Testing The Waters for Interest??

[72longbed]

I'd like to see if there's an interest in a well engineered rear Air Suspension system for 67-72, 1/2 and 3/4 ton trucks that will allow you to ride at anywhere from 15" between the top of the trailing arm and the frame to as little as 6" between the top of the trailing arm and frame?? This system is designed around the leading Air Spring manufacturer on the market for trucks (real trucks like ours), and will have 3200 lb capacity each. Designed to be used on trucks with Trailing Arm rear suspension, and will be a simple bolt on installation in place of the coil spring.
There's a company out there that has 3 initials that has a similar product but theirs is designed for lowered vehicles that may want to have towing capacity . My design will allow a truck to maintain stock, lifted, or lowered ride height at the discretion of the operator, and as the load requires.
I designed this system because I was tired of the 'Buckboard' like ride of the 3/4 ton coils when empty, and wanted to be able to travel at level ride height with the trailer in tow. A pleasant side benefit was the 'Cadillac' ride when loaded OR empty.
Just checking to see if there would be an interest in this system from fellow members if I should start to make them available to our Membership. Let me know your feelings on this please.
Thanks,
72longbed

[roj2323]

it sounds somewhat intersting depending on how it's designed and how complicated the air system is to install. idealy i would rather have bags with valve stems attached verse a overly complicated pump and tank system. however that's just me.
ondrew

[Frizzle Fry]

6" to 15" between axle tube and frame seems tall.

[Musclerodz]

How would you maintain front end geometry on a travel like that? Rear is easy, the front is the problem unless you are running a stick axle or beam front suspension.

Mike

[72longbed]

You may have mis-understood me. The system has the CAPABILITY of giving you as little as 6" between the trailing arm upper surface and frame, and as much as 15" between the two, and anywhere in between. This gives a much wider 'band' of useability for various truck suspensions, load applications, and lifting/lowering desires. The ability to carry light or heavy loads and pick where you want the ride height to be; stock, lifted or lowered. The ability to have a smooth, air ride at any height.

The system now has one single or two separate, (your choice) Schrader valves, (just like a car tire), at the end of the air lines that run back to the bumper area. Two separate lines allow side to side leveling, or a two-into- one valve gives the same pressure in each. The system can also be hooked up to an on-board compressor and valve setup.

As far as front end geometry goes; its just like any other car or truck with springs, air bags, or air shocks, you find the ride height that is most likely where the truck will be driven and set your alignment to that.

72longbed

[llegos]

i hear what your saying about the 6 inches, but most people think of airbags as slammed, where you have -inches between the axle and the frame...

[72longbed]

llegos,
yes thats correct, as many inches as the driver wants to suit the need. This setup is not for the SLAMMED look, its more functional than that.

72longbed

[llegos]

lol, no love for us with rear leaves?im j/k my dad(part owner of the truck) doesnt want me to have airbags(i have no clue why), so im SOL for this anyways

[72longbed]

Frizzle Fry,
the factory ride height of a C10 is around 10" between the trailing arm and upper frame rail. My sysem gives C10, C20 owners a whole lot more ride height options.

72longbed

[BOSS]

sounds like an interesting idea,i am sure if it was reasonable price wise,alot would be interested.So if i understand right if it is lowered all the way it would be equal to about a 4 inch drop?

[Musclerodz]

I understood correctly. I just think the way you said it was incorrect. What you are proposing is to simply replace the stock coils with an airbag for improved ride quality on the rear without lowering the vehicle. The way you said it is you would have 9" of operating travel. That is fine for the rear but that could never work on the front. Alignment would have to be set at desired ride height as you mentioned. How would this be any different from ART which you can do the same thing with?


Mike

[72longbed]

Mike (MuscleRodz),
you still don't understand what I'm doing, and if you don't understand what I'm doing, you can't tell me I'm "saying it wrong".

You need to carefully read the previous Posts, and you will see that my system is for the REAR of any trailing arm type pickup truck ONLY. No matter how hard you wish it were so, I didn't design it for the front of any truck.

Now do you understand, or am I saying this wrong also??

72longbed

[Green Machine]

Well, I'm just about ready to buy the third set of rear springs for my c10. Can't get the height where I want it. Not trying to lower it, just remain stock. Original springs ends were cracked, saw some variable rate ones that said beter ride, they were thicker and taller than stock and rode pretty stiff. Next set on now are "stock" rear springs, rides better but still too stiff and too high. That was on my 68, might try some 2 inch lowering springs next.

The best riding springs were on the back of my 1970, they were stock but wore out and sagging, but they we nice and soft, but sat to low. So to save some bucks we put the variables from the 68 on there for now, will see how it sits when the box gets back on, but I'm sure they will be to stiff on there also.

So yes, at about 100 bucks a set, it's getting expensive and frustrating to get the ride and ride height correct, I've got 2 trucks that could use some help !!!!

[Frizzle Fry]

Sounds interesting. Any pics?

[Musclerodz]

I apologize for adding front end issues into this thread when you have no intent on dealing with the front.

Mike