C10 Pick Up Chassis - Any Interest?

[Roadster Shop]

We are looking into possibly developing a production chassis for the 63-72 C10 pick ups. It seems that more and more are popping up that are built to a high level. Does anyone have serious interest in this type of chassis?

We purchased a '70 out of Arizona with the intentions of using this as the test truck for a production chassis. The trucks have great lines and you can still find nice, solid trucks for under $5,000. I'm just testing the waters to see if there would be enough interest and what people would be looking for.

The idea would be to offer a complete rolling chassis that is a direct bolt up replacement to the stock body, bed, bumpers, core support, etc...


What other features would be important to you?

Performance? - Pro-Touring or Fair Ground Cruiser
Stance? - Fixed or adjustable (Air Ride)
Price?
Ease of Installation?
Levels of completion?
Strength?
Appearance and Quality?

Any serious input would be greatly appreciated.

[wiedemab]

First of all, I'll say that I don't own one of these truck - yet! So I'm not a potential customer at this time.

My thoughts for one of these trucks was along these lines. I'd like to build a "shop truck" - you know the patina look with lettering on the door, but have it be very capable in and Auto-X setting. I think it would be awesome to be able to hang with the cars! LS motor and a stick shift - I'll keep dreaming for now.

I think a chassis along the lines of your other "muscle car" chassis would have a market. How big though I'm not sure. I'm not super familiar with these trucks, but I would think that as much engine set-back as you could get would help with the weight distribution. It may be a possibility to sell a firewall that would allow for more engine setback that went along with the chassis.

I'm not sure that my "dreams" necessarily represent a market large enough for producing a chassis for these trucks. I guess it all depends on the development costs.

Keep us posted on what you decide.

[ScotI]

Performance?

Definitely performance oriented. The stock frame works for cruising so aftermarket support isn't required which makes recouping your investment harder.

Stance? - Fixed or adjustable (Air Ride)

Like everything, different strokes for different folks. Offer a set-up that can easily accomodate either (coil-overs or Shock Waves). One set-up means less fab work for you which reduces overall costs for the end consumer.

Price?

Highly subjective. Obviously if you can bring something to market thats more perf oriented than your market competition (Jim Meyers offers a full replacement frame for example) the price can be higher. But, the economy still has a tight grip on many peoples accounts.

Ease of Installation?

Keep It Stupid Simple. Unbolt the cab, doghouse & bed. Swap 'em to the 'new' frame (maybe only requiring bed floor mods & new front inner wells).

Levels of completion?

Guys w/trucks want to play in the sandbox w/the rest of you w/cars & then haul everyones stuff back to the shop . Offer bare frame's to a complete rolling chassis.

Strength? Appearance and Quality?

Again subjective. A guy w/deep pockets doesn't need a readily available truck chassis..... he can have someone build whatever he wants. I've also seen frames that are a work of art (like RadRides newest p.ject) & I'm sure they're priced like art. While thats cool, it's priced out of most peoples budget.
Strong, simple, & solid. A foundation that corrects all the 37+ year old OE engineering.

Any serious input would be greatly appreciated.

Remember, remember . . ..... remember...... It's a truck first & foremost. Don't eliminate that while engineering your improvements.

I've played w/GM trucks since back in the mid 80's & have tweaked more than a couple of my own. My current stash consists of a 64, 67, & a 74. My current projects include the 64 w/an aftermarket Porterbuilt C10 front c.member + tweaked rear truck arm set-up (currently performing some rear frame mods on a spare frame) & my 67 w/another Porterbuilt c.member set-up (this one has a C4/ShockWave set-up w/a BBC/4l80e). My 74 is just dropped factory set-up w/homemade built AOL to maintain it's ability to still be a truck.

[Roadster Shop]

Thanks guys...a lot of real solid info here!

We were definitely going to shoot for the performance handling chassis with a lowered stance. The Air Ride / Coilover swap makes for an easy chassis build that can accomodate both. Every chassis that we build is designed around the idea that it should be as easy to install as a stock chassis. We go to great lengths to make all of the additional jigs and templates for bumper mounts, body mounts, core support mounts, proper engine/trans placement, and more.

Here are a few of my concerns:
Corvette Suspension - As a manufacturer of new components, I have a hard time building a frame to accept used suspension components to save $. You have no idea what type of condition the parts are in, or what they have gone through. It isn't really worth the time, money, or the liability in my opinion. Not knocking anyone for doing this, just my take. I see a lot of guys using Vette suspension, so I may be wrong here.

