C notched and dropped???

[66-PMD-GMC]

Look, I am not bagging on anyone here, just trying to understand.
It seems the largest percentage of people starting threads on this forum are C notching and or dropping their trucks.
I can't personally see the allure but to each his own.
My question is; does everyone here realize the compromise in structural integrity they are making by hacking up the frame like this??
In a rear or side impact these frames will buckle and fold big time.
I recently saw a Z notched truck that was reinforced and built in such a manner that it seemed the more logical way to "slam" a guys truck.
My other question is; is everyone doing this (slamming their trucks) because it improves the looks of the truck and the handling or is it just a fad that the hobby is going through??

[KroAutomotiveInc]

thats why i did a body drop my trucks lower and still as functional and strong as stock

[rbar]

Mine is lowered 6" in the back with the C notch. I don't like them laying on the ground myself. However, with the C notch I don't have any concerns with it. I'm not hauling or towing anything and if I got a side or rear impact, my concern would first and foremost be the bed. I feel I can rebuild the back end of frame alot easier than replacing my good short wide box bed. As far as the fad, I don't know. I've had lowered versions of these trucks for 25 years and it's always been mostly for the look. Just looks better to me getting rid of all of the open space above the wheels. The laying on the ground air bag versions, that is more recent, but I am not sure if it's going away too soon. If a guy wants his truck lowered some but doesn't care to lay it on the ground, he may still choose to bag it just for the flexibility.

[scum1]

Originally Posted by rbar

Mine is lowered 6" in the back with the C notch. I don't like them laying on the ground myself. However, with the C notch I don't have any concerns with it. I'm not hauling or towing anything and if I got a side or rear impact, my concern would first and foremost be the bed. I feel I can rebuild the back end of frame alot easier than replacing my good short wide box bed. As far as the fad, I don't know. I've had lowered versions of these trucks for 25 years and it's always been mostly for the look. Just looks better to me getting rid of all of the open space above the wheels. The laying on the ground air bag versions, that is more recent, but I am not sure if it's going away too soon. If a guy wants his truck lowered some but doesn't care to lay it on the ground, he may still choose to bag it just for the flexibility.

couldnt of said it better myself...minus the 25 years haha

[adpostel]

I feel I am way behind the "TECHNOLOGY" curve as far as suspension goes. And my 68 has a complete front suspension from an 86 truck. Rides like a dream. And I get alot of looks and thumbs when cruising around. I have a complete bag setup in the mail right now, that coupled with a staggered set of 20's and 18's and I will be able to accomplish alot of things with my truck, from function to form. As opposed to a static drop, with my bag setup, I will be able to adjust the suspension of the truck from perfect/comfortable ride height, lowered cool cruisin' ride height, to layin' it low when parked at the local car cruise or my garage. I just think the advancements in suspension technology can offer me everything in 1 complete package. My truck isn't, and will never be a frame off Barrett Jackson resto. My truck to me is like a tatoo, a personal piece of me that exhibits my own personal style and taste. My 68 is a tweed bucket seat, LWB fleetside, 454 BBC/TH400 Trans, 3:73 Posi, Kenwood system, wood bed, runs super strong, definitely a thumper, I just wanted to add some flare to it, so I thought bags offered me the most flexibility and quality all in one package. It is the only vehicle that I will have ever dropped. I definitely like the style and I choose bags to do it the right way. Think about it, us "baggers" pay darn good money to have quality lowered vehicles. We could do what you are talking about and just add blocks to the rear and cut our springs with a sawzall.....I'm just sayin'

[lakeroadster]

Originally Posted by 66-PMD-GMC

Look, I am not bagging on anyone here, just trying to understand.
It seems the largest percentage of people starting threads on this forum are C notching and or dropping their trucks.
I can't personally see the allure but to each his own.
My question is; does everyone here realize the compromise in structural integrity they are making by hacking up the frame like this??In a rear or side impact these frames will buckle and fold big time.
I recently saw a Z notched truck that was reinforced and built in such a manner that it seemed the more logical way to "slam" a guys truck.
My other question is; is everyone doing this (slamming their trucks) because it improves the looks of the truck and the handling or is it just a fad that the hobby is going through??

