Make it handle

[bdiamond]

Originally Posted by theastronaut

With that range of adjustment I could have it screwed up good....

[HEADTURNINGC10]

Hey robnolimit i have a 69 c10 with drums and heated coils (currently). I bought a 85 frame with drop spindles and drop coils. I tried reading this thread for the past couple weeks, i see people talking about cutting the cross member to go lower could i get some pictures and some intructions. Have learned alot from this thread cant wait to get the truck to spec.

[bdiamond]

Search sectioned crossmember on here or google. Captkaos has a write up too

http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=464574

[slowcpe]

Wow! Spent the last few days reading this entire thread. My head now hurts and probably need to re-read to help retain all the incredible information. Definitely learned a lot and great insight in moving forward with my truck.

I'm currently building an all-around driver that I would like good handling and nice ride (don't we all). I decided on air and currently have PB's Stage I front and Stage II basic rear with D2600 bags, KYB shocks and PB's adjustable trac-bar. After reading this thread I will probably be upgrading shocks later on. I have great plans to expand on the suspension but first want to install what I have, drive it, and go from there.

I saw a few posts about bags and I believe only one on management and that was about 3 years ago. I'm torn on going with a leveling system and saw a post where that is not the best for performance. Is that still the case? What are you guys running for air management to get the performance you need?

I'm real close to pulling the trigger on Accuair's e-Level for the simplicity of operation and customer satisfaction. I do not want to spend the money and find it performs poorly if I decide to run some kind of track event.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by slowcpe

I saw a few posts about bags and I believe only one on management and that was about 3 years ago. I'm torn on going with a leveling system and saw a post where that is not the best for performance. Is that still the case? What are you guys running for air management to get the performance you need?

I'm real close to pulling the trigger on Accuair's e-Level for the simplicity of operation and customer satisfaction. I do not want to spend the money and find it performs poorly if I decide to run some kind of track event.

If Accuair's e-level air mgt system is within your budget, it's definitely a great option. I would use it in a heartbeat if I could afford to....

[deth_1970]

ok, I know this thread has been going on for awhile, I was wondering how many of the c-10 JT mods and stuff would work on a 1979 truck

[bdiamond]

Originally Posted by deth_1970

I was wondering how many of the c-10 JT mods and stuff would work on a 1979 truck

The front suspensions are identical

[aggie91]

Originally Posted by deth_1970

ok, I know this thread has been going on for awhile, I was wondering how many of the c-10 JT mods and stuff would work on a 1979 truck

All of the front mods will work, but with the differences of the bushings in the controls arms, the rack and pinion conversion will hit the lower control arm bushing in the stock 1979 lower arms.

I did everything to my son's '82 that was done to JT. I replaced the lower controls arms with PBFab's Lower Forward arms and that fixed the bushing interference. Rob did the same to JT later in its development.

If those are out of you budget, get a set of lower arms from a 64-72 C10. They have a smaller metal bushing that does not hit the rack conversion.

[Cheyyenne81]

Originally Posted by robnolimit

If you guys (and gals) want, i'll try to keep responding to your handling questions.

Making these trucks handle is easy at first, but the more you want to get out of it, the more work it becomes. The are several things to consider. Tires, Wheels, Weight, Suspension, Brakes, Gears, ....... Set your goals before you start, as some of the parts change the deeper you go. Also, decide how streetable you want it to stay. The more you want to pull one 'G', the stiffer it's going to get. Drop spindles are better, in general, than short springs, this helps to keep the suspension in the sweet spot. In the rear, (trailing arm) blocks are better than short springs for the first 2 inches. Then go to springs. For leaf trucks, use de-arch springs or a flip kit, no blocks. Go BIG on the sway bars. And, spend $$$ on shocks. Doetsch, KYB, or Bilstien, this is where it happens.

Give me some questions, and I'll be more specific on the details.

I had a couple questions for you.. I have a 81 cheyenne that i want to turn into a autocross/ crazy street truck. I have heard that a corvette front suspension can be mounted right up?? I was looking into drop spindles and a front sway bar but what can be done for the rear?

[Bowtie001]

Originally Posted by bdiamond

I was pondering the taller balljoint idea lately. I was thinking that earlier in the thread it was said that the steering arm was a little low on most spindles (5/8" I think was mentioned) and more camber gain would be good also. What would be wrong with running a taller LOWER balljoint to fix both issues at once? It should get the steering arm up in its range, effectively make the spindle taller to help camber gain as well as lower the truck 1/2". Am I missing something or would this work? The only issue I see is putting the a-arms even closer to the ground.

Did this ever get answered?

I, too, am wondering about this, but I have not seen any affordable tall lower ball joints, despite a cheap (~$50) upper available from QA1 through Speedway (http://www.speedwaymotors.com/QA1-12...tud,84119.html). If a 1" taller lower was available for the same price, it seems like it would solve a lot of problems.

[robnolimit]

Oops sorry. We're in the middle of a move and I haven't been too focused on the thread lately. Yes, this is a great idea. A 1/2" taller lower will fix most of the bump steer, and increase the camber gain. It will drop the truck another 1/2".

