Register or Log In To remove these advertisements. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
08-23-2016, 10:02 AM | #1 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: OH
Posts: 2
|
1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
Hello, new to the forum and in need of advice/help.
Project is a 1951 Chevy Truck. I have the suspension kit from Flat-Out Engineering installed to utilize the C4 suspension from the 84-87 Corvette. I installed the provided rear Aldan coil overs but I am concerned with the amount of positive camber I now have. During the install, I put in a piece of bar stock the 11-1/2 from center to center hole. This was to simulate the coil over at ride height. Everything was good with that. But now that the coil over is in things seems all askew. The coil over was an Aldan AS654 with a 400# spring. Will the weight the bed, fuel tank, and everything else settle the rear back down? I am hoping there are some more that have used this kit. . . . |
08-23-2016, 10:22 AM | #2 |
Post Whore
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 14,670
|
Re: 1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
I have a flatout front end going in mine now..im not using the rear...but yes..without the engine , trans and body on the frame there is no load on your suspension so your coilovers are unloaded...I'm not sure of the rear spring rate..might holler at Don and double check rear spring rates ..my fronts are 450# springs..there are several guys here using full vette suspension...I'm sure they'll chime in
Last edited by mongocanfly; 08-23-2016 at 10:32 AM. |
08-23-2016, 11:02 AM | #3 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: OH
Posts: 2
|
Re: 1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
Yes, the fronts have the 450# spring rate (white/red mark on the coil). The rear coils are marked blue/red, and according to Aldan that is the 400# spring.
My father-in law and I both stood on the rear crossmember (about 425 lbs.)and could get the rear to squat. But I know flat-out designed the kit and they know what components to use. Yes Don @ Flat-out is great to work with. Just wanted get an end-users perspective. But my front suspension does not look the rear when unloaded. |
08-23-2016, 11:12 AM | #4 |
Post Whore
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 14,670
|
Re: 1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
It might change some when you get a 4 wheel alignment...also double check all your bracket measurements..
|
08-23-2016, 02:03 PM | #5 |
Post Whore
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 14,670
|
Re: 1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
Another thing that'll add some weight and change camber is a full tank of gas..also curious about what size front tires your running..I havnt got that far but I'm gathering info..I want to run a 28" tire as wide as I can get up front..
|
08-23-2016, 05:05 PM | #6 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 572
|
Re: 1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
If you're confident you have everything installed correctly I wouldn't worry much about it as of now. Wait till you have all the weight on the chassis and get the coil over ride height set then see how it's looking. Either way, in the end, I would get it aligned.
|
08-23-2016, 05:30 PM | #7 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toppenish, WA
Posts: 15,711
|
Re: 1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
Yep it should settle out pretty close to right when you get all the weight on the truck. Out side of maybe tape measuring the toe in it's pretty much of a waste of time to try to align it until it is all together with all of the weight there.
__________________
Founding member of the too many projects, too little time and money club. My ongoing truck projects: 48 Chev 3100 that will run a 292 Six. 71 GMC 2500 that is getting a Cad 500 transplant. 77 C 30 dualie, 454, 4 speed with a 10 foot flatbed and hoist. It does the heavy work and hauls the projects around. |
08-23-2016, 06:43 PM | #8 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Idaho
Posts: 8,800
|
Re: 1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
Also may need to get a few miles on it to let the springs settle in and compress.
__________________
1959 Chevy Short Fleetside w/ 74 4WD drive train (current project) OrrieG Build Thread 1964 Chevelle Malibu w/ 355-350TH (daily driver) Helpful AD and TF Manual Site Old Car Manual Project |
08-24-2016, 09:45 AM | #9 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Oklahoma city, ok
Posts: 7
|
Re: 1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
Can everyone see those pics? I'm getting the black x. Most likely on my end but, thought I'd ask.
|
08-24-2016, 11:13 AM | #10 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Idaho
Posts: 8,800
|
Re: 1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
No X here.
__________________
1959 Chevy Short Fleetside w/ 74 4WD drive train (current project) OrrieG Build Thread 1964 Chevelle Malibu w/ 355-350TH (daily driver) Helpful AD and TF Manual Site Old Car Manual Project |
08-24-2016, 01:30 PM | #11 |
Post Whore
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 14,670
|
Re: 1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
Nope...no x...but his pics are huge..
|
08-24-2016, 06:35 PM | #12 |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Cactus Patch So. Az
Posts: 4,749
|
Re: 1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
I would not put too much into the way it sets until you have driven the truck and had it aliened
__________________
53 TuTone Extended Cab 350 4-Spd 3:08 (SOLD) 53 Chevy Moldy pearl green ZZ-4 4L60E 9" 3:25 55 GMC 1st Black Mll (ZZ4) ZZ6 TKO 600 5 sp 3:73 62 Solidaxle Corvette Roman Red (327 340hp 4spd 3:36) C4 & C5 suspension tube chassis LS 3 4L70E 65 Corvette Coupe 327 350hp 4spd 4:11 78 Black Silverado SWB (350/350) 5.3 & 4L60E 3:42 2000 S-Type 3.0 (wife cruiser) 2003 GMC SCSB 5.3 4L60E 3:42 |
08-24-2016, 08:35 PM | #13 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: League City, TX
Posts: 83
|
Re: 1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
I can't say what the end result will be for you, but mine did the same thing. I used a 11 -3/4 in bar for shock height. I took about two inches from the coil adjustment but did not like that. I changed my upper mount to remove another inch. Like others- I would wait until you have more weight on it to decide. It seems the design for the rear is high but on the front ,where a majority of the weight will be, fits fine without adjustment. The rear was jacked up sky high on mine and I could not get the shocks on without adjusting the spring height.
|
08-27-2016, 12:05 PM | #14 |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 96
|
Re: 1951 Flat-Out Engineering suspension
This was mine before alignment if it helps.
|
Bookmarks |
|
|