The Stovebolt.com Forums Home | Tech Tips | Gallery | FAQ | Events | Features | Search
9 - 11 Memorials

Searching the Site - a click away
click here to search
New here ??? Where to start?
Click on image for the lowdown. Where do I go around here?
====
Who's Online Now
6 members (TUTS 59, Stovebolt48, 32Fordpuchoptop, Wayne67vert, Oswald, Otto Skorzeny), 83 guests, and 9 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums66
Topics128,021
Posts1,055,348
Members48,420
Most Online14,466
Apr 26th, 2026
Step-by-step instructions for pictures in the forums
Brad Allen's photos

AD Chevy Trucks

Pictures galore
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!

Big Thanks!

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!

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#361366 01/16/2008 2:58 PM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 51
T
Wrench Fetcher
Wrench Fetcher
T Offline
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 51
I posted this yesterday in the engine/ drivetrain forum but got no help, maybe I posted in the wrong spot? I have a 54 gmc 1/2 ton, I have a 76 ws6 sub frame avalible to buy , I already have a 68 camaro sub, my question is which is best suited for the 54 frame, I have heard that the 70s model frame is too wide for the 54 but another person said he has done this swap and it is better to use this cause the gearbox is ahead of the motor and the steering column is easier to hook up.Any help other than telling me it is fine stock is appriciated!!! thanks

Tom Perini #361381 01/16/2008 3:22 PM
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 191
C
Wrench Fetcher
Wrench Fetcher
C Offline
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 191
Look in Tech Tips under Suspension. First article up is about Camaro clip- on AD truck. That might help. Wish I had more to offer, but I have a 56 TF with Camaro clip, not an AD. Love mine.

Try this link:

http://www.stovebolt.com/techtips/clip_camaro/index.html

Clint Lovell #361538 01/16/2008 10:53 PM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 51
T
Wrench Fetcher
Wrench Fetcher
T Offline
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 51
Thanks Clint, I came across a artical sometime ago that had the most common parts to use , I have the artical you had pointed out to me , it is a later model frame going into a 2nd series I believe. I will keep digging!!! Tom

Tom Perini #361819 01/17/2008 10:12 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,249
"Hey! I sound like Darth Vader!!
"Hey! I sound like Darth Vader!!
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,249
Originally Posted by Tom Perini
I have the artical you had pointed out to me , it is a later model frame going into a 2nd series I believe.

The Stovebolt article is a 1971 Camaro clip going on a 1952 frame. Don't let the picture fool you.

MNSmith #361837 01/17/2008 2:36 PM
H
Houston54
Unregistered
Houston54
Unregistered
H
This subject comes up about every month and I have a first hand opinion on it from my 54 project, so here is my opinion.

The camaro subframe can be made to work on AD trucks but it is too wide by a smidgen. If you lower the truck you will have a tire/fender clearance problem UNLESS you use wheels with significant backspacing. This brings it own problems in inner fender clearances IF you plan to run wide meat on the rims. Some who do the Camaro/Firebird subframe swap also change out the control arms with aftermarket versions which remove the fender clearance issues. However, IF you go that route you have already spent close to or more than a model specific IFS kit would cost. Again it can be done but is not the perfect solution.

Regarding the 73-8? front suspension swap, this is a total abomination for AD trucks in that is is much too wide. If you like that look then fine, it is your truck but you will not be able to lower the front end to the point where your tires will fit under the fender lip with out again utilizing rims with severe backspacing. Some who use this suspension system also take about three inches out of the middle to solve this problem but that invites other "issues" such as engine mounting, new brake lines, modifying the centerlink, etc, etc. That can be fun if you like that kind of work.

Another option is using a G-Body subframe (78-88 Monte Carlo, Regal, Cutlass, Grand Prix). This suspension matches up well with the original track width but also has a host of fabrication issues (First hand experience here) the major one being a severe core support/steering box interference. This swap is NOT recommended for someone not familar with welding, fabrication or for people with lots of hair as you will be pulling it out.

If any of the sub-frame methods are not performed correctly it can ruin a project and be a complete waste of time, effort and most importantly...CASH.

THE BEST SOLUTION FOR AD SERIES FRONT SUSPENSION UPGRADE IS...
an IFS kit. This will give you a proven system which will be safe, solid and will ADD VALUE to your project. The other options may work but will not have the value adder that an IFS kit will give your project.