I share your concern, and have spent many days running calculations in order to determine the best notch types. There are ways to c-notch the frame and have it be equal, or even stronger, than when it left the factory. Check out this thread:

Frame Notch Based On Strength

[adpostel]

Originally Posted by 66-PMD-GMC

Look, I am not bagging on anyone here, just trying to understand.
My question is; does everyone here realize the compromise in structural integrity they are making by hacking up the frame like this????

From 66-PMD's build thread, "It will be going on a frame I am building using a 66 front half spliced to a 79 rear half. It will be a short bed when I am done."


Just sayin' again......

[66-PMD-GMC]

Originally Posted by adpostel

From 66-PMD's build thread, "It will be going on a frame I am building using a 66 front half spliced to a 79 rear half. It will be a short bed when I am done."


Just sayin' again......

that part of the build changed when I saw that it wasn't going to work without major work and it still wouldn't be right, splicing and boxing a frame and C-notching are completely different.
My build thread isn't even close to up to date but is now a boxed and highly reinforced 1/2 ton SWB with a 3/4 ton 79 front suspension and 3/4 ton rear disk set-up. just sayin'

[adpostel]

Originally Posted by 66-PMD-GMC

that part of the build changed when I saw that it wasn't going to work without major work and it still wouldn't be right, splicing and boxing a frame and C-notching are completely different.
My build thread isn't even close to up to date but is now a boxed and highly reinforced 1/2 ton SWB with a 3/4 ton 79 front suspension and 3/4 ton rear disk set-up. just sayin'

Good deal.... Ya, I was also very interested in the link that the other poster put up about the structural integrities of the different style notches. So your post isn't taken as bashing, but only as reference. Now, after looking at that information about the C-Notch, I'm gonna definitely be going on the fact that, so far, I haven't seen anything negative about C-notching. I won't be doing any towing with the truck, just more of a weekend cruiser. So I'll just hope for the best.

I hope no one takes any of these posts from myself or the OP in a bad way, I think we're all just looking for information. That is what this forum is all about.

66-PMD good luck with your project......

[lakeroadster]

Originally Posted by adpostel

Now, after looking at that information about the C-Notch, I'm gonna definitely be going on the fact that, so far, I haven't seen anything negative about C-notching. I won't be doing any towing with the truck, just more of a weekend cruiser. So I'll just hope for the best. ......

What?

There are a lot of negatives when it comes to c-notches if they are not done correctly. And those negatives are pointed out in the Frame Notch Based On Strength link listed above. Take the time to read through that post and you will see how terribly weak some of the notches are. If you use a c-notch without adequate welded in reinforcement plates your frame can loose 80% or more of its strength.

Don't "just hope for the best". The rest of us driving out there expect more from you than that.

[66-PMD-GMC]

Originally Posted by lakeroadster

What?

There are a lot of negatives when it comes to c-notches if they are not done correctly. And those negatives are pointed out in the Frame Notch Based On Strength link listed above. Take the time to read through that post and you will see how terribly weak some of the notches are. If you use a c-notch without adequate welded in reinforcement plates your frame can loose 80% or more of its strength.

Don't "just hope for the best". The rest of us driving out there expect more from you than that.

That is about all I was after in my post. -Why- is what I was asking.
It isn't a matter of towing or not or load in the bed. It was the obvious that was astounding to me and the fact that it has progressed to a point of absurdly hacked frames. Frames that in a collision will twist right up to the front bumper.
Nobody knows what will happen on the road ever.
But my main question was, and possibly not worded correctly, are people going overboard on this slamming thing to the point of absurdity???
A truck laying on its frame looks dumb to me and cool to others.
But, in a nutshell, some trucks look down right unsafe... to the driver and others on the road...

