reese style hitch

PTPULLINCHASSIS said:
Just curious how do you enforce a width rule when you don't give any measurements on paper to base it off of????Does it depend on what the tech dreams up that day or what?:what:
Click to expand...

I believe 102" was discussed on here. But it didn't make the posted 2011 rules.

Gene....
 
HotRodTractor said:
While we are talking about OEM style suspensions - What if I want to change the front suspension? For example - what if I take a mid 80s Chevy 2wd truck and install a 4 link front suspension on it with coil springs and shocks? Basically that is an OEM front suspension for a Dodge... Plus there are lots of lift kits that are being run on Fords that convert them to 4 link fronts - would I necessarily have to use OEM mounts at that point in time?

While my question is something I have been wondering (considering there is a 1985 crew cab short box 2wd truck sitting in my driveway) - its really more about - where do you draw the line? I must use the factory spring hangers - but I am allowed to cut and reweld the spring perches on the axle according to the pictures posted in this thread - really what is so bad about being able to fab my own spring hangers at that point? I understand not letting someone setup a rear 4 link - or even a rear radius arm suspension - no factory truck has one (that I am aware of...) and it could pose as a tactical advantage in certain circumstances if set up perfectly.
Click to expand...

Deffinatly talk to the offical before you jump into it. I ran the same sort of setup (2wd GMC converted to solid front Dodge axle and ran 05+ ford radius arms) and I was told I was legal to pull DHRA when I ran down at Indy in 2008. I had used my stock 2wd coil springs, in the stock location and the axle had the spring pockets in the stock location and where stock...Also because of the fact that I used all OEM parts is probably the only reason I got away with it!
 
bubba2400 said:
That's what I am seeing too!!!
Click to expand...
Yes you guys are correct, I have been using that top link set up for several years on all of my customers trucks w/factory reese style hitches it really seems to help prevent the hitches from bending and breaking. The sad thing is that the techs @ the scheid pull made 2 pullers unhook them before they pulled in the 2.6 class and they both tweaked their hitches pretty bad w/out them.
 
PTPULLINCHASSIS said:
EXACTLY!!!

The rules say OEM STYLE SUSPENSION MANDATORY and nothing about not putting it on the inside of the frame. All we did was bolt the hangers and brackets to the inside of the frame in the original oem bolt holes.

Wheelbase is fine it is a long wheelbase cab-in-chassis.
As far as the original track width rule goes that is pretty much a joke and doesn't get enforced. :woohoo:
Click to expand...

Thats the way i read the rules aswell but i was worried about going through all the trouble to move it to the inside and spending money on rear wheels and then having to change it back because of the techs point of view was different than mine.
 
Sledpuller said:
Nice catch Matt it missed the C&P, Maximum width is 102" same as 2010.
Click to expand...
I'm good then. The 10" wide dual wheel set up I'm running now only puts me @ 86" width. Does it say anything about running trip's on the rear? If I go to 8" wheels I think I can stay under the 102" max.:lolly:
 
PTPULLINCHASSIS said:
Yes you guys are correct, I have been using that top link set up for several years on all of my customers trucks w/factory reese style hitches it really seems to help prevent the hitches from bending and breaking. The sad thing is that the techs @ the scheid pull made 2 pullers unhook them before they pulled in the 2.6 class and they both tweaked their hitches pretty bad w/out them.
Click to expand...

Yeah PT I could see where if you put the bars on the hitch, it's a gray area....if you put the bars on the receiver it would be fine, but then your hitch has to be a lot stouter - which is why I went to 2.5"....mucho stronger/stiffer.
 
PTPULLINCHASSIS said:
I'm good then. The 10" wide dual wheel set up I'm running now only puts me @ 86" width. Does it say anything about running trip's on the rear? If I go to 8" wheels I think I can stay under the 102" max.:lolly:
Click to expand...

only in OHIO LOL
 
Not much peeping one way or another.... say Jason, are you planning on using one fiberglass leaf and calling that your springs?
 
Sledpuller said:
Not much peeping one way or another.... say Jason, are you planning on using one fiberglass leaf and calling that your springs?
Click to expand...

Nope we used the complete factory set of springs. I just cut the rivots out and flipped the hangers around to the inside of the frame and bolted everything back in. No need to waste money on fiberglass leaf springs, the truck only weights 5500lbs now. The way I read the rules It should be legal. I don't see how setting our truck up this way is an advantage over running the springs on the out side of the frame.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the NADM is the one who decided to allow solid rear susp. So what does the rear leaf springs do anyway???
 
PTPULLINCHASSIS said:
Nope we used the complete factory set of springs. I just cut the rivots out and flipped the hangers around to the inside of the frame and bolted everything back in. No need to waste money on fiberglass leaf springs, the truck only weights 5500lbs now. The way I read the rules It should be legal. I don't see how setting our truck up this way is an advantage over running the springs on the out side of the frame.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the NADM is the one who decided to allow solid rear susp. So what does the rear leaf springs do anyway???
Click to expand...

In theory, the advantage is, you could run a much wider set of rear tires than everyone else, and still meet the 102" rule. You've gained probably 4 inches per side...
 
