I've had a love of these since my folks bought their new 1980 C10 in 1980. Granted,theirs was a 250/3 on the tree, but it was a beautiful blue. I always loved the metal dash and hte individual gauges.
So, how bad was the front suspension geometry and can they be made to handle well?
Handle what? Dirt? Autocross? There are limits to certain things.
pavement. 73-87 body style. Something that looks and handles well enough to not be embarassed. Doesn't need to be able to take on a Z06 but maybe a fox-body or turd-gen.
Actually, I met a guy at a car show that had the entire front and rear suspension systems from a z06 under his c10. Man that thing was awesome. (Also had the running gear and engine.)
Trackmouse wrote: Actually, I met a guy at a car show that had the entire front and rear suspension systems from a z06 under his c10. Man that thing was awesome. (Also had the running gear and engine.)
Where was this auto show? Was the guys name Dwight?
These guys are doing just fine.
I had a '64 Chevy C-10 in high school (230, Three-on-the Tree). It tried to kill me in a different way every time I drove it , but I probably miss driving that piece of carp more than anything else I've owned.
In reply to Woody:
I've loved many of my vehicles, but I only ever miss my truck 
Imagine the confusion when the 10th generation of Corvette debuts and all the really old codgers think a nice, simple work truck is returning.
The easy button would be Mcgaughys. They've been doing truck suspension kits for years and years.
-Rob
There were some pretty impressive good guy autocross build over at This place.
All vehicle dynamics rely on tire grip to generate forces, so number one must be tires. Big and sticky.
Then your job is "contact patch manager." A pair of Equally loaded tires generates more forces than a pair of unequally loaded tires. So what can you do to keep tires as close to equally loaded as possible? 1. Lower CG. practical limits to lowering are either when you're bouncing off the jounce bumpers (instant spring rate increase) or your lowered kinematics cause you to lose grip due to unfavorable loading of contact patch (too much negative camber causing loss of braking grip, for example). Consider fore-aft loading as well. Can you move any weight around to your benefit? Does that truck have the battery up high just behind the rad support? If so, moving it to the bed (possibly even behind the rear axle, polar moment be damned!) should help.
Etc etc
Nuclear solution: put the sheet metal on a stock car chassis.
I wish I had my '78 c10 back. I had a sbc w the small Weiand street blower. I had a lot of fun in that truck. I kept the stock suspension (Big 10/Heavy Half) as I still needed to use it for truck duty. Straight lines no prob but watch the corners hahhaha. Traction was the big issue even with a fuel cell and two batteries mounted in the bed.
I love the lines of these trucks and I really appreciate the ones that still have the stock body side (upper and lower) factory trim.
In reply to sesto elemento:
All three of those examples have 0% C10 suspension. Also 0% frame. Also 0% drivetrain.
SLA in the front, so that shouldn't be too bad to make handle. Ive seen stock trucks running some pretty fat rubber in the front, i dont know what happens when you start lowering it though. Leafs in the back. If you want low and stiff you could switch to 3/4 or 1 ton springs and mount them under the axle. You could look into swapping the in the front brakes from a heavier truck also, but then you end up with eight lugs, if that bothers you.
I should mentoin ive owned three square bodies. They were all special in their own way, and i kinda wish i had one now, even though my 02 silverado in superior in every way, except charisma.
Javelin wrote: In reply to sesto elemento: All three of those examples have 0% C10 suspension. Also 0% frame. Also 0% drivetrain.
And even if they did have any C10 left underneath, they are the earlier generation that used completely different suspension. The '67-'72s had truck-arm rear suspension, the '73-'87 had leaf springs.
Belltech, Air Ride Technologies/Ridetech and CPP all are well-known companies that offer a range of bolt-on or more fab-intensive suspension parts that flat-out work
I am going to leave this here...
Know nothing about it other then it is awesome
Huge front sway bar
I really like SkinnyG's Crusty Chevy. No idea how it handles.
In reply to joey48442:
No. I don't remember his name but he's an old Dude here in town, which is where the annual hot rod show is. I might enter my celica this year, if I see him I'll make friends.
It's a truck, so it Has some inherent limitations. I think it's important to capitalize on it's strengths. Without spending many thousands of dollars on aftermarket clips or full custom frames the best options are to drop it, get a nice set of front/rear sway bars, and cram as much tire under it as you can (this is where trucks excel). If you can move weight around to better balance it, then that's great. Grip is really the name of the game though. Upgrade the brakes, so that you can brake later, and use the biggest tires you can fit under it to tear through corners. It's not going to be about finesse.
In reply to STM317:
Agreed. Finesse is not what a truck is on any front. One of the tricks I had an eye on already had a "400hp" small block under the hood. So power, lots of tire and low CoG. Sounds like the makings of a great time in any book as far as I'm concerned.
OHSCrifle wrote: I really like SkinnyG's Crusty Chevy. No idea how it handles.
I autocrossed it once last summer. Once.
Keep in mind, my other autocrosser is The Lethal Locost. They are VERY different beasts.
My '77 C10 has all poly bushings everywhere, including cab and motor mounts.
Front lower control arms are moved forward 3/4" for more caster (currently about 4.5°). Dropped spindles and cut 1-ton coil springs. Rear leafs are heavy "Big 10" leafs and a flip. Factory front sway bar, no rear bar. Shocks are Monroe blue. There is nothing magical here.
On the street, the steering is very responsive, and seems solid and stable. It REALLY needs an adjustable proportioning valve of some sort to keep the back from coming around when John Q Dimbulb pulls out in front of me.
On course, it is h-e-a-v-y (4400lbs with me in it and a tank and a half of gas (dual tanks - at 10mpg, I use 'em both). You feel every pound of weight). Steering is still responsive, but due to the weight you attack the course a lot differently than a 1275lb car. I did the entire course in Drive Low, palm-steering with the right-hand, and the left hand on the wing window to hold me upright on the bench seat.
With the 4-barrel, high-stall converter, 3.73 gears, Detroit TrueTrac, snotty cam, and BFG T/A's, it made ALL the right sounds as it careened around the course with both tires lit. HUGE crowd pleaser, and it garnered the most attention from those watching.
Frankly, it handles like a bowl of oatmeal on a storm-tossed sea. Which was pretty good considering what it was. I didn't place last, but two of the three cars I beat actually broke during the event.
If you wanted to get serious, you will want the biggest tire you can fit. That is probably the biggest difference you can make. Maybe a rear sway bar, but steering it with a good limited slip is also a LOT of fun. "Real" shocks would probably be the next thing to do.
You'll need to log in to post.