[JNJchev77]

66PMD... I understand your concerns... I've seen some suspect work as well that I wouldn't step foot in. I, for one, love the bagged look and think the factory look could use improvement, but still love these trucks all the same!

I think some of the younger crowd wanting the look of a bagged truck but not being able to afford quality products or don't have the fab skills to modify correctly could be part of the issue, throwing something together because they took a welding class in highschool and google "how to bag a truck" or something to that affect. I don't have the fabrication skills to drop my truck how I want, so I work hard , save my pennies and bought PB parts, some of the best out their imo.

Out here in AJ I'm sure you see a ton of "junk" as I do

Don't get me wrong, a lot of young guys out there have a ton of skill, far more than I, but it's the ones who don't and think they do, that worry me.

[stevencvn72]

I love threads that start with a disclaimer. I would hardly think that over 50 years of lowered cars running around should be called a fad. As stated above, there's a difference between a hack job and a well engineered lowered ride. And personally, I've seen more hack job 4WD trucks that scare me than lowriders. Other things on cars that scare me: Bald tires, no brakes, bumpers falling off, no visability out the back window, Studebakers.... Lets not try and pigeon hole the lowered crowd here.

[adpostel]

Originally Posted by lakeroadster

What?

There are a lot of negatives when it comes to c-notches if they are not done correctly. And those negatives are pointed out in the Frame Notch Based On Strength link listed above. Take the time to read through that post and you will see how terribly weak some of the notches are. If you use a c-notch without adequate welded in reinforcement plates your frame can loose 80% or more of its strength.

Don't "just hope for the best". The rest of us driving out there expect more from you than that.

OK, so what you are saying is that if I purchase a C-notch from a reputable company and install it per instruction, no welding, only bolts, that my frame will be severely handicapped and the structural integrity of the truck will be compromised to the point of unroadworthiness?

What is the percentage of catastrophic failures of c-notches marketed by reputable companies?

I personally haven't heard of anyone having an issue with a bolt in C-notch failing all by itself. If I am in a wreck and the frame is damaged ANYWHERE, including the C-notch, I would say it is unusable and would probably be parting the truck out anyway.

All I'm meaning to say regarding "hoping for the best" Is that I ordered a C-notch and will install it per instruction and see what happens. I can almost guarantee you that my rear end and bed is not gonna just come loose all over the highway because I installed a c-notch.......

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by adpostel

OK, so what you are saying is that if I purchase a C-notch from a reputable company and install it per instruction, no welding, only bolts, that my frame will be severely handicapped and the structural integrity of the truck will be compromised to the point of unroadworthiness?

What he's trying to say politely is.....

... if you purchase a C-notch from a reputable company and install it per instruction, no welding, only bolts, that your frame will be severely handicapped and the structural integrity of the truck will be compromised vs. how it came from the factory.

It won't be as strong as the original un-cut/un-modified c-channel.

[Grandpa's CST]

IMO these type of mods are all about the look of the truck. As a collision shop manager with 25 years in the business and an owner of a C notched truck I accept the fact that my truck is modified and should not be used in the same fashion as an unmodified one was originally intended, I also believe there is no way the C notched frame would react the same as an unmodified version in a rear impact collision, just lowering or raising a truck effects the impact (bumper) heights of most cars/suvs on the road. These things are personal choices and consequences of any modifications should always be considered. Good topic! I still like to look of a bagged C notched big wheeled truck.

[lakeroadster]

Originally Posted by 66-PMD-GMC

But my main question was, and possibly not worded correctly, are people going overboard on this slamming thing to the point of absurdity???
A truck laying on its frame looks dumb to me and cool to others.
But, in a nutshell, some trucks look down right unsafe... to the driver and others on the road...

