Dismiss Notice

Welcome To CK5!

Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.

Score a FREE t-shirt and membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.

Flat style transmission Cross Member?

Discussion in '1973-1991 K5 Blazer | Truck | Suburban' started by 78Blazer, Jun 12, 2002.

  1. 78Blazer

    78Blazer 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    873
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Michigan
    Can anyone tell me if there is a diffrence in the flat style cross member from say like a 78 and a 84??????? /forums/images/icons/grin.gif
     
  2. thatK30guy

    thatK30guy 1 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2001
    Posts:
    32,076
    Likes Received:
    55
    Location:
    .
    They are both the flat style but both look slightly different.

    Both can be used in place of the other with no problems.

    The '85 and newer crossmembers are the double-hump type and are not compatible with the '84 and older flat style.
     
  3. 78Blazer

    78Blazer 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    873
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Michigan
    Well I was just out trying to use the 78 flat style on my 84 and the damn thing dont work... the holes dont quite line up right. /forums/images/icons/confused.gif
     
  4. thatK30guy

    thatK30guy 1 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2001
    Posts:
    32,076
    Likes Received:
    55
    Location:
    .
    Not all crossmembers are gonna fit perfectly in place of others. They are not all "one size fits all." Most of them require some coaxing to get them in place, especially if you are not using the original piece. /forums/images/icons/wink.gif
     
  5. dyeager535

    dyeager535 1 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2000
    Posts:
    26,979
    Likes Received:
    189
    Location:
    Roy WA
    Had the same problem. (70 something crossmember on '81 frame) Holes wouldn't line up.

    Curious, was the older crossmember actually wider or narrower than the '84 frame, or just that the old style crossmember sat further forward or back on the frame than the '84 one did? (as evidenced by the holes already present in the frame)
     

Share This Page