The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network







Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.

Go Back   The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network > 47 - Current classic GM Trucks > The 1973 - 1987 Chevrolet & GMC Squarebody Pickups Message Board

Web 67-72chevytrucks.com


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-17-2020, 02:49 PM   #1
cebra
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Durham, North Carolina
Posts: 782
Laid Out vs Ride Height Square Body

Does anyone have a side picture of their square body laid out (laying frame/control arms) vs ride height? I searched forever and could never find any bagged truck pics not laid out. I am researching for my next project, I don't want a dropmember or z or anything but am considering bags. Thanks.
__________________
My Daily Driver Build: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=755668
cebra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2020, 05:21 PM   #2
Ziegelsteinfaust
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Temple City
Posts: 3,628
Re: Laid Out vs Ride Height Square Body

If your handy with a welder you can build your own drop member of sorts by sectioning your crossmember. Which helps you get closer to the earth if that is your goal.

It also has the benefit of helping keep your a arms out of the speed bumps.

Also if going that low is your goal consider plating your oil pan, and trans pan. That way they dont rip so easily.
Ziegelsteinfaust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2020, 12:56 PM   #3
cebra
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Durham, North Carolina
Posts: 782
Re: Laid Out vs Ride Height Square Body

After spending a ton of hours researching the internet, I noticed this same question has been asked over a dozen times on this forum and I still have not been able to find a pictures of a truck laid out and at ride height.
__________________
My Daily Driver Build: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=755668
cebra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2020, 01:08 PM   #4
Palf70Step
State of Confusion!

 
Palf70Step's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gulfport, MS USA
Posts: 47,223
Re: Laid Out vs Ride Height Square Body

I don't know if there is any specifically like you want, but here is a large thread that may have something for ya.

http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=492874
__________________
Bill
1970 Chevy Custom/10 LWB Fleetside
2010 Toyota Tacoma PreRunner SR5 Double Cab - DD

Member of Louisiana Classic Truck Club (LCTC)

Bill's Gallery
Life isn't tied with a bow, but it's still a gift.
Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply. Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God!
Palf70Step is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2020, 02:12 PM   #5
Ziegelsteinfaust
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Temple City
Posts: 3,628
Re: Laid Out vs Ride Height Square Body

Quote:
Originally Posted by cebra View Post
After spending a ton of hours researching the internet, I noticed this same question has been asked over a dozen times on this forum and I still have not been able to find a pictures of a truck laid out and at ride height.
There is not really one answer., and many factors come into play. Namely the owner/builder.

Tire diameter.
Which in turn effects effects ride height.
Did you do a stock floor body drop?
Or Z the frame.
Did you narrow the trace width to increase A arm length. Which can increase gross lift?

But typically if you run roughly a 27" tire you will be around 1-1.5" from laying frame. A 2" Z, and cross member section give you more then enough to lay out with out binding ball joints. Binding ball joints on the drop can crack the housings which leads to bad things latter.

Typically a truck that can lay out will look like it is running a 4/6 or 5/7 static drop if the owner drives it alot.

Some litterly at ride height look like a 6/8 or 7/9 drop, but they are really low for all but the most dedicated. I did a 6/8 static for a kid I knew, and damn it was low. He had big hp plans for the truck, but left the 4.3 V6 in there since it was fast enough to get him in trouble that low. Honest to God it would smack frame on the freeway with the right set of bumps. 245/60/15's front, and 255/60/15'ls rear.

If you want the 6/8 look just let some air out when desired. Or atleast set the bags up so they are stiffer at that level. If they are to soft smacking frame will drive you mad. It should still get you a couple inch rise to get into parking lots easier. Setting the bags stiffness is done by the installed height at ride height. If it rides to soft with let's say a 8" height. Remove shims so it is 8.5 inches instead, and test further.
Ziegelsteinfaust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2020, 05:38 PM   #6
tinydb84
Registered User
 
tinydb84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Jose Ca
Posts: 2,871
Re: Laid Out vs Ride Height Square Body

Here is my bother's old truck. Stock inner fenders. Bagged, 4 linked, tubular control arms, and a c notch. Not the best pics. They were taken with an old phone.


__________________
David
Used parts build: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=638991
My brother's Nova: http://www.67-72chevytrucks.com/vboa...d.php?t=727985
Rear suspension rework: http://www.67-72chevytrucks.com/vboa...d.php?t=750557
Instagram: myfabguy
tinydb84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2020, 12:51 PM   #7
cebra
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Durham, North Carolina
Posts: 782
Re: Laid Out vs Ride Height Square Body

Perfect, thank you tiny. My choice of whether or not to proceed with a bagged truck project was hinging on that picture and I like the look at ride height so I am going to go forward. Will start a build thread in the near future.
__________________
My Daily Driver Build: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=755668
cebra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2020, 01:48 PM   #8
SCOTI
Registered User
 
SCOTI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 22,066
Re: Laid Out vs Ride Height Square Body

Stock....
Attached Images
  
__________________
67SWB-B.B.RetroRod
64SWB-Recycle
89CCDually-Driver/Tow Truck
99CCSWB Driver
All Fleetsides
@rattlecankustoms in IG

Building a small, high rpm engine with the perfect bore, stroke and rod ratio is very impressive.
It's like a highly skilled Morrocan sword fighter with a Damascus Steel Scimitar.....

Cubic inches is like Indiana Jones with a cheap pistol.
SCOTI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2020, 01:49 PM   #9
SCOTI
Registered User
 
SCOTI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 22,066
Re: Laid Out vs Ride Height Square Body

Laid out....
Attached Images
  
__________________
67SWB-B.B.RetroRod
64SWB-Recycle
89CCDually-Driver/Tow Truck
99CCSWB Driver
All Fleetsides
@rattlecankustoms in IG

Building a small, high rpm engine with the perfect bore, stroke and rod ratio is very impressive.
It's like a highly skilled Morrocan sword fighter with a Damascus Steel Scimitar.....

Cubic inches is like Indiana Jones with a cheap pistol.
SCOTI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2020, 01:51 PM   #10
SCOTI
Registered User
 
SCOTI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 22,066
Re: Laid Out vs Ride Height Square Body

Ride height....
Attached Images
    
__________________
67SWB-B.B.RetroRod
64SWB-Recycle
89CCDually-Driver/Tow Truck
99CCSWB Driver
All Fleetsides
@rattlecankustoms in IG

Building a small, high rpm engine with the perfect bore, stroke and rod ratio is very impressive.
It's like a highly skilled Morrocan sword fighter with a Damascus Steel Scimitar.....

Cubic inches is like Indiana Jones with a cheap pistol.
SCOTI is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1997-2022 67-72chevytrucks.com