Sledpuller said:
For reference guys, Logans clevis is illegal, as it is VERTICAL and is NOT rigid.

Lets make 2011 a BIG year for not having rinky dink farmer clevis with the tractor pin, actually owning a hitch yourself..
Click to expand...

ok sleddy, how about clevis' inside a pintle hitch? i cant tell you how many i saw in ohio this year. tons of them at goshen.
 
nwpadmax said:
In theory, the advantage is, you could run a much wider set of rear tires than everyone else, and still meet the 102" rule. You've gained probably 4 inches per side...
Click to expand...

He knew there was an advantage or he wouldn't have spent the time to do it. Or he just charges by the hour and it was slow around the shop. Lol
 
Letting you guys run suspension stops down to prevent travel is not a "solid suspension". The way PTP does it is stretching a grey area,to the breaking point,but since the entire rest of the class wanted to do away with 1" of travel, and nobody asked for a wording change to prevent shenanigans, we let them have it. I dont think any of them realize how your trucks take advantage of that rule.

However the advantage of losing your spring packs is a few hundred more pounds up front, from the rear, and the advantage of moving them inboard is obviously a different spot for your tires to track,, and get more width if you wanted and stay under the 102.

Still have working brakes in there right?


All I heard was screaming about protruding the horsepower back on the turbos, to keep the class where it should be kept, and then you play games like this.
If you think the way the rules are written allow this, you would be wrong. If it makes you feel better we can amend the rule to say stock location, thats not a problem.

Next you will be bolting the cab on backwards(using same holes!!!) for some backwoods crazy idea.

You guys would be further ahead money wise to build a 3.0 with all your modifying the grey areas.:clap:

Merry Christmas!!!
 
ktmracer21 said:
ok sleddy, how about clevis' inside a pintle hitch? i cant tell you how many i saw in ohio this year. tons of them at goshen.
Click to expand...

Illegal yes. Safer than the chinese pin from TSC holding the twisted garden tractor clevis? Yes.

We are fed up with the toy hitches boys. Come with a pulling hitch ring HORIZONTAL this year, or dont pull.

Guys who have shops or spare hitches, bring them to sell or rent, you can make a few bucks.
 
nwpadmax said:
In theory, the advantage is, you could run a much wider set of rear tires than everyone else, and still meet the 102" rule. You've gained probably 4 inches per side...
Click to expand...

I have 2 customers running (4) 33x12.50r16 on 16x10" wheels across the back like my set up but they still have leaf springs in factory location and they fit w/in the 102" limit.

The truck in the pic's is just a project we are playing around w/ @ the shop and are using parts and pieces we have available to get the truck out next year and try some new chassis set ups. The main reason the rear duals are set up so narrow is because I'm putting a aluminum hillsboro flat bed on it that is only 88" wide and I wanted the tires o stay under it. I'm not a big fan of the outside dual sticking out past the bed a mile like a big donkey dick!!!LOL



Merry Christmas!!!
 
Sledpuller said:
Letting you guys run suspension stops down to prevent travel is not a "solid suspension". The way PTP does it is stretching a grey area,to the breaking point,but since the entire rest of the class wanted to do away with 1" of travel, and nobody asked for a wording change to prevent shenanigans, we let them have it. I dont think any of them realize how your trucks take advantage of that rule. Not really taking advantage of that rule just utilizing it.:woohoo:

However the advantage of losing your spring packs is a few hundred more pounds up front, from the rear, and the advantage of moving them inboard is obviously a different spot for your tires to track,, and get more width if you wanted and stay under the 102. How is this any different than the SRW trucks bolting extra tires on the back and sticking way out past the bed side??? At least my cab-n-chassis came w/ duals from the factory:doh:

Still have working brakes in there right? I haven't had rear brakes on a pulling truck for 15 years:evil


All I heard was screaming about protruding the horsepower back on the turbos, to keep the class where it should be kept, and then you play games like this.
If you think the way the rules are written allow this, you would be wrong. If it makes you feel better we can amend the rule to say stock location, thats not a problem. Do what ya want I'm just letting you know what ideas are being tossed around.

Next you will be bolting the cab on backwards(using same holes!!!) for some backwoods crazy idea.

You guys would be further ahead money wise to build a 3.0 with all your modifying the grey areas.:clap: That sounds like a good idea.

Merry Christmas!!!
Click to expand...
Back @ ya!!
 
PTPULLINCHASSIS said:
O Not really taking advantage of that rule just utilizing it.
Utilizing it for an advantage- thats not a problem, in that particular case.

How is this any different than the SRW trucks bolting extra tires on the back and sticking way out past the bed side??? At least my cab-n-chassis came w/ duals from the factory.

Going for the different tire line is the same- but they aren't altering and moving a major component.

I haven't had rear brakes on a pulling truck for 15 years

Shame on the techs that let go, if you were pulling in a class that required it.


. Do what ya want I'm just letting you know what ideas are being tossed around.

We will, and thank you!


Merry Christmas!!!Back @ ya!!
Click to expand...

:rules::rockwoot:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top