What's new
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.

2 frames

38377k5 said:
It has nothing to do with budget and everything to do with not knowing how and/or not having the skills to build it stronger and lighter.

We've argued over this before and I stayed out of this post until now, but c'mon...
Click to expand...
Yep, i gotta agree with 383 on this one
 
You know...somewhere around here is a guy with a first gen Blazer with a completely fabed tube frame under his body. If I recall correctly it was in one of the mags. He got tired of issues with the frame and just bent up a tube frame that fit the body AND gave him extra lift, better angles, tucked the drivetrain up, etc etc etc.
 
I think if done properly there is nothing really unsafe about stacked frames, just that most we have seen were hillbilly hacked together POS's.........however I also see absolutely no benefit to running stacked frames.

If you have two frames sitting right on top of each other you get maybe 6"??? Not like it gives you 36" of lift or something...with my point being it's pretty easy to get the same amount of lift by "normal" means and I'm pretty sure it's a lot easier and quicker to bolt on a 4" suspension and 2" body lift and you probably won't even have to modify any component to do so.

For the comment from the guy saying his truck "rocks" in the mud...please explain how your stacked frames make it perform so much better. Is it the extra "strength", or maybe just the extra weight that makes it go better in the mud than everybody else :rolleyes: Or maybe because it rocks because you are comparing it to trucks on bald 31's?????
 
Randy92782 said:
I personally see this thread going nowhere but downhill. The guy's gonna run it if he thinks it's fine. I by no means agree with putting yourself in danger but if he has enough confidence in building it i say go for it. I could never do it myself cause i lack the ability to even think about something like this
Click to expand...
I knew there was a reason i wrote this back on post #55

Still applys here also
 
RustBuket said:
I dont' know why all you guys are so against this idea...seems as though you've seen it done wrong once and then you assume that it can't be done properly. I don't think I'd do it because I'd probaly just build my own chassis from scratch if I needed that much lift but its up to him really.

I think there is a right and a wrong way to do this. If you had both frames mated together nicely, welded by a trained welder etc I don't see the problem. You could build some cross members that connect both frames for added strenght and box whatever is left of both frames. It'd be strong, really strong. Alot stronger then a 3" regular bodylift, I'd say.

It might not look so cool cause you'd have a whole bunch of frame hanging down under the body but w/e, if its burried in mud anyways who cares?!

Another benefit is you wouldn't have to run such high lift springs. With a bit of trimming, maybe some axle spacing, and a small lift spring you could run pretty much w/e tire you wanted. The spring would still be soft and ride better then those 12" arched as hell ones you see on most mud rigs. Maybe ride really isn't a concern of his but its still a bonus in my mind.

All that being said, I think there is alot of guys here that form an oppinion against an idea in general and then just chirp back the same response everytime. I think if he builds this thing, shows some pics, then form an oppinion. If its a mud-only truck then I really, really don't care if he does this. So what if his body falls off in the mud pit, it'll just be something for all the people to laugh at.

I'm finishing my Mech. Eng degree this year and I would like to see someone model a single frame and a stacked frame and run some analysis on it. I think everyone would see that if they were in fact joined together properly and had proper cross-members, they could be stronger then a single frame. If someone sent me some dimesions of a frame I could even make up a rough drawing in solidworks and try to run some different loads.

Well thats what I have to say for now. So instead of just saying "don't do it~!" give some reasons with some backing.

Flame on,

RustBuket
Click to expand...

I'll make sure I stay away from you Canuck mechies lol
 
kitimatdude said:
S4021402.jpg

Sorry if I sound pissed off, but the tone of this thread reminds me of pirate...
Click to expand...

nice headers
 
6.2Blazer said:
I think if done properly there is nothing really unsafe about stacked frames, just that most we have seen were hillbilly hacked together POS's.........however I also see absolutely no benefit to running stacked frames.

If you have two frames sitting right on top of each other you get maybe 6"??? Not like it gives you 36" of lift or something...with my point being it's pretty easy to get the same amount of lift by "normal" means and I'm pretty sure it's a lot easier and quicker to bolt on a 4" suspension and 2" body lift and you probably won't even have to modify any component to do so.

