View Single Post
Old 12-03-2020, 11:38 AM   #21
SCOTI
Registered User
 
SCOTI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 21,924
Re: 68 C10 Lowering dilemma

Quote:
Originally Posted by GMJimmy View Post
Well first it needs a C notch kit because the axle is 1\2 inch from the bump stop and not comfortable over bumpy road. Secondly the lowering blocks are causing the trailing arms to be too low to the ground. I want to eliminate the blocks and use only the springs to lower it. I already have shock relocation brackets installed and the shocks are fine and don't bottom out. I don't want to lower the truck at the back any more than it already is. What I don't know is did the previous owner use springs and blocks to get it that low or just the blocks?? If someone who has lowered their truck as mine is in the picture what springs did they use?
Thanks
Nobody commented on this statement so I will.... When you remove the lowering blocks, you will also be decreasing the shock stroke the same amount. Lowering blocks in a truck-arm application allow for drop w/o impacting the shock stroke distance. If you eliminate the blocks & maintain a similar drop amount using coils only, you will be decreasing the shocks travel so they may not work like they do now once the blocks are removed.

Something to be aware of & understand.

Also, for the Panhard bar, extend the frame mount lower vs. changing the bracket on the rear housing. At or slightly below the axle centerline & parallel to the road would be better vs. above the centerline (how they were originally).
__________________
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