Project: Recycle

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by SkinnyG

I think it would warp like that if the balljoint mount was welded to the arms after the pivots were welded on.

It should warp less if the balljoint plate is welded first, and then the pivots welded on after.

Kind of trying to determine that (order of steps). That helps determining if there's a 'better' way if tweaking w/force to arrive back where you want it. I have a machinist buddy going to verify/measure things w/me tomorrow & see what his thoughts are. I'll contact Nate once I have numbers to discuss.

Just a curve in the road

[SCOTI]

Had a second set of eyes look @ the arms today for his thoughts. My co-worker has a machinist background so after I explained my issue/concern the first thing he did was grab a straight edge he uses on equipment @ the plant & checked alignment between the 2 bushing housings. They are not aligned. It does appear one end pulled away as a result of heat.

We then did some measuring on a 'special' machined-flat ceramic/granite block they use just for measuring. Shim stock indicated .115"; dial gauge was a little higher @ .131". The shim stock was slid under @ the center of the barrel; the dial gauge was close to the outer edge so the variance makes sense.

I also brought another set of C10 upper arms (from a different manufacturer) that utilize Delrin bushings to compare pivot resistance @ the shaft for both sets. He agrees there is definite bind from misalignment.

He confirmed we can probably tweak the arms so alignment is better between the 2 bushing barrels/housings. But, since tweaking them could also possibly damage them (doubtful but possible), I e-mailed PB to get their thoughts before I do anything.

[SkinnyG]

Hydraulic press them back into alignment. Upper arms aren't that heavily stressed anyway.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by SkinnyG

Hydraulic press them back into alignment. Upper arms aren't that heavily stressed anyway.

Waiting for his ok.

If anything goes wrong, I'm not eating the cost because I shouldn't have to mess w/correcting anything. I'm confident I can get things where they need but again just crossing my T's & dotting my I's.

[SCOTI]

Nate responded w/acknowledgement that he could see what I was talking about from my pictures. He asked me for some additional specific info & requested that I try tightening the partially assembled Driver side arm to spec since I only zapped it w/my cordless impact.

I torqued the Driver side arm from 100ftlbs up to 140ftlbs. While it did improve the alignment @ the bushing housings the rotational drag was still significant. I responded Friday w/the additional info & will see what the next step is once he replys.

[SCOTI]

I got a follow-up phone call today & will be moving forward. Based on measurements & numbers discussed, the amount the arm is off is related to some stretch from building & consistent w/what he's seen. Once torqued, the alignment is better. He say these arms do start off tighter than others by design but work fine w/the full truck weight.

I'm good w/moving forward. He offered to work w/me if I'm not ok w/things (as I get farther along w/the assembly). Nate is always great to work & talk with concerning this stuff.

[Inverter]

Nate is good at holding himself and the brand accountable.
Production line parts are unfortunately off here n there pretty often,,in my experience.
Ive had several PB parts n pieces with slight misalignment or dimensionally inaccurate fitup and even more so with other brands like RideTech. it happens.
I try to remind myself that nothing is ever as good or as bad as we tend to perceive it to be. its hard to let things go when your creating a masterful work of antique art. 10,000 hours baby,,, back to work..

That is all....

Move along...

6 feet apart please...

[aggie91]

Scoti,

What are the specs on the front coil over you plan to use?

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by aggie91

Scoti,

What are the specs on the front coil over you plan to use?

Since my mounts are custom, I'm going w/a 5.2" stroke HQ Series shock & will use a 10" coil @ Ridetechs recommended 750lb rate.
Basically it's just a longer version of what's spec'd for their 63-70 C/O conversion kit.

The rear C/O's will match their kit specs using a 5.2" stroke & 12" coil. Their spec calls for a 275lb coil which I'll increase to 325lbs to compensate for the additional rear weight of the gas tank + raised floor sub-frames.

[SCOTI]

Not much of an update but as we like to say.... progress is progress. I've been playing the waiting game for 'Recycle' parts + research, waiting for G-body parts + research, & doing some home repairs for my GF's house. I have not been idle!

