View Single Post
Old 10-13-2007, 11:58 AM   #24
SCOTI
Registered User
 
SCOTI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 21,919
Re: Z'ing the rear?????

Quote:
Originally Posted by XXL View Post
What is "they?" If the trailing arms, they don't get raised unless you do the Z under the cab. If the frame rails, are you just trying to get clearance for more trailing arm travel? If the latter, a "simple" notch there will give you the same effect.

The reality is, for trailing arm suspensions, where you locate the frame after the trailing arm xmember is irrelevant (except for the Panhard bar mount, which can be adjusted up/down rather easily). You don't even need a frame at all (again, except for some kind of centering device such as the Panhard) after the trailing arm xmember.
Those frame rails that "you don't even need" are kind of important for locating the top of the rear suspension parts (springs/bags, shocks) & bed floor unless you don't plan to have a bed.

The frame rails interfere w/the trailing arms when the arms are raised high enough. A simple notch of the frame would/could remedy the situation but you will still have to modify the bed supports (to raise the bed floor if keeping it a solid floor) create a new shock crossmember as well as the rear-ends locating device.

Z-ing may not be everyone's answer..... but it is still a viable option for some when still retaining the trailing arms (or factory front a-arms/steering box) & going ultra-low.
__________________
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