I personally love the look of a truck laying frame. But if a truck "lays frame", meaning the frame or any suspension components touch the road when aired out, it is unsafe and may even be illegal due to violating "scrub line" requirements.

Only exception is a truck with removable bump stops. Get to a show or cruise in, remove the bumpstops, air out the truck. It can be done, and would be cool if engineered into the design.

I saw a real world application of the importance of "scrub line" about 15 years ago. I drove up on a guy in a "patina'd" 47 Ford Coupe whose car was literally facing the wrong direction up on a sidewalk. His front right tire went flat, and the car had stepped lower a-arms. When the right front tire went flat the lower a-arm dug into the asphalt and it spun him up onto the sidewalk, in his own words "in an instant". You could see where the a-arm had dug out the asphalt. Luckily no pedestrians were on the sidewalk and the speed limit was 35, so he wasn't traveling that fast. Still tore his car up pretty bad though.

There is a lot of thought that goes into the design of stock suspensions by Engineers that go through "worse case" real world scenarios. Scrub lines are one of those designed in features.

I have never understood why anyone would intentionally build a suspension that when totally aired out -and/or- when a tire goes flat, that the suspension would rub the road. This leaves you with little, if any, control over the steering of the vehicle. I guess I am more of a function drives form kind of guy, with safety taking job one priority when making modifications. Life is to short to trust an air bag or a tire with you or your loved ones life.

Something to think about?

[66-PMD-GMC]

Originally Posted by stevencvn72

I love threads that start with a disclaimer. I would hardly think that over 50 years of lowered cars running around should be called a fad. As stated above, there's a difference between a hack job and a well engineered lowered ride. And personally, I've seen more hack job 4WD trucks that scare me than low-riders. Other things on cars that scare me: Bald tires, no brakes, bumpers falling off, no visability out the back window, Studebakers.... Lets not try and pigeon hole the lowered crowd here.

I never said anything about cars and I wasn't referring to all low-riders being a fad.
I owned a 65 Impala 2 door low-rider with cragars and 560's in 1976 as a high school ride. I know about low-riders.
As a matter of fact, I was referring to 60-66 GMC/Chevrolet trucks.
I also said, in not so many words that it was a matter of taste and to each his own. While it isn't my preference, what is being built today as a rule doesn't look safe, doesn't look like it would handle well at all and the functionality as a ride.... looks questionable.
Look at "monster" trucks. Big Foot made a splash and then everyone and their brother had to have 18X44 monster mudders on their 4X4's. This escalated into the so called "monster trucks" of today that are noting more than a tube frame roll cage with a fiberglass sort of truck body wrapped around it.
My point of the truck slam-a-thon that goes on in the 60-66 threads is that 8 out of 10 threads started are about trucks dragging frame and if it is a fad, what made it happen and why C notch?
C-notching will be replaced by something else like Z notching and channeling as it only makes structural sense and seems the logical next step if this fad goes on.
As far as a bolt on C notch.... seriously... that is nothing I would risk my life on.

[66-PMD-GMC]

Originally Posted by lakeroadster

When the right front tire went flat the lower a-arm dug into the asphalt and it spun him up onto the sidewalk, in his own words "in an instant". You could see where the a-arm had dug out the asphalt. Luckily no pedestrians were on the sidewalk and the speed limit was 35, so he wasn't traveling that fast. Still tore his car up pretty bad though.


Something to think about?

Exactly. I agree totally

[N2TRUX]

Originally Posted by 66-PMD-GMC

Look, I am not bagging on anyone here, just trying to understand.
It seems the largest percentage of people starting threads on this forum are C notching and or dropping their trucks.
I can't personally see the allure but to each his own.
My question is; does everyone here realize the compromise in structural integrity they are making by hacking up the frame like this??
In a rear or side impact these frames will buckle and fold big time.
I recently saw a Z notched truck that was reinforced and built in such a manner that it seemed the more logical way to "slam" a guys truck.
My other question is; is everyone doing this (slamming their trucks) because it improves the looks of the truck and the handling or is it just a fad that the hobby is going through??

