![]() |
Register or Log In To remove these advertisements. |
|
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#26 |
Stirrer of the Pot
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: washington
Posts: 477
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: melbourne
Posts: 27
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
dont take this thread the wrong way peeps, im not hating on the ones with bags or 22's its just not my liking, i may have worded the thread poorly but its to the point, being that i dont understand why, now there has been some good eye openers on here, and that was the reason why i started this thread, i like non bagged cars/trucks as i feel its more pure but dont get me wrong i can understand the effort people go to but in bags etc,
also i may have had australian ''mini trucks" in mind when i posted this. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Elk Grove Ca
Posts: 629
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 | |
Registered User
![]() Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Burbank CA
Posts: 3,055
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
Quote:
All's good, carry on. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 | |
Square
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Posts: 1,568
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
Quote:
__________________
Squarebody Syndicate |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#31 |
Registered User
![]() Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: FarEastern WVa
Posts: 1,691
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
Before hangin out here low rides weren't my thing either. I've really come to like all the work and low-riders on here. Not that I'm gonna slam my 4x4 Burb. Although bags might be a way for me to go. Lower the truck for entry and exit, raise it for ridin.
Something to think about.
__________________
Past Master Triluminar Lodge #117 GL of WVa My 1963 4x4 Suburban build; http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=531274 My Gallery, now with pics of my 1966 C30 motorhome. http://67-72chevytrucks.com/gallery/...&ppuser=103447 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#32 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: east texas
Posts: 463
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
Quote:
Posted via Mobile Device |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#33 |
Registered User
![]() Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: apple valley, ca
Posts: 2,670
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
I've lowered almost every car I've ever had in the last 30 years because I like the look. 30 years ago, all we could do was cut the coils and add blocks, and they rode pretty badly. As time went on, drop spindles came to the market, along with lowering springs that had better spring rates to help the ride, and the ride got even better. My quest was to have a car at a ride height I liked that would ride comfortably. I can can get pretty close statically, but it has it's limitations, namely ground clearance. It takes a certain driving style in a lowered car to keep from banging the front crossmember on everything. You drive at a slower speed and look faaaarrr down the road for upcoming "challenges".
About 15 years ago, I was at SEMA, and I was checking out the Air-Lift booth and looking at their load leveler trailer bags. I asked the rep if they had ever thought about making a bag that would completely replace the front and rear coil springs. He looked at me like I was nuts. Fast forward to today: Bagged vehicles are everywhere, and parts are readily available in vastly different levels of quality. Some of the bagged vehicles out there are really well-executed, most of them are horrific. In order to make a bagged vehicle work correctly, you have to engineer it correctly. Too often, guys are only concerned about how low it can go (lay frame....hate that term), but never take into consideration about the functionality of the system at ride height. That's the most important thing that guys miss when they design their system. I completely understand your opinion about bagged vehicles. I really do. My challenge to you is to find a well-engineered bagged vehicle in your area and study it closely. See if you can go for a ride in it. If it's designed correctly, you'll be impressed at the ride quality and handling. Please don't judge all bagged vehicles the same. 75% of them out there are garbage. Poorly engineered and constructed with terrible functionality and ride quality. It's too bad you're not closer, and you could go for a ride in a nicely built bagged truck like Delmo's, Dino's or anything that Nathan Porter (Porterbuilt) has designed. I think you might change your mind. You still might not want to build one, but you'll see the appeal of going to an air-suspension.
__________________
Check out my latest endeavor: https://roundsixpod.com My build threads: '55 Chevy: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=247512 '64 C-20: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=446527 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#34 |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Carlos, Ca.
Posts: 3,048
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
I originally got on this site for info on my '63K truck. After seeing what guys are doing with bags, I would really (if funding allowed) like to bag my '63 if anything for a better ride while still being functional for work. The longer I stay on this site, the more I think that I need to find a 2wd so that I can have the lifted and lowered bases covered. Plus I wouldn't feel left out when reading about all the cool lowered stuff that alot of the guys are doing! Can't have it all right! I agree with chvyrestoguy in that it HAS to be well engineered otherwise it's not going to perform like expected (and possibly be unsafe). For now I will just add bags to the long list of upgrades that I think about when that next Cali. pothole compresses my vertabrae another 1/2"!
![]()
__________________
Chris '63 k15 long step Vortec 7.4 - L29 Blackbear tune, Five 0 Motorsports injectors, Chris Straub Cam, NV4500, divorced 205 ![]() 52" front and 63" rear spring swap D44 / 14bff - disc axles Milemarker 9K and 10.5K hydraulic winches 63" & B52 Spring Install http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...ng+swap+thread NV4500 Reverse Build Thread http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...=reverse+build L29 - 7.4 Vortec Build http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...&highlight=L29 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#35 | |
Senior Member
![]() Join Date: May 2007
Location: Doodah Kansas
Posts: 7,773
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
Quote:
well it had to have been way more than 15 years ago, I built this in 1997 and I was assuredly not the first, bag kits were already huge business. ![]() not correcting anything but the year of your idea.
__________________
the mass of men live lives of quiet desperation if there is a problem, I can have it. new project WAYNE http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=844393 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#36 |
meowMEOWmeowMEOW
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: MKE WI
Posts: 7,128
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
^ya but back when we were building those things, they didn't have NEARLY the level of bolt on 3 and 4 links, bag cups etc.
