![]() |
Register or Log In To remove these advertisements. |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#9 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 22,570
|
Re: Starting 1966 Factory Short Bed Build, Bagged, 383 Stroker and Muncie M20 4-Speed
Quote:
Those bags look like the standard C10 fronts (2600's/SS7's/Firestone 224c F6873) have about a 6" recommended ride height @ pressure. If/when you deviate from that recommended pressure, it impacts ride quality. I ran that same size bag in the rear w/no bracket & it took only ~25psi to achieve my desired ride height (top of axle tube @ bottom of frame rail lip/approx. 2.5" from bottoming out on the c-notch). Now, I also had lowering blocks in the rear which should be a wash for your bag bracket since they prob both were similar in height. Below 30psi the ride was too bouncy & felt like it was basically too much for the shock. You might want to set it up & verify dimensions. The smaller Dbl. Convoluted bag (2500/SS6's/255c F6781) are ~5" @ recommended ride height @ pressure (40-50psi likely). You get a much better ride quality w/the correct air pressure. Food for thought. You sound like you weren't planning to go as low as mine was so you might be ok. I figure it's worth mentioning while you're still in the build stages. A pic for reference . This was a bolt-in C-notched frame, bags directly bolted to the frame/Truck-Arm, & 1.5" blocks. I know it's a different year/body style but the chassis' are almost identical for the ride height concerns/comparisons....
__________________
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. |
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|