Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | |
2 members (Buckeye998, J Lucas),
301
guests, and
2
robots. | | Key: Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod | | | Forums66 Topics128,152 Posts1,057,012 Members48,460 | | 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: 8,878 . | | . Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 | Tie rod arms came in today, ordered them through Central truck and Trailer in Hagerstown MD. They look like just what I needed. http://rides.webshots.com/photo/2028637100080251109saQYcZNext step is find tie rod ends and see if I can shorten and re-thread a tie rod I already have. Grigg | | | | | Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 . | | . Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 | Got lucky for once!
The original tierod is a perfect fit!
Still need new ends but at least I know what Im looking for now.
The original tierod working is a good sign that I picked the right arms to get the steering geometry about right.
Grigg | | | | | Joined: Jan 2008 Posts: 4,962 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Jan 2008 Posts: 4,962 | Grigg, I think those tanks are going to be bigger than 50 gallons. For many years I ran 22" tanks round tanks. A 57" x 22" is around 100 gallons with 90 gal draw. If they are 100 gallons, that will be 1500 lbs hanging from the side of the frame. For quite a few years it has been law that fuel tanks are marked for gross and draw. I now run 26" tanks because it gives me a little more room between the tank and the drive axle. | | | | | Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 . | | . Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 | The tanks are 13"x18" with about a 3" radius on the long corners.
I calculated 55 gallons completely full. They have stickers but are painted over, I'll look more closely for tags but was surprised not to see them right off.
Grigg | | | | | Joined: Dec 2003 Posts: 1,144 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Dec 2003 Posts: 1,144 | Some tanks have stamped info near filler neck rather than tag. may be filled with paint. My former boss had a tank made for a gas job DOT fined him because it wasn't certified. | | | | | Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 . | | . Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 | I'll look again, but like I said I did look and was surprised not to see anything in the usual places. let's hope for the stamped in the tank and filled with paint option. | | | | | Joined: Jan 2008 Posts: 4,962 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Jan 2008 Posts: 4,962 | I misread your post. I took the 22" as the size of the tanks. You are probably right in your calculations with the size you cited. Tanks usually have a certification tag welded to them. By law, they must have the name of the manufacturer, certification, and capacity. We get scrutinized on this on DOT inspections. But I doubt if you would be scrutinized. And because it is a 53 model, you could claim that you meet 1953 standards. | | | | | Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 . | | . Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 | ...We get scrutinized on this on DOT inspections. But I doubt if you would be scrutinized. And because it is a 53 model, you could claim that you meet 1953 standards. Good point, they will appear "factory" although not original to the truck so probably can get away with it. The original tanks don't have anything on them that I've seen either. I do know what you mean about newer ones having tags tack welded beside the filler or stamped around the neck, the aluminum tank on my truck is an example. Grigg | | | | | Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 . | | . Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 | After carefull measurement I'll need to ream the taper in the tierod arms several thousandths of an inch larger so the nut will have enough room to get the cotter key in it. Taper is the right 1.5"/foot just not quite large enough.
The only ends from Spicer that fit the arms (perfect) were for a dropped tierod and I need a straight one. Then the next likely ones and commonly available would require shortening the tie rod an inch and reaming the holes some.
Using the stock GMC ends only requires the reaming, and I have the reamer.
Ends are ordered.
Grigg | | | | | Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 . | | . Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 | Edit Whole picture album here It's been quite some time on this project and in the meantime I have been busy with other stuff and even ended up getting hitched. Back to work, pushing to get the engine and transmission mounted in the next 2 weeks. We left off with ordering new arms that fit the spindles and tie rods. See them here https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/norl5UeJogDlgf4o4HyBrtMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlinkI had also ordered new original GMC 2 ton tie rod ends and had no trouble at all using them with the original tie rod tube and easily adjusted for proper toe in, 1/16". I had first thought I'd need to ream the taper in the arms a little but turns out with the proper nut it's not necessary at all. Then I removed the old steering column/box and hung the engine as close to home as I could to evaluate the situation. Here are a series of pictures. https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/zdsVSZBpfiJHr76SbS93bdMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlinkhttps://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/NMwkp_VHnK8o7-RLph8eodMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlinkhttps://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/9NpVGZQ-hzhPy03B0UiWgdMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlinkhttps://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/f6z9EURHS92u4UXSFRdb_9MTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlinkhttps://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/Go2d3qaCY5lIje-hq0PBIdMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlinkhttps://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/DjQPdY_eMg2Rh_YVtaOxetMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlinkAs you can see it doesn't quite fit... which I had really hoped it would because the GMC engine is longer (than the Chevy) and I could easily get another 1.5" by moving the