That and the rubber tech has gotten SO much better.
__________________
'66 Short Step / SD Tuned / Big Cam LQ4 / Backhalfed /Built 4l80e / #REBUILDEVERYTHING ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#37 |
Senior Member
![]() Join Date: May 2007
Location: Doodah Kansas
Posts: 7,773
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
yeah nothing bolted on that system. I used a hotrod 4 link from TCI but it was all weld on.
__________________
the mass of men live lives of quiet desperation if there is a problem, I can have it. new project WAYNE http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=844393 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#38 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: melbourne
Posts: 27
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
hahaha nothing worse then it coming from a good place and you end up in a bad one.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#39 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: melbourne
Posts: 27
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
Quote:
anyway to those that took it on the chin and gave me a bit of insite i thank you, and to the others, take it how you want, no skin off my nose |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#40 |
But Found Her 25yrs Later!
![]() Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Oregon City, Oregon
Posts: 10,525
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
I like a little low look.
Slammed looks good, but not for me. I most likely will eventually go to bags in the rear. That way I get the softer ride, but can pump em up if I need to go get some wood pellets for the stove. The previous owner put air shocks, but I just read recently that for very brief and occasional loads, that's okay. But the shock mounts weren't designed to carry loads.
__________________
I lost my 65 - Found it 25 years later: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=426650 66 C20 Service Truck: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=428035 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#41 |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Strathmore, Alberta
Posts: 470
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
I'm not trying to offend anyone, but here is my humble opinion. I love the look of lowered trucks, or lowered anything as much as anyone. But, when I see the fenders and body touching the ground, it looks broken or something, and that it can't be driven that way. I prefer to see the thing at ride height, the way it would look driving down the road. These trucks ride like a car with the coil springs all around, not like they are a rough ride in the first place. The other thing I don't like is when the tires are sticking up in the engine compartment with no inner fenders, and a bunch of the outer and inner fenders chopped out, I just don't like the look of that. Also, the inside of the box is compromised by the frame having to come up so high to clear the rear axle. Some of the box floors are only a foot deep. I chose to be lowered for sure, but spend my money in other parts of the truck. Nothing wrong with bags, just not for me. I am not criticizing anyone, just my 2 cents worth of opinion.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#42 |
But Found Her 25yrs Later!
![]() Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Oregon City, Oregon
Posts: 10,525
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
That's what so cool about these trucks.
I think patina is sad, but I appreciate why others like it. - they say it's o-naturale. ![]()
__________________
I lost my 65 - Found it 25 years later: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=426650 66 C20 Service Truck: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=428035 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#43 | |
Happy to be here
![]() Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Cypress, TX
Posts: 39,023
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
Quote:
![]() BTW- I love your truck, and have evil thoughts about what I would do to it if it were mine. Your P/C is a pretty good vision of what I would do to it... ![]()
__________________
Follow me on Facebook and Instagram @N2trux.com Articles- "Jake" the 84 to 74 crewcab "Elwood" the77_Remix 85 GMC Sierra "Scarlett" "Refining Sierra" |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#44 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Carrollton tx
Posts: 216
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
![]() ![]() First pic all the way up, 2nd pic at ride height. It really dosnt go much lower aired out then at ride height. I never got the lay frame look either,I first used bags because I couldnt get out of my driveway to the alley without first putting down blocks of wood then having to pick them up and put them in the car each time I came or went. After we moved I still put bags on all my stuff. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#45 |
Stirrer of the Pot
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: washington
Posts: 477
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
what I dont understand is why anyone would both building a high performance engine when you can't do faster than 25-35mph through down town anyways. what a waste.
![]() all trucks should have an inline 3 cylinder. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#46 | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2008
Location: tyler texas
Posts: 94
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
Quote:
![]()
__________________
65c10 43,000 original miles ,230 stovebolt,powerglide,3" drop spidles 3" drop springs w/ half coil cut and 5 drop springs in back with 1 1/2 blocks... c notch soon to add hei offy 4 v intake and holley 390 ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#47 | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2008
Location: tyler texas
Posts: 94
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
Quote:
__________________
65c10 43,000 original miles ,230 stovebolt,powerglide,3" drop spidles 3" drop springs w/ half coil cut and 5 drop springs in back with 1 1/2 blocks... c notch soon to add hei offy 4 v intake and holley 390 ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#48 | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2008
Location: tyler texas
Posts: 94
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
Quote:
![]()
__________________
65c10 43,000 original miles ,230 stovebolt,powerglide,3" drop spidles 3" drop springs w/ half coil cut and 5 drop springs in back with 1 1/2 blocks... c notch soon to add hei offy 4 v intake and holley 390 ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#49 |
Senior Member
![]() Join Date: May 2007
Location: Doodah Kansas
Posts: 7,773
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
I can pop off one spark plug wire for ya. ![]() ![]()
__________________
the mass of men live lives of quiet desperation if there is a problem, I can have it. new project WAYNE http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=844393 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#50 |
Stirrer of the Pot
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: washington
Posts: 477
|
Re: bagged trucks, i dont get it.
lol
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|