The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network







Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.

Go Back   The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network > General Truck Forums > Suspension

Web 67-72chevytrucks.com


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-09-2014, 10:33 PM   #1
chris1044
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: MI
Posts: 56
Static VS bagged

Looking at dropping my truck over the winter, but I can't decide on bagged vs. static. The end goal is to have a decent power touring truck; truck already has a v8 in it but I've got an LS in the works. I want something that will ride nice and handle well. The truck will still see some light use as a truck, mainly with motorcycles/lumber in the bed.

I've decided I'm going to keep the 6-lug front end and convert to discs, likely with 2" drop spindles. I'd like the truck to be low, but don't want to lay frame - 4" drop in the rear would be good, but I read conflicting info on how some static drops ride/handle, and also on having to C-notch the frame.

What have you done, why, and are you happy?
chris1044 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2014, 12:45 AM   #2
LVPhotos
Registered User
 
LVPhotos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,853
Re: Static VS bagged

At 4" you most likely won't need a notch. What year? 60-62 frames are different than 63-66. Bag the rear for sure. The ride height is adjustable as well as firmness. I had air shocks to help my '81 with loads. I run Schrader valves for now til front is installed and compressor set up. I run the Ride Tech kit with Firestone bags and had no issues. Porterbuilt crossmember soon to be in. I got tired of dragging headers and a arms on last truck. Now this '62 the torsion bars drag. Hit switch and no more dragging.
__________________
1962 shortbed 408cui small block, TKO 600 5-speed, bagged Porterbuilt suspension. 18" Salt Flats
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/332579...t-c-k-pick-up/
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=560081
LVPhotos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2014, 12:50 AM   #3
LVPhotos
Registered User
 
LVPhotos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,853
Re: Static VS bagged

Pic.
Attached Images
    
__________________
1962 shortbed 408cui small block, TKO 600 5-speed, bagged Porterbuilt suspension. 18" Salt Flats
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/332579...t-c-k-pick-up/
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=560081
LVPhotos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2014, 01:45 AM   #4
BigDan3131
Registered User
 
BigDan3131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Maple Valley, WA
Posts: 1,913
Re: Static VS bagged

One thing to think about is whether or not the real pro touring race bug hits and if you want to slalom and do the other things they do now. If you had any thoughts about doing that I would do the triangulated 4 link with double adjustable coil-overs and if they make them for the front do the same plus the porterbuilt and large by huge 13"-14" rotors all around.
__________________
Custom Painter/Restoration Specialist

1965 GMC 3/4 Ton LB SOLD?
1964 Chevy El Camino in full restoration
1991 Chevy S10 288K+ miles 2nd Owner SOLD

2020 RAM 1500 Warlock
BigDan3131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2014, 01:51 AM   #5
verdell
Registered User
 
verdell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Columbus, MS
Posts: 443
Re: Static VS bagged

I just switched from rear 4" dropped coils to air bags and Schraders about a month ago. We made a 4 hour drive to the MS Gulfcoast and the handling was really good. I also have dropped spindles and 6 lug power discs up front on my '60. It stops great but wheel selection is limited with 6 lugs. Not sure your year model but I'd recommend front sway bar also...
verdell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2014, 03:57 AM   #6
Desert.Chevy
Registered User
 
Desert.Chevy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Earth
Posts: 338
Re: Static VS bagged

I did 3"F/5"R from CPP and love it. I will be watching this thread as it has been a question in my head.
Desert.Chevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2014, 04:53 AM   #7
Grizz1963
Registered User
 
Grizz1963's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Rochester, KENT
Posts: 10,528
Re: Static VS bagged

My truck now has 2" front drop and 2" rear drop springs and shocks, all new as well as 2.5" lowering blocks in the rear.

THREAD AND PICS HERE: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=585901

Not done a full road test, but will report once done.

Photos in my truck thread of how it looked, and on last page some bad driveway pics of how it looked on Friday night when we finished the rears.

I would love the front wheel arches a bit lower, but suspect that would need me to fit dropped spindles, and I do not want to move from my stock drum setup as I have a huge booster fitted.
__________________
MY BUILD LINK: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...585901]Redneck Express - 1966 C10 Short Fleetside
MY USA ROADTRIPS http://forum.retro-rides.org/thread/...2018-humdinger
IF YOU CAN'T FIX IT WITH A HAMMER, YOU'VE GOT AN ELECTRICAL PROBLEM MATE.
Grizz1963 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2014, 08:55 AM   #8
chris1044
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: MI
Posts: 56
Re: Static VS bagged

The truck is a 64. Currently there's a swaybar with poly bushings in the front; I need to add one in the rear. The front coils are sagging, and I suspect the rear would too but there are helper's on the shocks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigDan3131 View Post
One thing to think about is whether or not the real pro touring race bug hits and if you want to slalom and do the other things they do now. If you had any thoughts about doing that I would do the triangulated 4 link with double adjustable coil-overs and if they make them for the front do the same plus the porterbuilt and large by huge 13"-14" rotors all around.
13" brakes are what I'm looking at - I just need to think about clearance and rim size. Currently the truck has 15" drag style rims. I doubt I'll ever do any type of slalom stuff with the truck, but I would like something that will handle well.