radiator forward in the support. I had even measured and measured and pretty much convinced myself It would fit without modifying the cab. Turns out I was wrong, the cab needs some work to fit the engine just as it did in my 2 ton Chevy, really not a surprise I guess looking at it now. What I learned is important though. You see I often get questions form folks like "Will X Detroit Diesel engine fit in Y truck". Furthermore they'll say "I'm pretty sure it will because I found these dimensions on the internet that say the engine is only xx" long and yy" wide...." My response is always "The engine isn't a perfect cube, the only way you'll know for sure if it will fit is to set engine beside truck and measure." Now I know even that's not enough! You've got to actually try to make it fit and see what happens. So making it fit. For now we just moved the cab back a few feet to get some working room, in time it'll need some firewall work. Really the firewall just needs a lot more width to the existing depression, the depth is about right. Then the front motor mount is really easy on the GMC because the old one has the same bolt spacing as the new Detroit motor mount (from 1978 GMC 6500). only the hole isn't quite large enough, an easy fix. https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/up5Nd7jY-siJkcn_D-_Mt9MTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlinkhttps://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/PxGXAzwePbEyZMpRK3S5GtMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlinkhttps://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/70a_QUjCjZkfTgzms5fc1dMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlinkNow here it is sitting/hanging in place ready to install new crossmember from an AD GMC 470, remove old, and fab rear motor mounts. https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/DMz-lH3NXwgOGgHESQMbMtMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlinkGrigg | | | | | Joined: Nov 2005 Posts: 6,100 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Nov 2005 Posts: 6,100 | Hy Grigg, thank you so much for your photos and descriptions of your projects, very informative! | | | | | Joined: Jan 2008 Posts: 4,962 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Jan 2008 Posts: 4,962 | I was wondering how your project was going. Its looking good. The whole album puts it into perspective. | | | | | Joined: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,276 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,276 | Wow Grigg another great looking project. I like the idea of adapting the larger spindles to the original axle. I thought about doing that myself not for disc brakes but for bigger drum brakes and 11 1/4" 10 bolt pattern. | | | | | Joined: Jan 2008 Posts: 4,962 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Jan 2008 Posts: 4,962 | International used something similar to what you picture through 1996. In 1997 they switched to a V type block. I may have some of the old style laying around. | | | | | Joined: Jan 2008 Posts: 4,962 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Jan 2008 Posts: 4,962 | I don't think they are International. The 9000 series from mid 80's to the mid 90's mounted the journal to the clutch housing and the bushing was on the frame like yours. IH mounted it down lower and put the mount inside the frame. | | | | | Joined: Nov 2000 Posts: 1,399 Camp Commandant | | Camp Commandant Joined: Nov 2000 Posts: 1,399 | Grigg, beautiful work as always. Very impressive. | | | | | Joined: Apr 2013 Posts: 172 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Apr 2013 Posts: 172 | Grigg, just went thru all of your build pictures. Very nice. Looks like on the front leaf springs you've used both rear and front shackles on your builds. Did you find shackles on the rear provided less bump steer, smoother ride, less wear and tear on the suspension or is it not noticeable? I was going to go to the trouble of reversing mine on a 47 frame but maybe it's not worth it.
Thanks, Greg
1947 M15 Studebaker 454 4x4 1949 Chevy COE In the Stovebolt GalleryMore pix of the COE1950 Harley FL 1958 GMC LCF 455 3x2bbl 1961 Chevy C60 Tilt Cab 327 1966 Chevy C60 Tilt Cab 496 1961 Chevy K10 sb 292 1974 Harley FXE 1979 Chevy K10 sb 2007 Harley Streetglide I'm not that good but I'm slow
| | | | | Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 . | | . Joined: May 2005 Posts: 8,878 | looking back through my own pictures all I can see are shackles on the front of the front leaf springs. This truck, the 48 2 ton, 52 1 ton, and the 61 F350.
The AD COE trucks used shackles on the rear of the front springs, I haven't worked on one of those.
I believe that the steering setup has a lot to do with where the shackle is on the front springs. Ideally the pitman arm is level and if the steering gear box is forward of the axle, pitman arm moving front to back the shackle is probably behind the axle, and the reverse is true.
I haven't experience any bad bump steer on any of my trucks and wouldn't consider swapping things around just for the fun of it.
Grigg | | | | | Joined: Apr 2013 Posts: 172 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Apr 2013 Posts: 172 | Yup. Your right of course. Must have been a different white 52 I was looking at. Guess that means it was a COE? Sorry about that. That brings up some more spring / steering box questions but I'll present them in another post.
Thanks,
Greg
1947 M15 Studebaker 454 4x4 1949 Chevy COE In the Stovebolt GalleryMore pix of the COE1950 Harley FL 1958 GMC LCF 455 3x2bbl 1961 Chevy C60 Tilt Cab 327 1966 Chevy C60 Tilt Cab 496 1961 Chevy K10 sb 292 1974 Harley FXE 1979 Chevy K10 sb 2007 Harley Streetglide I'm not that good but I'm slow
| | | | | Joined: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,276 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,276 | Grigg and Goob the idea of running the shackle to the rear isn't for bump steer it is because as the spring is compressed it grows in length pushing the axle away from the solid mounted eye and toward the shackle. So assuming that the vehicle will spend most of its time going forward if the shackles are in the rear the axle will move a little bit away from the impact that caused the spring to compress. In the off road world guys will often move forward mounted shackles to the rear. It dose make for a softer ride and tends to break fewer parts. | | |
|
|