[Bowtie001]

Originally Posted by robnolimit

Oops sorry. We're in the middle of a move and I haven't been too focused on the thread lately. Yes, this is a great idea. A 1/2" taller lower will fix most of the bump steer, and increase the camber gain. It will drop the truck another 1/2".

Great!

Where can I find one?

Also, that will positively or negatively affect the bump steer?

How about if I cut 1/2 coil on stock spindles in addition to the taller lower ball joint?

[robnolimit]

Taller spindles are avail from Howe Racing, Afco, and other Circle Track suppliers. A taller lower ball joint will help to reduce the amount of bump-steer found in the factory geometry. Cutting 1/2 a coil will drop the truck 1" to 1 1/2".

[Bowtie001]

Originally Posted by robnolimit

Taller spindles are avail from Howe Racing, Afco, and other Circle Track suppliers. A taller lower ball joint will help to reduce the amount of bump-steer found in the factory geometry. Cutting 1/2 a coil will drop the truck 1" to 1 1/2".

Apologies for asking a question (bumpsteer) that you already answered.

You say "taller spindles are avail..." but I suspect you mean taller balljoints, correct?

So if I cut the coil 1/2, install a 1/2" longer lower balljoint, I will improve my bumpsteer, improve my camber curve and lower the center of gravity in the front by two inches.

Would it be helpful to also move the inner pivot point of the upper control arm down 1" or is that overkill?

I would also look at sliding the lower control arm forward to improve caster a small amount, but with manual steering, I would not want to add too much.

Once this is figured out I will set you to work on what I've already done to the rear suspension (leaf springs).

[laid67]

I think he was referring to taller spindles. if the additional height was added below the tie rod connection point; it would accomplish the same thing as a taller lower ball joint, which as far as I know does not exist.


On another note I have a question about trailing arms. is there an advantage to the stock style setup where the trailing arms are sort of triangulated? or would parallel trailing arms perform the same? Also for a street driven truck would heim-joints be OK on trailing arms or should I stick to a bushing style.

[dkauffman05]

Love this thread .I sold 68 ls1 truck so I built a new truck to handle. I ordered ridetech complete front kit with adjustable coilovers. Rob I saw a chart on your website listing wheel back spacing for different vehicles. I really would like to run 18x9.5 on the front and rear. Your chart says 67-72 can run a 18x9.5 with 4" bs. I'm ready to order wheels but wish I could find another c10 that has done it. I also am running cpp modular spindles.

[dkauffman05]

Oops I'm messed up. You have 5.5 bs for the front with a 18x9.5

[CHRIS67GMC]

Yes a 5.5 will work. What front brakes do you have?

[dkauffman05]

I'm gonna have wildwood d52 calipers.

[CHRIS67GMC]

You should be fine.

[Bowtie001]

OK, did we ever get a definitive answer on the taller spindles or balljoints? Was I mistaken to think that there were tall BJs available?

Also, what is the best way to handle the control arm bushings?

[robnolimit]

There are taller ball joints both upper and lower. These are available from Howe Racing, Afco, and others.
There no tall spindles avail for a C10.
BTW, tall ball joints are a tuning tool, to be used by racers, who inspect and replace them on a regular basis. OR, they are a Band-Aid for a poor suspension design. Tall uppers are OK for general street use, but I would stay away from the lowers.

[Bowtie001]

Wait, none of the myriad of lowering spindles out there are any taller than stock?

I am also curious about why you hesitate to use taller lower balljoints on the street. The quality of those companies far surpasses OE replacement stuff.

[theastronaut]

Ok, I finally got some .500" taller upper ball joints from QA1 and have one side of my suspension assembled. I have Porterbuilt 1" forward and 1" narrowed arms which I'm thinking would improve the camber curve from being 1" narrowed; the angle of the arms changes more with the same amount of travel compared to stock length.

I set up the frame at ride height (4") and set the spindle close to it's height (13.25" for 26.5" tires). Not 100% sure on final tire sizes yet but that should be close. I measured 1" of travel with a dial indicator and checked camber with an angle app on my iPhone.

I measured a few times and averaged the results to come up with 1.61* camber gain over 1" of travel.



Rob doesn't say how much taller the ball joints are in this post (# 812) but here are the numbers he posted.

Originally Posted by robnolimit

We're finally getting around to putting a set on the JT. It should change the camber gain from .86deg per inch, to 1.23deg per inch. We probably won't test until after SEMA. As a comparison, our wide rides have 1.56deg/in

[Coldshot]

I've tried to read threw the whole thread but haven't made it all the way yet. Have a question that I hope hasn't been brought up. Independent rear suspention? Anyone testing/tuning?
I'm building a 51 3100 on an s10 frame and have a 88 toyota supra IRS witch is a sub frame dual wishbone design. Has limited slip and matches the stock truck width.

Going coilover all around.
Haven't seen or heard of anyone doing my setup so I'm just wondering what you guys think? As I can clearly read you know your stuff
Thanks