| |
Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | | Forums66 Topics128,021 Posts1,055,346 Members48,420 | | Most Online14,466 Apr 26th, 2026 | | AD Chevy Trucks Over 6,000 pictures Brad Allen has an awesome collection of Chevrolet factory pictures that he has set up from film strips. Check them out!
Lots of work on Brad's part ... pure enjoyment (and references) for you!
| | THANKS!
For helping keep this great
old truck web site
on the Internet for over 30 years! and not clogged down with Ads! Again, thanks! | | | | Joined: May 2005 Posts: 47 Member | | Member Joined: May 2005 Posts: 47 | Originally posted by KyleDallas: I have a 57 GMC swb/step 114wb... I am planning on swapping a ifs from 71-87 truck onto my factory frame without cutting or welding other than boxing the frame for added stegth... it took me a while to find the infomation needed on track width but I finally found it.. the suspension of the 60-87 is bolted in... it can be unbolted and matching holes drilled into the 57 frame for a bolt in operation.... trouble is the track width... here's the info I have TRACK WIDTHS hub to hub
1. 55-59 Chevy Pickup 62in 2. 47-55 1st Series 60-62in 3. 71 Chevy Pickukp 63 3/4in 4. 78-up Monte Carlo 58in 5. 76-80 Camaro 61 1/2in 6. 68-72 Chevelle 61 1/2in 7. 89 Trans Am 62
I found these on the web... so as always- do your own measuring before doing anything as drastic as cutting a frame...THESE ARE FRONT TRACKS- rear may be different..sometimes a little narrower to accomidate wider tires.. The practice of unbolting and redrilling and attaching ..is one that I am familiar with.. it is how 18wheeler frames are shortened... for vehicles carrying 80,000 pounds.. I am planning on running narrowed control arms on the suspension.. hopefully I will gain an inch on each side(2 inches total)and be right there at 61 3/4 inches on front track... 1/4 inch less than normal 62 on the 1957 model. This will allow me to run low dollar yet bulletproof factory suspension... theoretically this can be done on suspensions back to the 1960 model... I mentioned 71-up because of factory disc brakes... BE WARNED.. I have a friend who used a 71/disc front on his 59.... it currently looks TERRIBLE.. .. very ungainly... wheels are sticking out quite ackwardly from under the fenders...yuk.. there are some who have addressed this problem with wheel offset alone...to some success... but I like the deep look on the wheels...to accentuate their width... and I want absolutely no part of the look my buddy with his 59 got.. Fatman makes narrowed control arms... they are very pricey...but still cheap when compared to a complete $1300-$1800 dollar Mustang 2 fully complete set up.. I've found a fabricator in the Carolinas who makes custom control arms but I have no price yet.. I am probably going to pick through my racing contacts and find an engineer/fabricator who can complete the task and not offend the laws of physics...or hopefully my pocket book.. I can get a junkyard front suspension with brakes for under $100.... another good reason to go this way is there are aftermarket lowering kits available at many heights in use with this IFS...so tailor the height to your liking.. Eibach..and many other quality racing spring MFG companies make springs for this front... or keep it factory for a softer ride..up to your taste and desires.. Good luck on whichever way you choose... many of the Mustang II kits are quality pieces.. -K Thanks for all of the great information.
1957 Chevy Stepside 1993 GMC Sonoma
| | |
| |
| |