CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

1978 K5 Tribute Restomod (402BBC EFI, 205, 3/4 Ton)

1986 K5 to 1978 K5 Tribute
@imiceman44 thanks for your input!

Anyone else have any thoughts. I can try and get some measurements if y’all think it would be helpful. Or some better pics of the areas that may be kinked or twisted.
 
All those braces, crossmembers and braces are what “limited” the side rail from twisting like a wet noodle.
But even with all in place it was designed to flex - A LOT !

I assume you will bolt those brackets, such as spring hangers and such, back together - might be wise to use bolts a little longer ( something like the T-case crossmember to frame setup ) with a spacer so the bolt can stretch when needed instead of snapping.

Put it all together with the rails supported by stands and take some measurements BEFORE you start tightening anything down first.
 
@tarussell yes, I planned to bolt all the parts back on (hangers, shock mounts, cross members, etc). I think most of them come with grade 8 hardware. I can use spacers but I suppose I’d need to get longer bolts.
 
So I’ve been prepping all the chassis components for blasting and paint. One thing that is confusing is the spring plates.

IMG_9800.jpeg

So, previously I had noticed the bump stop point and threaded hole for the sway bar link were different on these. So I was going to try and find another 1716 plate instead of the 1746 plate. But now, as I was cleaning the 1716 plate I noticed the spacing of the u-bolt holes were different. (3-3/4” center to center vs 4-1/4” center to center) This is for a 10bolt axle with 8 lug hubs which has 3” axle tubes. Which plate is the one I should use? Or neither?

Also, if I sand blast these cast parts will I lose the cast texture? I need to do a variety of other parts and I’m thinking I’d like to keep the texture instead of smoothing it out. Thoughts?
 
So I’ve been prepping all the chassis components for blasting and paint. One thing that is confusing is the spring plates.

View attachment 531766

So, previously I had noticed the bump stop point and threaded hole for the sway bar link were different on these. So I was going to try and find another 1716 plate instead of the 1746 plate. But now, as I was cleaning the 1716 plate I noticed the spacing of the u-bolt holes were different. (3-3/4” center to center vs 4-1/4” center to center) This is for a 10bolt axle with 8 lug hubs which has 3” axle tubes. Which plate is the one I should use? Or neither?

Also, if I sand blast these cast parts will I lose the cast texture? I need to do a variety of other parts and I’m thinking I’d like to keep the texture instead of smoothing it out. Thoughts?
The plate with the wider hole spread is for the passenger side. The one u-bolt is larger that goes around the pumpkin.
 
@Fastereddie thanks, that makes sense. So the bump stop points will be staggered? One inward and one outward? Because the threaded holes both have to face out for the sway bar links correct?
 
@Fastereddie thanks, that makes sense. So the bump stop points will be staggered? One inward and one outward? Because the threaded holes both have to face out for the sway bar links correct?
They are staggered. Both threaded holes point towards the passenger side. Or maybe im thinking of the ord kit I put on? I’ll have to check when I get home.
 
Last edited:
I know the rear nubs are indicative of the Chevy 10 bolt front axle thanks to @tarussell but can anyone tell me what the ones on the top are for? The current plan is to strip this axle housing down to bare metal, epoxy prime and paint and then install all the components. I have sealed the axle tube openings and pinion opening with inflatable plugs and taped over the pumpkin and installed the old diff cover with silicone to minimize blast media from getting inside the housing. I’ve also considered a chemical dip or laser cleaning (I have access). Am I over thinking that?

My assumption is these upper nubs were part of the casting for some reason but I can’t see them being structural.

E41928A0-6834-464C-A646-09E5C866BDFD.jpeg

0BA1D884-F43B-405A-BF8B-8E5DAA5C9D2B.jpeg

IMG_9808.jpeg
 
Those markings on the mating surface showed up after I ran a 150g sander over the housing after scrapping the old rtv. I was surprised that’s what the surface looked like. I’m planning to use a lube locker but I could surface that area better if you think it’s necessary.
 
Those markings on the mating surface showed up after I ran a 150g sander over the housing after scrapping the old rtv. I was surprised that’s what the surface looked like. I’m planning to use a lube locker but I could surface that area better if you think it’s necessary.
Those lines are from the end mill used during the machining process to make the surface flat. That is normal and you won't make it better with any hand tools, you actually run the risk of making the surface not flat and harder to seal.
 
@kennyw I would mount it up on the surface grinder at my buddy’s machine shop but if it’s not necessary I’ll leave it alone.
A surface grinder would be the only way to make it better, but if you cannot feel the transition or catch a fingernail on it, it probably is unnecessary.
 
Top Bottom