• Welcome to The Truck Stop! We see you haven't REGISTERED yet.

    Your truck knowledge is missing!
    • Registration is FREE , all we need is your birthday and email. (We don't share ANY data with ANYONE)
    • We have tons of knowledge here for your diesel truck!
    • Post your own topics and reply to existing threads to help others out!
    • NO ADS! The site is fully functional and ad free!
    CLICK HERE TO REGISTER!

    Problems registering? Click here to contact us!

    Already registered, but need a PASSWORD RESET? CLICK HERE TO RESET YOUR PASSWORD!

Another air bag thread

Burning oil

Burning oil

LeroyDiesel.com
Vendor
Messages
10,306
Reaction score
1,958
Location
Houston
I've been searching without finding the answer.
I looking to add air bags to the 96 CCBB SRW. It will have a slide in camper (someday) so I'm getting it ready.

Question is, is anyone actualy running a kit on rear? what brand and part #?
All the manfactures so far have said 7" minimum clearence between frame and tire. Mine is 5.5-6". What do yours meassure at? This applies to the kit thats outside the frame simular to this http://www.airliftcompany.com/shop/57216/

There is another design that moves it all inboard, but what all must be considered if going that way?
 
This may help

http://www.thetruckstop.us/forum/showthread.php?36448-Air-bags-that-work-with-gooseneck-hitch

When you say other kits move it inboard - does that mean the bags are inboard? If so, steer clear. You want your bags directly under the frame rails. Anywhere else and you're putting unwanted stress on something. If the bag is outboard from the frame, then you're putting torsion into the frame when loaded. If the bag is inboard from the frame, then you're loading the axle where it wasn't designed to be loaded and you're decreasing it's capacity. Make sense?
 
GM Guy said:
what about this?

2,000 lbs is nothing to sneeze at, thats for sure.

http://www.airliftcompany.com/products/air-springs/ridecontrol/

I bet it would only take 4-5 inches or so, but IDK.

If it fits a C/K 1500, I bet it would work just fine on a C/K 2500 or 3500.
Click to expand...
I saw that one. Not sure what clearence it needs?
SnowDrift said:
This may help

http://www.thetruckstop.us/forum/showthread.php?36448-Air-bags-that-work-with-gooseneck-hitch

When you say other kits move it inboard - does that mean the bags are inboard? If so, steer clear. You want your bags directly under the frame rails. Anywhere else and you're putting unwanted stress on something. If the bag is outboard from the frame, then you're putting torsion into the frame when loaded. If the bag is inboard from the frame, then you're loading the axle where it wasn't designed to be loaded and you're decreasing it's capacity. Make sense?
Click to expand...

I was going to post my question in your thread, but did not want to jack it. I like the brackets you made. And keeping the bag under the frame makes perfect since. The inboard one puts it on the inside closer to the shock area so would for sure put a twisting force on the frame.

OK the problem is still who's system works/ bolts onto the 88-2000 style truck? I dont see how they can fit in the space, if they call for a minimum of 7" and there is only 5-6" Maybe I should just look for some air shocks?
 
I can send you the drawings if you would like to try to fab up what I made. Access to a CNC burner would be ideal for you.

Air shocks won't do the job you want to do. Consider the mount brackets for the said shocks, then ask yourself if you really want that kind or load on those little brackets.
 
When the airbags are mounted either inside the frame or outside the frame, but they are right next to the frame within an inch or so it's perfectly fine. The bracket simply has to be designed so that the bottom part of the airbag bracket is putting full load on the bottom part of the frame. The bolts that mount the side of the bracket to the side of the frame is not designed for holding all the weight, if so the bolts would start a shearing action inside the frame.

Yes there's going to be some cross lateral torsion, or rolling of the frame, but the minimal amount of that is going to incur take decades to have any effect. The frame is designed to twist in this in that area which is why it is so important to never drill weld or cut into the flanges of the frame. Flanges are considered the top or bottom part of the frame and the bent part where it goes to join to the side of the frame.

Having the airbag directly between the frame and the axle is the most desirable location. Well, other than getting rid of the leaf springs and mounting up a link that hangs from the front leafspring mounts to the axle and has the airbags mounted back at the rear of leafspring out area that's really the most desirable. Going barely inside or to the outside of the frame putting a slight sideload on the mounting bracket which is supporting the weight to the bottom flange of the frame is going to transfer most of the load there.
 
