring with 1 coil cut off, appx 1000 lb/in. (I posted up the spring info earlier, don't have it in front of me here) So, about 6" total drop, but rides like it is 2"drop. - nice. Out back, I cheated big time. I cut a notch ib the rail behnd the cab, and raised the rear rail 4" over the axle, then back down for the bumper. This took four cuts to do. This mod raised the upper coil mount, shock mounts, and panhard mount. Then I flipped and raised the front trailing arm mounts as high as I could, appx 5" higher than stock position. With a 2" spring, and a 2" block, that is 8" total rear drop. It thinks it is a 2" drop as far as spring travel is concerned. We did use our new design rear shock mounts, panhard bar, and sway bars. I have no ground clearance problems, and it drives great. Soon we are going to switch the rear to air, we need it to carry pallets to powdercoat and such, the drop springs can't carry much load. lol

[65Short]

The JT drop is as follows - Front crossmember is raised 1 1/2", I notched the bottom of the frame and pushed the whole think up, then I had to notch in to the top side for oilpan clearance. I still think this was easier than the 'sectioned' crossmember plan.

Did you add anything to the top of the rail or box the section?

Thanks,
Jon