When you come to a forum and start a post with " I am not bagging on anyone here" you have already sent a message that is going to generate some negative responses. Then you follow it with "I can't personally see the allure ... and.... does everyone here realize the compromise in structural integrity they are making by hacking up the frame like this??

If you really want to educate yourself, then ask how can it be done safely rather than start a post that is a thinly disguised attempt to stir crap.

Lets start with your biased opinion that since you don't much care for lowered trucks, that it must all be a "fad" that will soon go away. I have been driving lowered vehicles for 30 years and it was going on long before I started, so I'm not seeing it as anything "trendy" that will soon go away.

More to the point, is why you feel that a truck that requires a C-notch must be "hacked" and the "structural integrity" has been compromised? If you actually spend some time reading the posts in this forum you might realize that every Staff Member and most regular users here promote doing suspension mods in the safest possible manner.

John (lakeroadster) and Scoti are perfect examples of members that go above the average with their concerns over structural integrity of their modifications. If you take the time to look closer you will see that is very much what we all try to promote here.

If you came here to learn, please do some research and ask questions in a positive manner. We will be glad to offer you some positive insight to our passion for lowered trucks. If you continue with the condescending devils advocate approach, your stay will be short and uncomfortable.

Just to get you started on the right path, a lowered truck that is not equipped with a hydraulic suspension hasn't been called a "Lowrider" in a few decades, so please adjust your terminology accordingly.

[broey]

Worst thread ever.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by 66-PMD-GMC

That is about all I was after in my post. -Why- is what I was asking.
It isn't a matter of towing or not or load in the bed. It was the obvious that was astounding to me and the fact that it has progressed to a point of absurdly hacked frames. Frames that in a collision will twist right up to the front bumper.
Nobody knows what will happen on the road ever.
But my main question was, and possibly not worded correctly, are people going overboard on this slamming thing to the point of absurdity???
A truck laying on its frame looks dumb to me and cool to others.
But, in a nutshell, some trucks look down right unsafe... to the driver and others on the road...

While I share your concerns about some builds being possibly unsafe, these trucks are 45+yrs old on average & aren't exactly up to todays safety standards set forth by government regulation.

Has lowering, which has been around since the 60's/70's gotten to the point of absurdity? Of course. Just like many mainstream trends, someone is always looking to push the standard to a new level. In the case of dropping a truck, some opt to put the sheet-metal on the concrete. I personally don't like it. I like them low but like the adjustabilty that air-ride offers so the truck can still be used as a truck.

[YBNORML]

New title, same old thread. It seems like this one pops up about every month or so.
Posted via Mobile Device

[SBTork]

Originally Posted by broey

Worst thread ever.

hate to beat a dead horse, but I am with this guy

[66-PMD-GMC]

OK,
I won't quote and I won't comment in a negative way.
Expressing attitude in written form is highly difficult and there are those that perch and wait to jump on people for asking questions.
I don't question anyone's integrity and was unsuccessful in expressing that from the beginning of this thread.
Looking back.... I should have worded it differently.
I could care less about how long anyone has driven low-riders and don't care to update my vocab.. thanks anyway.
I don't know about lowering trucks in this fashion because I have had no interest in this type of vehicle in the past so I never paid any attention to them but now I am curious so....
I will reword this as follows;
It is this........ WHY does the majority of truck lowering projects involve a C-notch?
And as I posted... I saw a Z-NOTCH truck that seems a better way to do it. So WHY do most take the route of the C-notch???? because of limitations of their fabrication skills??? Because C-notching is better than Z-notching and channeling the bed.
What other ways exist that may be better?
And my final question, where better to do RESEARCH on this than with the guys that are doing it on this thread??!!
Please school a 5 decade old guy on this.....