| |
Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | |
1 members (1 invisible),
46
guests, and
2
robots. | | Key: Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod | | | Forums66 Topics128,043 Posts1,055,610 Members48,426 | | 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: Feb 2009 Posts: 17 New Guy | | New Guy Joined: Feb 2009 Posts: 17 | First, I would like to thank you guys who chimed in on the corvette rear question I previously posted. I learned a ton. However, learning what I have has led me to a question about the s10 frame. Since my ride is a suburban, I face different challenges than you pickup guys as far as dealing with the rise in the rear frame rails. How much would the use of an s10 frame affect the floor in the rear of my suburban? I really dont want to get into raising the floor to make the whole thing work. The idea of an s10 frame appealed to me because of the ability to get the ride height very low. But, the corvette suspension affixed to the FLATTER original frame should help lower the 'burb quite a bit (unless I'm missing something). I don't want to drag frame, I want an agressive, low stance that is functional. I'm beginning to have doubts about accomplishing this with the s10 frame without having to raise the rear floor (or channel the body- which is not an option). Admittedly, this is my first AD vehicle (I'm a convert from muscle cars and an old model A Ford - none of which presented this problem), so any advice is appreciated. 1951 GMC SuburbanIn the GalleryHe who hesitates is lost..........I'm sorry, where was I? | | | | | Joined: Feb 2009 Posts: 17 New Guy | | New Guy Joined: Feb 2009 Posts: 17 | I should mention that the corvette suspension would be mounted to the original frame with the help of the kits by Flat-out Engineering using their coil-overs, or equivalent. I don't know how much this changes the equation, but I thought it might be useful information so that I can paint an accurate picture- sorry for the omission. Oh, the 'burb is a '51 Sincerely, Rich 1951 GMC SuburbanIn the GalleryHe who hesitates is lost..........I'm sorry, where was I? | | | | | Joined: Oct 2003 Posts: 5,152 Cruising in the Passing Lane | | Cruising in the Passing Lane Joined: Oct 2003 Posts: 5,152 | It depends somewhat on how low you really want to go. The frame is the same on a Suburban or pickup, except for the mounts, and the frame is pretty close under the floor on your Suburban. The S-10 does have more room for the cab to drop down, which may limit how far you can drop the body.
1955 1st GMC Suburban | 1954 GMC 250 trailer puller project | 1954 GMC 250 Hydra-Matic | 1954 Chevy 3100 . 1947 Chevy COE | and more... It's true. I really don't do anything but browse the Internet looking for trouble... | | | | | Joined: Feb 2009 Posts: 17 New Guy | | New Guy Joined: Feb 2009 Posts: 17 | I read somewhere where a guy used 3 1/2 inch mounts btween an s10 frame and his cab- which meant he had to doghouse the floor to clear the tranny. This Is acceptable and about the limit for me. The question then becomes this: in this setup, would the rise in the rear framerails of an s10 cause me to have to raise the floor? 1951 GMC SuburbanIn the GalleryHe who hesitates is lost..........I'm sorry, where was I? | | |
| |
| |