Would you tow with this? NOT MINE

[352]

HERE

[dodge_guy]

hornet28 wrote:

mkirsch wrote:


Front end looks like it has 5-bolt hubs. I would have to assume that it also has a corresponding light duty suspension up front as well. While the front end doesn't carry the weight under acceleration and cruising, it does see a significant amount of weight transfer under braking. I would also want matching rims so I only have to drag around one spare.

The 383 stroker is probably built to go 1/4 of a mile at a time, not tow heavy for hours on end too... I also would not want to listen to it droning away at 3500RPM for hours on end. Would a 12 valve Cummins 5.9L fit, I wonder?

The ad states Mustang II front suspension. Way to light for serious hauling. It could be an HT 383 which is a GM crate motor for trucks with 323 hp and 444 ft lbs of torque. It also shouldn't be singing anywhere near 3500 with those rear tires unless it's geared extremely low

Yep, that’s the thing that I seen. The smallest front suspension with the largest rear axle, doesn’t mean it can tow! Not to mention I’m sure it’s on a 1/2 ton frame and with that goose neck there is a lot of stress on the rear of that frame!

So.....No I wouldn’t tow with that. Maybe a small trailer. Pop up or tear drop.

[hornet28]

mkirsch wrote:


Front end looks like it has 5-bolt hubs. I would have to assume that it also has a corresponding light duty suspension up front as well. While the front end doesn't carry the weight under acceleration and cruising, it does see a significant amount of weight transfer under braking. I would also want matching rims so I only have to drag around one spare.

The 383 stroker is probably built to go 1/4 of a mile at a time, not tow heavy for hours on end too... I also would not want to listen to it droning away at 3500RPM for hours on end. Would a 12 valve Cummins 5.9L fit, I wonder?

The ad states Mustang II front suspension. Way to light for serious hauling. It could be an HT 383 which is a GM crate motor for trucks with 323 hp and 444 ft lbs of torque. It also shouldn't be singing anywhere near 3500 with those rear tires unless it's geared extremely low

[Range_Maggot_Bo]

Yes. Yes I would.

[mkirsch]

Yup, more comfort than anything. People were smaller and didn't travel very far in a truck, so room and comfort were not a priority.

With a couple of modifications, it would make quite a unique and capable tow rig, though.

Front end looks like it has 5-bolt hubs. I would have to assume that it also has a corresponding light duty suspension up front as well. While the front end doesn't carry the weight under acceleration and cruising, it does see a significant amount of weight transfer under braking. I would also want matching rims so I only have to drag around one spare.

The 383 stroker is probably built to go 1/4 of a mile at a time, not tow heavy for hours on end too... I also would not want to listen to it droning away at 3500RPM for hours on end. Would a 12 valve Cummins 5.9L fit, I wonder?

[ppine]

Depends on the quality of the build. Many vintage cars and trucks are much better than they ever were when they were new with after market parts. You pay a price though for all of the style points. Hard to fix on the road. Comfort is just not there in a regular cab. I love the Ford seats with lumbar support.

[romore]

Cool truck but I would not want to cross country in that cramped cab. They weren't designed for comfort.

[colliehauler]

I have seen something similar where a guy took a old international pickup and used a 3/4 Dodge truck Diesel donor truck for the complete chassis. He pulled a medium size 5th wheel. What I found interesting is how small the interior was and narrow.

[kw_00]

Interesting, I think I have seen that truck before though... I live in the area, and thought I saw that at a car show...