I got the PB narrowed a-arms powder coated. The coating (low gloss black) turned out nice but they got material in the bushing barrels which I had to go back & remove. PITA. But all four arms are now assembled.

The new Moog lower BJ's pressed in no problems. The new QA1 upper 'tall' BJ's bolted in after drilling the PC material out of the holes.

I went to assemble the upper shafts to the arms when I discovered the shafts were steel where I thought they were stainless. There were rust spots starting as a result of moisture & oils from handling. So, I made the decision to get the shafts & modular spindles PC'd focusing on the car/house stuff mentioned. I dropped the shafts/spindles off last week but I guess the guy was not there to get them done. I got a call Wed am & picked them up @ closing on Wednesday. As soon as I got back to the shop & unwrapped the high-temp tape, I was not happy. The parts looked great but they sand-blasted all surfaces including threaded areas. I spent Thurs/Friday trying to polish out the surfaces & running a die over the shaft threads.

Today I drilled the holes through the vertical portion of the upper C/O bracket on the driver side & assembled things for verifying. The vertical portion of the bracket will be tweaked/slimmed-down as the process moves forward. The bottom C/O bracket @ the lower a-arm still needs to be finalized so that I can drill the inner mounting hole (it will bolt in using the existing hole for the air bag on the lower a-arm).

I still need to trim the inner TRE for the reduction in track width. I'm cutting the full 1" difference off @ the inners since there is over twice as much thread to utilize. I originally just purchased the current rack from a local Oreillys for mock-up. I might get a 'better' R&P from an aftermarket source but undecided.

For now, everything moves/pivots up/down nice & smooth. I'll purchase the C/O's next & do a little more homework on other possible tweaks as things progress. I hope to have a front shock in place soon to test up/down travel (to ensure there's no bind). I'm also going to verify the current Bilstein shock will mount to the new PB lower w/o issue & then get the shock + bracket out of the way.

[Inverter]

So you are leaving that upper bag plate there? I am confused..

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by Inverter

So you are leaving that upper bag plate there? I am confused..

Yep. C/O goes through the middle of where the top bag bolted in. It doesn't interfere w/the C/O & allows me to still do bags if wanted @ a later date vs. if the mount is completely removed.

[aggie91]

Nice progress Scoti! As you said, progress is progress!

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by aggie91

Nice progress Scoti! As you said, progress is progress!

TY sir.

I brought the spindles to work w/me today & will complete the Tap & Die 'clean-up' process on them after hours.

[TA_C10]

Hard to find outside folks, that you need for a job like powdercoating/blasting, that take their work as seriously as you do, or at least consider their job essential to the customers they are working for and that their work reflects on them and their business.

Sucks to hear what they did man. Looks great BTW.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by TA_C10

Hard to find outside folks, that you need for a job like powdercoating/blasting, that take their work as seriously as you do, or at least consider their job essential to the customers they are working for and that their work reflects on them and their business.

Sucks to hear what they did man. Looks great BTW.

Agreed. But they are convenient to access from my work & nice people to deal with so I'll go back. I plan to make a day trip there @ some point to try & communicate ideas that could be done differently to make it easier on them plus better for the automotive type customer in the end. Not sure if it will make a difference or if they'll be receptive of my input.

If it doesn't, I'll take my business elsewhere.

[SCOTI]

The spindles were not as bad as the upper a-arm shafts.

I was able to easily polish out the hubs w/Red Scotch-Brite material. The hub threads were hit w/sand but they didn't feel excessively rough (like the threads on the a-arm shafts). Being such a critical area, I opted to try the castle nuts & see how far they would thread w/some special cutting paste. They threaded on w/o much fuss using the cutting paste & now easily thread on/off w/finger-tip effort. I chased the caliper bracket holes for each & all is good there as well.

Driver side spindle is installed w/the caliper bracket. I purchased new rotors 10yrs ago when this chassis was started. They were painted but the pad surfaces that didn't get paint have surface rust so I'm going to D/A them before installing. The calipers are also new-but-old. I cleaned them up back then of casting flash, D/A'd them smooth, & they got some low gloss black. I might replace them though w/the Wilwood D52 part based on the idle timeline.

