Truck Industry History Question

[Octane]

Every truck from the 1950s on I have owned had a higher back end.And it better stay that way.If you use a truck for a truck it's doubtful you'll fret over and clean out a drain hole that much.A little water wont hurt that truck.Now I know there are those that have customized country cadillac pickup trucks.4x4 and lots of expensive mods..a trailer queen basically.Cant get that precious cityboy truck dirty. Lol.

 

[pt1655]

Hey Phillyrube, I wish they made Crager SS wheels in 20" for our Rams! My 2012 Ram is silver and those rims would look really good old school!

 

[2012RAM1500RT]

Yep, I plan on lowering mine in the front about 2 inches. I like the front just a little bit lower than the rear.

 

[Plankton]

I usually keep a couple hundred lbs of stuff in the bed of my truck and it rides beautifully and takes some of the rake out. I took everything out the other day to help a friend move a new piece of furniture and afterwards I left everything out. The ride was noticeably bumpier and the rake was more pronounced. This is on a 2017 Rebel with airbags.

Years ago, I had a GMC Sierra that was used as a parts truck before I bought it. There were added leaf springs to the rear axle for the heavier loads, like engines, axles and such. The rake was very pronounced and the ride was horrendous without any weight back there. Going over RR tracks was fun though. Boing boing boing... lol

My understanding is that rake is mostly about weight distribution and having an empty/lighter portion of a vehicle to put things in.

 

[kurek]

Hey Phillyrube, I wish they made Crager SS wheels in 20" for our Rams! My 2012 Ram is silver and those rims would look really good old school!

Cragar doesn't make Cragar SS in both 20" and 5x139 but they do make 20" SS...

Other brands make knock-off Cragars in our size though... actually quite a few classic styled wheels.

17" on left column 20" on right column:

 

[Gregory2]

Hey, don't forget Gabriel HiJackers

 

[62Blazer]

"Rake" in trucks has been around forever in varying degrees. I've been into the old square body Chevy trucks (I've owned a K5 since the early 90's) and lift kits for those always provided more lift in the front than the rear in order to level the trucks. For example a 4" lift kit would come with front springs that provided 4" of lift but the rear blocks or springs usually were only 2.5"-3" tall. As mentioned the primary reason for this is so the trucks don't look saggy when you put a little load in the bed. It's a fact from marketing in the truck industry that many people look at excessive sagging/squatting of the back under a load as either something is wrong or the truck is "weak" or can't handle a load, even though it is just a cosmetic thing.

I don't think the popularity of "leveling kits" came about because of a difference in rake in newer vehicles, but rather the IFS. You can usually tweak an inch or two out of the IFS without many issues, but a true lift kit that raises it anymore than that is pretty complex and much more expensive. Keep in mind that back in the late 80's when Chevy introduced IFS in trucks, you could buy a complete 4"-6" lift kit for the older solid axle and leaf spring trucks for $300-$400 (including shocks) and slap it on in a few hours in the driveway, but for the same amount of lift on the newer IFS trucks it was now $1,500-$2,000 just for the kit and it took an entire weekend to install in the driveway or pay a shop another $1,000 to install it. On the other hand you could "crank up the torsion bars" or slap a spacer under the IFS for 2" of lift for a couple hundred $.

 

[Sasquatchtdg]

Y'all I understand the rear being empty therefore being higher, the only weight on the rear is the fuel tank and spare tire, the springs or coils are designed to handle payload and trailer load without making the truck unstable with light steering.

ALSO, in the pursuit of every MPG they can squeeze out, the front end is more rounded with front air dam plastics and other add ons to help with aerodynamics as well. The lower the front of the vehicle is, whether by ride height or spoiler/splitters, the less air goes under the truck to create turbulent air on the chassis.

Hyper speed cars have full underbelly pans for this purpose, to make it as slick as possible for speed rather than economy.

With the front end being TOO low, it directs air to the bed which creates drag on the tailgate. Its a balancing act. Just seems that 2000s on there's not much visual difference stance wise between 2WD and 4WD.

Just my semi educated $0.02

 

[Klaus756]

The rake is set to allow for "brake Dive" There is a correct dive angle in setup. It seems counter intuitive, when you figure weight transfer under braking/ It's part of the reason front brakes are bigger than rear brakes. Also, in the earlier uears the rear would tend to level out under load.

 

[Docwagon1776]

The rake is set to allow for "brake Dive" There is a correct dive angle in setup.

Where do you guys come up with this stuff? Cars *naturally* dive nose down regardless of rake under braking, pickup trucks are already heavily front biased due to weight distribution and when unloaded become even before so due to weight transfer effects of braking. They can become rear biased with overly heavy loads, which is why maximum tongue weights and payloads are a thing, but rake is only part of that equation.

Take a look at a pursuit rated SUVs and the pursuit rated F-150. Compare rake to higher tow rated versions of the same vehicles. Note the differences. Braking is incredibly important in police pursuit driving for obvious reasons and brake upgrades are a big part of what makes a pursuit rated vehicle pursuit rated. Rake isn't what determines braking power. Simplified a bit, but you want all four tires at the edge of lockup simultaneously, so weight distribution and weight transfer from rear axle to front axle determine the desired ratio of braking force of the front vs the rear. Biasing toward the front even more just means the front tires get overwhelmed faster. Since available traction used for braking can't be used for steering, you don't want just the front tires/brakes doing all the work.

 

[Octane]

The rake is so cargo travels forward to back of cab instead of falling off backwards...like I did.

 

[VA-RAM]

Keystone was about all I could afford at that point in my life.

Keystone Klassics...love it!

 

[VA-RAM]

Cragar doesn't make Cragar SS in both 20" and 5x139 but they do make 20" SS...

Other brands make knock-off Cragars in our size though... actually quite a few classic styled wheels.

17" on left column 20" on right column:

View attachment 236346

Are those Torq Thrust II knockoffs on the right, 2nd from bottom? Had those on the 63 Impala...sure miss that one!

 

[beebop]

Cragar doesn't make Cragar SS in both 20" and 5x139 but they do make 20" SS...

Other brands make knock-off Cragars in our size though... actually quite a few classic styled wheels.

17" on left column 20" on right column:

View attachment 236346

They did a few years ago! 20x9 all aluminum Cragar SS wheels. +20 backspace, 5x139.7. I bought a set new in 2009 for my 2008 Dakota. Wheels are perfect match for Ram 1500 too. Good luck finding a new set now!

 

[Pttrader]

Don't forget those adjustable shackles. I had them on my 72' Charger 440 along with air shocks to keep those big tires on the back from rubbing the inner fender. The car certainly had that raked look!
Since the car had a trailer hitch I rented a car tow hitch and strapped my daily runner a 2 door 75' impala behind it and traveled across a few states when I changed jobs. Brings back memories.
The Charger came with those big fuzzy dice hanging from the mirror. I swear I tossed them!