Why introduce unnecessary forces on the frame if it can be avoided, though?

If it cannot be under the frame, directly, then it can only be outboard of the frame and still be considered safe. Putting a bag on the inboard side would introduce too much stress on the axle tube. Moving it in this manner isn't a linear exchange on the numbers, it's an exponential effect. Moving it "barely inside" would cause me to fail the design if it's further inward than the bump stop pads. That is the last point, at which the axle is safe to take a significant load. No matter the bracket design, the load isn't really transferred if it's outside the frame area. Rather, it is a moment (torsional effect). At that point, refer to my first statement in this reply.

To summarize:

1) Under the frame is best
2) Outboard of the frame is, likely, acceptable
3) Inboard of the frame is a design failure if it's going across my desk
 
SnowDrift said:
I can send you the drawings if you would like to try to fab up what I made. Access to a CNC burner would be ideal for you.

Air shocks won't do the job you want to do. Consider the mount brackets for the said shocks, then ask yourself if you really want that kind or load on those little brackets.
Click to expand...

I may take you up on that. Im still looking. I just can't get anyone to confirm if the bag system will work with the tire to frame clearence I have (5 1/2" to 6"). I'll go meassure the burb to see what it has.

A thought: Could the lighter duty bag (GM GUY posted) be used in combo with the activesuspension kit?
 
Can you fit the 2" spacers in that madmax is selling? A hair wider stance might not hurt anyways being single wheel, and an easy solution to run the kit you looked at where you just missed the clearance to the wheel.
 
Leroy, I measured my 98 1500 and it has 8" between frame and tire. My 95 with the bags no longer has the duals on. IIRC it would have had less than 7".
 
I have heard rumors C2500's have narrower rear track width than k2500's. I dont know if there is any truth to that but if leroy's rear is as close as he says then it could be possible.
 
Will L. said:
Can you fit the 2" spacers in that madmax is selling? A hair wider stance might not hurt anyways being single wheel, and an easy solution to run the kit you looked at where you just missed the clearance to the wheel.
Click to expand...
I thought about spacers and may have to do that.
NVW said:
Leroy, I measured my 98 1500 and it has 8" between frame and tire. My 95 with the bags no longer has the duals on. IIRC it would have had less than 7".
Click to expand...
Thank you.
Hmmm wonder why the big difference?
tanman_2006 said:
I have heard rumors C2500's have narrower rear track width than k2500's. I dont know if there is any truth to that but if leroy's rear is as close as he says then it could be possible.
Click to expand...

I meassured 2wd Burb today and it was same 5 1/2" to 6" That is its 5 1/2" at front of wheel and 6" at the rear.

Anyone have a 2wd they can meassure?
 
Be interesting to compair to what Leo has. Just don't lay in a puddle. You could be right on the 4x4 vs 2WD spacing.
 
I got some of each. :)

to get real picky, I have the pair of 1996 2500HD Ext. cab long beds, 6.5L 5spd, one 2wd, one 4wd. 3.73s gears on both. :)

do you want a outside of tire to outside of tire, or center of tire to center of tire measurement?

I can also compare a 93 and 94, 94 is 2wd, and 93 is 4wd, also both 2500HDs, ECLB, 5spd, 6.5L diesel, os that should be exact.

I allways thought the rear axles were the same, and the 2wds tracked the same, and the 4wds stuck out more up front.
 
On the straight axle 4x4 the front is wider, should be the same on 88-2000??

I need clearence messurement from inside wall of tire to the frame, inline with axle, right above spring perch.
 
tanman_2006 said:
I have heard rumors C2500's have narrower rear track width than k2500's. I dont know if there is any truth to that but if leroy's rear is as close as he says then it could be possible.
Click to expand...


Yes, 4 inches narrower. Had a friend who swapped in a C2500 9.5" rear axle into his K1500, and it was 2 inches narrower on each side than his old axle. The K2500 rear axle is supposed to be the same width as a K1500, but GM made the C2500 narrower(at least the 9.5" 6 lug one).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top