For the comment from the guy saying his truck "rocks" in the mud...please explain how your stacked frames make it perform so much better. Is it the extra "strength", or maybe just the extra weight that makes it go better in the mud than everybody else :rolleyes: Or maybe because it rocks because you are comparing it to trucks on bald 31's?????
Click to expand...

I'm running 44" boggers. The front of my frame lift is 8" the rear is 10" with my 4" spring lift giving me 12" front 14" rear. I've just added a doubler I hate my rear driveshaft angle. I think I need to take suspension lift out of the rear and maybe add more body lift. I don't like weak driveshaft angles. It did help my front shaft angle. I switched from the cv on a flange joint to a ubolt rear style joint 1350? single joint. I had to put in a ford np205 shaft tho.

The guys I wheel with run 37" boggers and 2 guys with 38.5 boggers and 2 other guys with 44" boggers. a long way from bald 31s...
 
87K506 said:
nice headers
Click to expand...

thanks! I'm setting it up so the exhaust runs thru the upper frame away from the drivetrain. Plenty of room there. All I could find in straight back pipes were something called lake pipes. And they were only available for smallblocks. So I made my own.
 
kitimatdude said:
thanks! I'm setting it up so the exhaust runs thru the upper frame away from the drivetrain. Plenty of room there. All I could find in straight back pipes were something called lake pipes. And they were only available for smallblocks. So I made my own.
Click to expand...

don't take this the wrong way, but i was being kind of sarcastic. Why not just use stock manifolds, they prolly flow better than those anyways. You don't have hardly any runner length and the primaries don't merge together smoothly or anything, so there is prolly next to no scavenging with those. If I had to guess, its probably breathing worse than it would have with the stock manifolds
 
87K506 said:
don't take this the wrong way, but i was being kind of sarcastic. Why not just use stock manifolds, they prolly flow better than those anyways. You don't have hardly any runner length and the primaries don't merge together smoothly or anything, so there is prolly next to no scavenging with those. If I had to guess, its probably breathing worse than it would have with the stock manifolds
Click to expand...
Stock exhaust runs down and low, I have plenty of room up high so I run it up there. the primary's are 2" going into tapered 3". the largest dimension in my cylinder exhaust port is 1 7/8. I have no intention of revving over 5,000 and most of my offroading is below 3,500 rpm. I don't see them as restrictive and scavenging is a high rpm thing as I understand it.
 
kitimatdude said:
I'm running 44" boggers. The front of my frame lift is 8" the rear is 10" with my 4" spring lift giving me 12" front 14" rear. I've just added a doubler I hate my rear driveshaft angle. I think I need to take suspension lift out of the rear and maybe add more body lift <- :eek1:. I don't like weak driveshaft angles. It did help my front shaft angle. I switched from the cv on a flange joint to a ubolt rear style joint 1350? single joint. I had to put in a ford np205 shaft tho.

The guys I wheel with run 37" boggers and 2 guys with 38.5 boggers and 2 other guys with 44" boggers. a long way from bald 31s...
Click to expand...
OMG you did not just say that ^^^:eek1:. I thought you were a mud bogger? Why the doubler? Also are you afraid to cut your wheelwells? Im running about 4.5"s of lift and 42" TSLs, NO BODY LIFT.
 
muddermilitia said:
OMG you did not just say that ^^^:eek1:. I thought you were a mud bogger? Why the doubler? Also are you afraid to cut your wheelwells? Im running about 4.5"s of lift and 42" TSLs, NO BODY LIFT.
Click to expand...

I've cut them, I've cut them as far as I can without removing structural parts of the body. I do a bit of gravel road cruising and trail riding as well. There just aren't any rocks in my area. Oh I could drive up a creek bed etc. But in BC that is very frowned upon.
 
I've seen a 12" body lift that was safer than a factory frame...


...but then the guy basically put a jungle gym worth of tubing on, around, and inside of his original frame to do it. Thing was 100% rigid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom