Please don't do the ten lug conversion.
Just don't.
You're not named Chad or Kyle.
Please don't do the ten lug conversion.
Just don't.
You're not named Chad or Kyle.
This is a terrifically weird idea that I fully support, but is it the best way to get there?
A Trailer Toad would solve the tongue weight problem, leaving you a Dmax away from dreamt-of awesomeness.
ShawnG said:Please don't do the ten lug conversion.
Just don't.
You're not named Chad or Kyle.
And doesn't making those tires into rubber bands destroy the load rating?
Duke said:ShawnG said:Please don't do the ten lug conversion.
Just don't.
You're not named Chad or Kyle.
And doesn't making those tires into rubber bands destroy the load rating?
Yes
In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :
My question is will this conversion actually improve its towing capability. It sounds like a lot of work and expense for minimal gains.
stuart in mn said:In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :
It sounds like a lot of work and expense for minimal gains.
I mean, that doesn't necessarily invalidate it from Curtis's point of view. Well, expense, maybe.
I think that it could fundamentally work; I just think he needs to resist the urge to overcomplicate it.
Best way to do this with minimal horsing around is to body swap a C3500 duramax dually.
Channel the body to sit it down best over the framerails you can - frame rails are still pretty damn tall - so you may end up having to build a custom chassis to get the same towable goodness and not have that "car on a truck frame" look.
Dave Chappelle (the fabricatator, not the comedian) did a pretty slick bag setup on his little Mustang 2 - basically reversed the trailing arms so they connected to the chassis in the rear bumper location, bags went right over the axle. This saved a ton of room in the passenger compartment and kept most of the rear seats the expense of the trunk space.
It seemed backward to me, but he is real experienced in this stuff and stated that for something that getting low, looking stock, and riding good was more important than quarter mile performance it was a perfectly credulent way to build something.
MyMiatas said:So are you gonna tub it in the rear then?
So you can keep the tires inside the body
Yes. Narrow the frame and extend the tubs inward. I likely also raise the trunk floor to fit thicker/taller frame rails and also have some hope of a half-decent fuel capacity.
ShawnG said:Please don't do the ten lug conversion.
Just don't.
You're not named Chad or Kyle.
I wouldn't do the 10 lug. This will be functioning mainly as getting more rubber on the road for overkill stability with a trailer. I will likely shoot for 18-20" wheels with modest rubber in a size that fits my weight needs and is proportional to the lines of the car.
Right now I'm researching small box truck tires, like you might see on an NPR or UD. They are E - G range usually, but a smaller overall diameter compared to most LT E-range. One of the smallest diameter E-range LTs I ever found was 215/85-16, and they are big donuts. I'd like to make the tire diameter on this one a little inflated (pun intended) from factory wee little 60s tires, but not cartoonish or comical.
Like in this photo that I inserted earlier. Notice how at full drop, the top lip of the wheel is just hidden behind the fender? I love that look.
stuart in mn said:In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :
My question is will this conversion actually improve its towing capability. It sounds like a lot of work and expense for minimal gains.
It most definitely will. When I was in fleet maintenance, we had a fleet of C3500s and F350s in both SRW and dually. Pretty much the same exact truck, same springs, same everything except dually or not. The duallys were light years ahead in towing. Double the rubber hitting the road meant that sidewall flex and tread scrub were greatly reduced making the "tail wagging the dog" thing greatly reduced.
I know that it does nothing for my actual towing capacity on paper, but it does in reality. Of course, this car was engineered before manufacturers gave a tow rating, and they were frequently used on bias-ply nylon tires towing monster steel-framed RVs. Like I said, I'm not trying to turn it into a C3500 and tow 15k, I'm just looking to make it more planted when towing about 6500-7000.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:stuart in mn said:In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :
My question is will this conversion actually improve its towing capability. It sounds like a lot of work and expense for minimal gains.
It most definitely will. When I was in fleet maintenance, we had a fleet of C3500s and F350s in both SRW and dually. Pretty much the same exact truck, same springs, same everything except dually or not. The duallys were light years ahead in towing. Double the rubber hitting the road meant that sidewall flex and tread scrub were greatly reduced making the "tail wagging the dog" thing greatly reduced.
I know that it does nothing for my actual towing capacity on paper, but it does in reality. Of course, this car was engineered before manufacturers gave a tow rating, and they were frequently used on bias-ply nylon tires towing monster steel-framed RVs. Like I said, I'm not trying to turn it into a C3500 and tow 15k, I'm just looking to make it more planted when towing about 6500-7000.
Tow all you want without the hassle of a dually rear end. For 6 or 7k there is no need for a dually.
In reply to 93gsxturbo :
No need, perhaps, but want and benefit.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:
Of course, this car was engineered before manufacturers gave a tow rating, and they were frequently used on bias-ply nylon tires towing monster steel-framed RVs. Like I said, I'm not trying to turn it into a C3500 and tow 15k, I'm just looking to make it more planted when towing about 6500-7000.
You may find this interesting - the factory 1966 Pontiac Trailer Hauling Options brochure. http:// https://oldcarbrochures.org/United%20States/Pontiac/1966_Pontiac/1966-Pontiac-Trailering-Options/index.html (at the time they they only rated them for towing up to 5,000 lbs.)
Duke said:I mean:
Funny... I read this thread last night and saw the pic above. During my usual morning marketplace check I saw the ad below. NMNA but relatvely close to home.
https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/452502147199914/
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to 93gsxturbo :
No need, perhaps, but want and benefit.
I guess the effect of having a lighter wallet to haul around *would* help your GVWR. So yeah. Makes sense to me.
You'll need to log in to post.