For the $1,500 or so that an IFS kit will run you, it really is cost effective when you look at the cost of purchasing the other options and the time and money spent to fabrication/repair them into service. This is one of the biggest "lessons learned" I have from my project. Hindsight tells me I would have been further along if I had used a kit.

In my opinion though, the subframe options are very viable for the 55-59 series trucks as few if any of the interference issues are present.

The 73-up front suspension is just plain wrong for AD trucks.

Agree with this or not, that is my $0.02.

Edit 1: Here is a link to a current thread from a bolter dealing with the problem of the 73-up suspension now. https://www.stovebolt.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/360079#Post360079

Edit 2: Another option is the S-10 frame swap but the cost of that is equal to or greater than an IFS when all is said and done UNLESS you fabrication all the body mounts yourself.

Edit 3: I just re-read your original question and will add that the 68 camaro sub-frame with the rear steering IS a good option for the AD truck. The 1st gen camaro and the early Novas 68-72 have that type of sub-frame. The track width is good for the AD and the only real problem you will face is header clearence on the left side caused by the steering box. You may be able to find headers to solve the problem though. If you do not have the cash for an IFS I would recommend the rear steer sub-frame as the next best option. Good luck.

Last edited by Houston54; 01/18/2008 3:17 PM.
#363264 01/20/2008 6:12 PM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 51
T
Wrench Fetcher
Wrench Fetcher
T Offline
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 51
Huston 54, Thanks for your input on this, I wanted to be sure you knew I was considering useing a 1976 trans am sub , not a pickup frame, is there alot of difference between the widths of a 68 camaro sub and a 76 firebired sub? The firebird sub is alot better as in it already has disc brakes and has a stiffer spring rate thanks again for everyones time

Tom Perini #363656 01/21/2008 2:46 PM
H
Houston54
Unregistered
Houston54
Unregistered
H
The 70-81 camaro/firebird/trans am sub-frame is the one I think is too wide for the AD trucks. That is the one I am referring to above. You can make it work but it is not the ideal solution to your need. If you are dead set on a sub-frame then I would suggest the rear steer version from 1st generation camaro/firebirds or Novas of the same vintage.

When I was trying to make the same decision about 5 years ago I talked to several owners who were running the camaro sub-frame and everyone of them recommended against it. It rides great but your problems arise when you try to lower it AND run wide tires. Every with tires as narrow as 205's you can have fender clearance issues UNLESS your rims have enough back-spacing.

#363676 01/21/2008 3:30 PM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 51
T
Wrench Fetcher
Wrench Fetcher
T Offline
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 51
Thanks again for your time. I have mine sitting on my lift right now and have the rear suspension out of it, I have it lowered to where I think it would look good and measured the running boards ,they are 12 inchs from the ground. How low does yours sit, in you pictures it looks low,nice job!

Tom Perini #363728 01/21/2008 6:02 PM
H
Houston54
Unregistered
Houston54
Unregistered
H
The front end of my running boards are 7.25" to the lower edge and the rear end measurement is 8.75".

12" sounds much too tall.

#364167 01/22/2008 6:52 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,464
W
Shop Shark
Shop Shark
W Offline
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,464
Please forgive me if a solid axle solution is not wanted here, but my running boards are 8" from the ground, I can easily lower it more if I choose to. I used a dropped axle from Sid's, the truck rides and handles at least as good as 2 different MII kits I had previously, and at a fraction of the cost. I have pictures on this board under "New Dropped Axle" if interested, otherwise I'll shut up and just hang with the solid axle guys.

waldo53 #371261 02/06/2008 3:49 PM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 51
T
Wrench Fetcher
Wrench Fetcher
T Offline
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 51
waldo 53 dropped axles are cool, my delema is the springs ,hangers,and king pins are all bad and to go with a dropped axle it would cost a small fortune to get it back up to standards fixing all the above.I think I will keep my eyes open for some more tech articals on doing the 1st gen sub swap . Thanks Tom


Moderated by  Fibonachu, KCMongo 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Home | FAQ | Gallery | Tech Tips | Events | Features | Search | Hoo-Ya Shop
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 8.0.0