HG's Adjustable Track Bar

[stich626]

Originally Posted by lakeroadster

Using Autocad Inventor Pro

Really? When shocks fail they typically aren't as strong... they don't fail, get rock hard and break mounts. The point is GM went from a better design in 1966, to a weaker design in 1967. Look at shock mounts on new Chevy Trucks... they capture both sides.

And some of the aftermarket parts manufacturers are mimicking the weaker design in the shock relocation kits they are peddling. And they are selling them with shocks that are much harsher on suspensions, due to newer shock absorber technology.

• If you use the truck to haul loads, the shock loads are more severe.
• If you use your truck like a car the single mount will probably be just fine

Why settle for the weaker design? Or even worse, take of the stronger design and replace it with a weaker one?

and if the shocks where replaced when their service life was up. there isn't an issue,,
shocks don't hold up the truck.. air shocks and spring helper shocks are what kills 99% of mounts, yes the older set up is better never siad it wasn't..
but the 67-72 don't fail because of an engineering point..
it's use'n shocks as springs (air or spring helper shocks) or a locked up shock (frozen or bent ) not the mount..

[stich626]

Originally Posted by lakeroadster

I guess we will agree to disagree.

thats fine..
but I gotta ask, why do you think a load in the bed (say for sh and giggles 1000lb) adds load to the shock.. the wheel/trail arm/rearend isn't any heavier.
nor did the spring rate change.. shock is only controlling the spring that didn't change.. it's still so many lb per inch
load only lowered the travel some..
what am I missing..
yes if you add shock valving that is set up for a 4 by 4 or
to run a road course , then ya, it stress the mount more than the engineers ever though of..
never mind the fact they never engineered the trucks to last 40+ years..
just wondering your take on all this..