Base Frames - From past experience these have never worked out in our favor. When we design and produce a chassis it is all designed to work with a specific set of parts. When we sell a base frame with no suspension, the customer will put what ever he wants or can afford on the frame for suspension. Incorrect coilovers, spring rates, the wrong rear suspension.... This causes 2 problems.

1. When that vehicle does not perform the way it would if properly set up...that is still on us. "That truck has a RS chassis under it and it rides poorly or can't perform in an auto cross event" 9 times out of 10, the finger is pointed at us and our reputation is shot rather than the customer who incorrectly built the chassis.

2. We design a chassis around specific parts list. If the customer varries from that, it is now our fault that the parts didn't fit or that the stance is awkward, or some part is hitting another. Again, tarnishing our reputation and the quality of our product.

Price - Flat out, as most manufacturers know, it is hard to build a quality product that has everything the customer would want, and make it cheap. The only way to do so is to cut corners, use cheaper components, or dumb down the quality. We are definitely not interested in doing any of these things.

I guess that I would be looking for some of your thoughts on these concerns. Being on the manufacturing side can get you on one track of thinking while the customer may be on another.

[Roadster Shop]

ScotI - Cool rides. What are your plans for the mid 60's truck? I was looking for one for a long time with cool patina to it to build a shop truck out of. I found this '57 big back window instead out of CA for $3,500 and couldn't pass it up. Definitely not a performance truck by any means.

Weidemab - That would definitely be a cool way to build a truck. I wish I had that idea before I began all of the work on this '57. The 6 deuce Nailhead and Firestone Bias Ply's probably won't handle the Auto X to well.

[bentfab]

Here was my version till I sold it last year. I have a 63 chevy in the shop write now that I'm designing my own pro-touring frame for and hope to start making them as well. i 'm lacking man power so unfortiantly for me it's a slow process. To say the least there is a market for these trucks.

[ScotI]

Originally Posted by RS-Perf

ScotI - Cool rides. What are your plans for the mid 60's truck? I was looking for one for a long time with cool patina to it to build a shop truck out of. I found this '57 big back window instead out of CA for $3,500 and couldn't pass it up. Definitely not a performance truck by any means.

The 64 was a freakin score. One of the most cherry untouched trucks I've ever come across @ an affordable price. It's getting the latest version of the Porterbuilt front crossmember set-up for the front (replacement c.member that utilizes stock GM C10 suspension parts). I like the simplicity of the truck arm suspensions. This one will get slightly modified (modified truck arm c.member, revised truck arm c.member pivot points, shock locations, full frame width Panhard bar). It will be on air. Out w/the 6cyl/3spd & in w/a 350/700r4.

I was going for kind of an old school look w/a nostalgic 15" wheel big/little combo but already have those 18x8 & 20x10 TT2's that were on my 74 just sitting around doing nothing. Not sure which it will end up with....

[SWAPMEETCRAZY]

Originally Posted by RS-Perf

We are looking into possibly developing a production chassis for the 63-72 C10 pick ups. It seems that more and more are popping up that are built to a high level. Does anyone have serious interest in this type of chassis?

We purchased a '70 out of Arizona with the intentions of using this as the test truck for a production chassis. The trucks have great lines and you can still find nice, solid trucks for under $5,000. I'm just testing the waters to see if there would be enough interest and what people would be looking for.

The idea would be to offer a complete rolling chassis that is a direct bolt up replacement to the stock body, bed, bumpers, core support, etc...


What other features would be important to you?

Performance? - Pro-Touring or Fair Ground Cruiser
Stance? - Fixed or adjustable (Air Ride)
Price?
Ease of Installation?
Levels of completion?
Strength?
Appearance and Quality?

Any serious input would be greatly appreciated.

The p. t. 68 I am building has c4 on all 4 corners--already planning to use c5 or c6 on next one !! I built mine own chassis but would be real interested in an affordable chassis for next project--Have u seen how many c5 rolling chassis are on ebay lately ?? i know roger at iron works uses c5 and c6 components without using the factory aluminum plate but for the home builder if some one could design frame rails that catch the mounting points on the factory plates , most of the geometry other than the upper a-arms would be done!!! I've been looking at these alot---lengthen the torque tube--make any wheel base--sorry i got winded!!! lol jim