I come from the 4x4 world, so typically when I think of bags I think of them in the sense of HD trucks and towing. However, the fact that I can adjust the spring rate on the fly is the main reason I'm looking at them. Coil overs are great, but I can't ever see myself actually using full adjustability in them being the amount of time it takes to tweak them for different uses.
chris1044 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2014, 07:20 PM   #9
61_FL_Apache
Who Me?
 
61_FL_Apache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Royal Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 4,067
Re: Static VS bagged

For what you want, I would lean toward static.
__________________
Steve

1997 Tahoe LT 4D 2WD (DD)
2001 Blazer 4D 2WD
1961 Apache 10 (sold)
1965 C10 Stepper (sold)
61_FL_Apache is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2014, 12:52 AM   #10
joedoh
Senior Member
 
joedoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Doodah Kansas
Posts: 7,773
Re: Static VS bagged

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris1044 View Post

13" brakes are what I'm looking at - I just need to think about clearance and rim size. Currently the truck has 15" drag style rims.

just something to keep in mind, a 13" rotor means the very smallest wheel you will be able to run is a 17". that means pick up an extra 17" for a spare or maybe do the shuffle rear to front if you carry a 15" spare.
__________________
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
joedoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2014, 09:20 PM   #11
Slow Build
Registered User
 
Slow Build's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: California Delta
Posts: 2,163
Re: Static VS bagged

It sounds like your in the same situation as me.

I am thinking of the combo option for a 4"-6" drop. For the front ride height I want to set it and forget it so drop coils and spindles should be fine for my needs, but for the rear I need more flexibility for carrying loads so bags would be the best there.

I'm sure there are a few members using this combo. To those I ask:
How does this combo ride?
Does it feel balanced?
__________________
Name: Rich
Current Ride: 1964 C-10 Short Fleetside
Daily Driver: 2005 GMC crew cab short fleetside /2001 Chevy Tahoe
Past GM Trucks:
1959 GMC short stepside
1968 GMC short stepside-4x4
1973 Chevy short stepside
1989 Chevy short fleetside-reg cab
1993 Chevy short fleetside-Xcab
2002 Chevy short fleetside-Xcab

Save the dinosaurs, use synthetic oil.
Slow Build is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2014, 10:54 PM   #12
chris1044
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: MI
Posts: 56
Re: Static VS bagged

Static front and bagged rear is, in my opinion, probably the best suited to my use. I'm also interested in how it rides. I've been looking into this in a 4-6" drop with some aftermarket A-arms up front the last day or so.

My main concern with static is I don't want to drag the crossmember, and I want to be able to align it/clear fenders and not have to limit travel.

With bags in the back - anyone just running bags and manually adjusting? People say this is a no-no because a schrader can fail and leave you stranded....but so can the ones in your tires.
chris1044 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2014, 11:21 PM   #13
NEWFISHER
Registered User
 
NEWFISHER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,303
Re: Static VS bagged

My 65 was bagged all 4. Plates on arms front and bags in coil location rear. Adjustable panhard, shock relocators front and rear. Disc at all 4 with a 2lb residual on rear line. Capt fab ps bracket and a box from a 71 2 wheel drive and a sway bar up front from an 82 suburban. It rode great and handled like it was on rails. Manual paddle valves next to dual needle gauges. It was a 2 day install.

The 46 burb was bagged rear only on a 2 link with a huge trac bar and 2600 Firestone bags running Kyb gas adjust shocks from the front of a 67-72. The front is still leaf and knee action fluid shocks. Stock puney sway bar from 46 and handles great. The ride is waaaaaaay better. Running an airlift V2 and have it preset for auto raise but run it in manual mode lately figuring oht whats best for all roads.
__________________
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
NEWFISHER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2014, 11:47 AM   #14
LVPhotos
Registered User
 
LVPhotos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,853
Re: Static VS bagged

Been on rear bags and Schrader valves for years. Torsion bars front. Air shocks and bags have been round a long time. Semis still run bags and brakes on air. Use quality stuff it won't break.
__________________
1962 shortbed 408cui small block, TKO 600 5-speed, bagged Porterbuilt suspension. 18" Salt Flats
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/332579...t-c-k-pick-up/
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=560081
LVPhotos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2014, 12:50 PM   #15
CRGRS 66
Registered User
 
CRGRS 66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Cambridge, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,771
Re: Static VS bagged

For me the answer to the lowering question on the front was easy, 2.5" spindles, 2" springs. On lowering the rear end, I didn't know what to do exactly. I knew I wanted it lower, but had no idea what combination of springs/blocks to go with to get what I wanted. I forget who suggested it, but I went with the porterbuilt stage one rear kit, which included adjustable trac bar, shock relocate brackets, shocks, bags, bag brackets, and all fasteners. I can now set my ride height exactly where I want it, and adjust it if I have a load, or if I am towing something. I will keep a spare shrader valve, and a 12V compressor in case I ever have an issue on the road.
__________________
Craigerrr

My build thread, CRGRS 66 Winter Build: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...09#post5638709
CRGRS 66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2014, 01:58 PM   #16
DLW
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Union City, CA
Posts: 384
Re: Static VS bagged

For you guys running just Schrader's, do you have to run a hose out to fill them up all the time as air pressures change?
DLW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2014, 06:15 PM   #17
SCOTI
Registered User
 
SCOTI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 21,964
Re: Static VS bagged

Quote:
Originally Posted by DLW View Post
For you guys running just Schrader's, do you have to run a hose out to fill them up all the time as air pressures change?
About as often as you adjust the pressure in your tires.
__________________
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.
SCOTI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2014, 07:23 PM   #18
DLW
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Union City, CA
Posts: 384
Re: Static VS bagged

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCOTI View Post
About as often as you adjust the pressure in your tires.
Ahh! Seems everyone I know has slow leaky airbags including myself. I'll have to check into that.
DLW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2014, 07:25 PM   #19
SCOTI
Registered User
 
SCOTI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 21,964
Re: Static VS bagged

Quote:
Originally Posted by DLW View Post
Ahh! Seems everyone I know has slow leaky airbags including myself. I'll have to check into that.
I started off the 1st 2yrs w/rear bags on my 68 & rarely had to adjust for leakage. I also leak test everything before final installation.
__________________
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.
SCOTI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2014, 10:32 PM   #20
chris1044
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: MI
Posts: 56
Re: Static VS bagged

Quote:
Originally Posted by LVPhotos View Post
Semis still run bags and brakes on air. Use quality stuff it won't break.
That's why I'm not worried about running like that at all...but on board air would allow a train horn to be installed

I still cannot find any good threads on static VS bagged for handling....sounds like for a cruiser either works just fine.
chris1044 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2014, 10:42 PM   #21
LVPhotos
Registered User
 
LVPhotos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,853
Re: Static VS bagged

I am working on on board system. One part at a time. The guys at Ride Tech and No Limit will give you the best road course information.
https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?i...ce=46&refid=17
__________________
1962 shortbed 408cui small block, TKO 600 5-speed, bagged Porterbuilt suspension. 18" Salt Flats
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/332579...t-c-k-pick-up/
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=560081
LVPhotos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2014, 05:03 PM   #22
Slow Build
Registered User
 
Slow Build's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: California Delta
Posts: 2,163
Re: Static VS bagged

Can somebody that has run the static front and bagged rear tell us how it rides and feels?
__________________
Name: Rich
Current Ride: 1964 C-10 Short Fleetside
Daily Driver: 2005 GMC crew cab short fleetside /2001 Chevy Tahoe
Past GM Trucks:
1959 GMC short stepside
1968 GMC short stepside-4x4
1973 Chevy short stepside
1989 Chevy short fleetside-reg cab
1993 Chevy short fleetside-Xcab
2002 Chevy short fleetside-Xcab

Save the dinosaurs, use synthetic oil.
Slow Build is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2014, 06:05 PM   #23
SCOTI
Registered User
 
SCOTI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 21,964
Re: Static VS bagged

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slow Build View Post
Can somebody that has run the static front and bagged rear tell us how it rides and feels?
Ride is like a stock height coil sprung truck.
__________________
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.
SCOTI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2014, 09:21 PM   #24
gimmy 64
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: menifee california
Posts: 788
Re: Static VS bagged

i asked this question on the burb site and the suspension sight because i want to lower my burb. i was concerned that the lowering springs for trucks would not be good for the burbs. any other people out there that have lowered burbs have suggestions. also for the origanal poster i had a 64 gmc static dropped 4 1/2 in fromt and about the same in back and it rode and handled fine.
gimmy 64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2014, 11:57 PM   #25
NEWFISHER
Registered User
 
NEWFISHER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,303
Re: Static VS bagged

Static 8 leaf pack straight axle knee action fluid box shocks in the front. 2 link on Firestone 2600s w kyb gas adjust front shocks from a 67-72 in the rear. Handles 100% better and rides 100% better. I do plan on an Ifs system bagged next month, but my point is....they can handle and ride great with air only in the rear. You can do schraders, but why not spend another $400 for a tank, comp, fittings and manual paddle valve set up? Static is great but air is fun and also handles as well as coil overs and rides better when you can adjust on the fly.
Just got back from a week away and left the burb inflated. No leaks when I returned. Quality fittings and a hose cutter jig to ensure a straight cut.
Attached Images
  
__________________
GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Last edited by NEWFISHER; 11-17-2014 at 12:06 AM.
NEWFISHER is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1997-2022 67-72chevytrucks.com