Page 1 of 2

truck stance

Posted: Sun May 31, 2015 1:57 pm
by bigks3
Is it just me or does it seem like the 68 and older 3/4 ton trucks sit higher in the air than 69 thru 71?

Re: truck stance

Posted: Sun May 31, 2015 6:40 pm
by Hobcobble
bigks3 wrote:Is it just me or does it seem like the 68 and older 3/4 ton trucks sit higher in the air than 69 thru 71?
The pre-'69 Ws do sit higher.
John

Re: truck stance

Posted: Sun May 31, 2015 7:07 pm
by bigks3
why do they?

Re: truck stance

Posted: Mon Jun 01, 2015 7:22 am
by Hobcobble
bigks3 wrote:why do they?
The rear lift blocks on '68 and earlier Ws are taller than
later Sweptlines. :2cents :study
John

Re: truck stance

Posted: Mon Jun 01, 2015 7:50 am
by PwrWgnDrvr
bigks3 wrote:Is it just me or does it seem like the 68 and older 3/4 ton trucks sit higher in the air than 69 thru 71?
Are u asking about D's, W's or both?

Re: truck stance

Posted: Mon Jun 01, 2015 2:01 pm
by bigks3
im asking about the w series. So its just the rear lift blocks? I want my 70 crew to sit as high as the pre 69s

Re: truck stance

Posted: Mon Jun 01, 2015 9:23 pm
by dodgeboykim
68 and older W's use higher lift blocks as you know and different spring pack in front to have higher stance.

Re: truck stance

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 10:35 am
by Hobcobble
bigks3 wrote:im asking about the w series. So its just the rear lift blocks? I want my 70 crew to sit as high as the pre 69s
Keep an eye on the drive line / yoke angles as well as the run-out in the front and
rear drive shafts... :idea :2cents
John

Re: truck stance

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 1:37 pm
by riffraff
bigks3 wrote:Is it just me or does it seem like the 68 and older 3/4 ton trucks sit higher in the air than 69 thru 71?
If you look at page 18 of the 1969 "Light-Duty Dodge Trucks" brochure, Dodge does say the 1969 W100, at least, sits lower:

"...the W100 displays a new LOWER PROFILE for sleeker appearance and easier entry and loading."


Download the 1969 Dodge Truck brochures here:
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=37948

Re: truck stance

Posted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 1:31 pm
by WD
Swap your W front springs out for a set of D front springs. Supposed to add a couple inches of lift. Then spend less than $20 at the nearest chain auto parts store on new rear blocks and u-bolts. I'm sure someone on here with a D series would trade springs straight across for a low cost front end lowering job. Running W springs on a D drops the front end roughly 3 inches.

Re: truck stance

Posted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 7:13 pm
by Hobcobble
WD wrote:Swap your W front springs out for a set of D front springs. Supposed to add a couple inches of lift. Then spend less than $20 at the nearest chain auto parts store on new rear blocks and u-bolts. I'm sure someone on here with a D series would trade springs straight across for a low cost front end lowering job. Running W springs on a D drops the front end roughly 3 inches.
Are you sure of this? :thinking
John

Re: truck stance

Posted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 7:32 pm
by WD
Hobcobble wrote:
WD wrote:Swap your W front springs out for a set of D front springs. Supposed to add a couple inches of lift. Then spend less than $20 at the nearest chain auto parts store on new rear blocks and u-bolts. I'm sure someone on here with a D series would trade springs straight across for a low cost front end lowering job. Running W springs on a D drops the front end roughly 3 inches.
Are you sure of this? :thinking
John
Pretty sure, since you are one of the guys who stated it in here over the last 11 years. I'd have to hunt back through the suspension and 4wd threads to find it.

Re: truck stance

Posted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 7:45 pm
by Hobcobble
WD wrote: Pretty sure, since you are one of the guys who stated it in here over the last 11 years. I'd have to hunt back through the suspension and 4wd threads to find it.
Hmmm..... I don't remember posting this, as I'm not positive myself. :thinking
Now you've got me wondering who I might have answered on this. :pale :lol: I do have a
pair of W200 front springs now and I can measure the bow distance vs the springs
currently on my D200 easy enough.... :idea
John

Re: truck stance

Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 8:04 pm
by mopardwh
It does sound familiar, as many members have mentioned "lowering a D truck" by using w series leafs. So in this case it works opposite?

Re: truck stance

Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 8:14 pm
by riffraff
I just pulled a set of 1969 W100 springs off my truck for replacement.

Up for grabs; local pick up only. Costa Mesa, CA. Gotta take both front and rears. Going to the scrappers soon...

Re: truck stance

Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:39 am
by Hobcobble
I measured the distance from the bottom of the spring pack to the underside of the
truck frame on a D200 and W200. The distance is ~6 3/4" on the D and ~8 1/2" on
the W. :study :2cents
John

Re: truck stance

Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 9:41 am
by PwrWgnDrvr
Hobcobble wrote:I measured the distance from the bottom of the spring pack to the underside of the
truck frame on a D200 and W200. The distance is ~6 3/4" on the D and ~8 1/2" on
the W. :study :2cents
John
What yr are those springs from?

Re: truck stance

Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 9:56 am
by Hobcobble
PwrWgnDrvr wrote:
Hobcobble wrote:I measured the distance from the bottom of the spring pack to the underside of the
truck frame on a D200 and W200. The distance is ~6 3/4" on the D and ~8 1/2" on
the W. :study :2cents
John
What yr are those springs from?
Terry,
The D200 is a '61
The W200 are mid '65 and '68. :study :Thumbsup
John

Re: truck stance

Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:40 am
by soopernaut
Could D100 springs be taller than D200 springs? It seems unlikely, but then again it seems unlikely for D springs to be taller than W springs.

Re: truck stance

Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 11:06 am
by PwrWgnDrvr
John, 69-71 W springs are flatter and lower. See the post way up in this topic. 68 and earlier are much taller and your measurements are congruent with that.