Plan is to start on the pass side by end of week if I have the shocks (they indicated they were ready to ship today).

[SCOTI]

Slo-Mo progress was made. The constant assemble/dis-assemble/assemble takes time & had to be done multiple times.

I set-up my 2nd 'shock' jig so I could do a better job of locking in trueness of the upper & lower mount positions. With both upper & lower mounts on V.2 solidly locked square in place, the shock should travel w/o bind so I felt it was a better option. It also allowed mounting an angle finder to narrow down shock angle which you need to know when calculating for the springs.

With the new a-arm combo in place, I needed to get the upper C/O mount to fully seat both horizontally & vertically. It kept fighting me. I was trying to leave the vertical portion of the bracket base as tall as possible & then slim it down after it was tacked/welded together but it wouldn't allow the horizontal parts to seat flush. I trimmed it back an 1/8 of an inch. Still not good enough. Did it again.... Still not there. Made the decision to just trim it flush w/the upper a-arm mount which helped.

While alignment there was getting better, I noticed the shock was crowding the original remaining upper bag mount. To remedy this, I then cut that same vertical bracket base into 2 separate pieces. This allowed the upper shock mount to move 1/4" farther out which yields 1/4" more clearance for front a-arm shaft stud.

This all took the better part of 8hrs yesterday w/the marking, dis-assembly, cut, grind smooth, re-assemble.... Rinse, wash, repeat process. In the end, the upper bracket now is fitting flush on the horizontal & vertical portions on the bracket base & I have a 12° shock angle for calcs.

[Inverter]

Been doing some of that rinse/repeat myself, the wrenching wears me out.
Did you cut an inch out of the rack studs or more than ?

[SkinnyG]

I bought a 2-post for my own shop at home so I'm not tripping over the footprint of the 4-post.

I also placed it a bit further away from the door, so I can have a car in the bay with the roll up door down, both cars doors open, and not hitting the posts.

Ideally you want both a 2-post and a 4-post - they each have their advantages and neither really "does it all." My shop is 1065sqft, and I'm not willing to have two hoists.

[Inverter]

Lotta people swear by them, and they are handy but I wont put my antiques on one. Gotta have the room for a 4 post but I feel they are more useful. You can level the runways for accurate ride height adjustment and wheel alignment. When lifting the chassis the jacks can be placed anywhere along the chassis for an optimal lifting point. And you can just park on the lift w/o being crowded by the columns n arms of the 2 posts.
I have a Challenger XFX 14k lb.

[SCOTI]

Got an early start which let me get the lift/hoist finished & tested w/the better structure. Worked much better vs. the ratchet straps. More control of where to shift the fulcrum so it lifts straight up (which it did)….

[SCOTI]

My only revision for now will be the triangulated braces. I'm going to flip them to be on top of the beams vs. under them. When I did the numbers, I knew it would be close once the bed made it to the top. The thought was to lift the bed until it contacts the beams to keep things 'steady'. By doing so, it allows me to roll the set-up over the top/front of the truck if desired. The bed clears the cab now but I would prefer it to be secured if I were to attempt to roll it around. The straps can do the job as well but I liked the idea of the top of the bed rail/side touching something fore & aft if moving it around.

It's crude but functional & relatively cheap for what it allows me to do solo now. I priced the adjustable 'bed-lift' structures you can use w/engine hoists but those were $175+ shipping up to $350. Not sure what differences there are between the price ranges I looked at. I priced steel from a local yard to make my own but just the 2 (fore/aft) beams were $110 plus transit costs. The treated 4x4's were $25 & are easy to stack in a corner along w/the main spine (that was someone's scrap) so.....

[Inverter]

Repurposed Pallet Rack for the win !! That looks good.
I think the wood lifting bracket is suitable. Cheap, strong and effective.
No need to spend 200$ on the fancy store bought kind.
Electric hoist too ? Now your just showin off...

[aggie91]

Nice work on the lift.