Will this work with 35s?

[10scoops]

Recently came across this listing on BaT with someone running 35s: https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1985-chevrolet-k10-silverado-2-2/
I know the tires are 35x12.50r15 and not sure about the wheel specs. I thought the general consensus here was that you needed a 4" lift with 35s to fit but that doesn't look anything close to a 4" lift. Can anyone tell me what kind of a lift that might be and how it would be possible to fit 35s on that??

 

[Grit dog]

The lift is mostly in the front. Looks perfectly “leveled”. Guess of 3”F and 1”R for lift.
And those pics are proof that 35s fit, but they are nowhere close to fitting.
You couldn’t drive that truck around the block if you had to make a full steering lock turn without ripping the fender trim off and getting into the back edge of the front fenders.
Look at my recent post on here in the thread someone made about backspacing.
Eyeball, that black truck has a very similar negative offset or backspacing as the tire/wheel combo I just installed. And same size tires.
With a stout set of 4” springs up front, my truck won’t turn full lock without almost/barely catching the back corners of the fenders at idle speed (no suspension dynamics in play). I’ve got 1” zero rates to put on the front and expect to find an install combo with them that works fine for daily driving.

 

[Grit dog]

Worth noting, not a fan of the stuffed tire look either. But this makes ya question the overall integrity of the truck when so much of it looks like a lot of money or effort went into it, yet it’s a huge fail in the suspension/geometry department!

 

[bucket]

Recently came across this listing on BaT with someone running 35s: https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1985-chevrolet-k10-silverado-2-2/
I know the tires are 35x12.50r15 and not sure about the wheel specs. I thought the general consensus here was that you needed a 4" lift with 35s to fit but that doesn't look anything close to a 4" lift. Can anyone tell me what kind of a lift that might be and how it would be possible to fit 35s on that??

You do in fact need a 4in lift to clear 35's as well as trimming. The amount of trimming needed depends on use, driving style, spring rate, vehicle weight, wheel backspacing, tire width, etc.

The issue being overlooked here is that the truck in question has tires that do not fit with the use of most drivers. It cannot steer nearly as sharp as what the steering box allows and it probably cannot even drive over a large speed bump if the steering is not straight or close to it.

So just because they are bolted on, doesn't mean they "fit".

 

[bucket]

Somehow I missed @Grit dog 's post. It summed it up well.

 

[10scoops]

The lift is mostly in the front. Looks perfectly “leveled”. Guess of 3”F and 1”R for lift.
And those pics are proof that 35s fit, but they are nowhere close to fitting.
You couldn’t drive that truck around the block if you had to make a full steering lock turn without ripping the fender trim off and getting into the back edge of the front fenders.
Look at my recent post on here in the thread someone made about backspacing.
Eyeball, that black truck has a very similar negative offset or backspacing as the tire/wheel combo I just installed. And same size tires.
With a stout set of 4” springs up front, my truck won’t turn full lock without almost/barely catching the back corners of the fenders at idle speed (no suspension dynamics in play). I’ve got 1” zero rates to put on the front and expect to find an install combo with them that works fine for daily driving.

That is a good point, I guess I just assumed since he threw them on he was running them with little issue. So the lowest I can go up front is 4 inches with 35s? Would it also apply the same in the back? I'm trying to get as little lift as possible with 35s while still being able to daily drive them without issue. I also found this setup which seems like 4" up front but also seems lower in the back: https://www.mecum.com/lots/SC0522-527449/1987-chevrolet-k10-pickup/

 

[bucket]

That is a good point, I guess I just assumed since he threw them on he was running them with little issue. So the lowest I can go up front is 4 inches with 35s? Would it also apply the same in the back? I'm trying to get as little lift as possible with 35s while still being able to daily drive them without issue. I also found this setup which seems like 4" up front but also seems lower in the back: https://www.mecum.com/lots/SC0522-527449/1987-chevrolet-k10-pickup/

It's hard to say with only one underside picture, but that looks like it may actually be a 6" front spring, along with a 5" rear block.

 

[Grit dog]

@10scoops
You could stuff 35s probably under stock rear springs if they weren’t sacked out, without rubbing as long as the rear wasn’t loaded down heavy.
Another guy here has good drivability with 4” lift and axle relocated 1” I think forward. Look at ORD website for front axle relocation shims or zero rates.
The easy answer like @bucket said is 4” and some trimming, if you’re up for that or it’s a beater truck. But if you want to keep the back edges of the front fenders uncut you need min 4” + move axle forward or > 4” lift.

Also when you look at squares and try to judge lift/level/stance, note that the rear fender well is lower in relation to the body line than the front. About 2” or about the same as a normal oe rake. So normal truck rear is higher but looks “level” due to difference in fender well height. A leveled truck looks lower in the rear like the first one you posted.

 

[10scoops]

Thank you for the help @Grit dog @bucket ! I think I'm leaning toward 4" all around then just to keep things simple. I do really like the look in both of those trucks I posted where the rear fender is lower but since the squares have that lower rear fender already I suppose it's not necessary to have a lower lift in the rear than the front.

 

[Redfish]

I do not understand why this person went to all the trouble with the engine and drive train to be so stupid with the suspension and tires. This could have been a decent truck...

@10scoops if you look at the pic below of the front suspension you will see that they have added a 3rd leaf and a small lifting block. That block is not legal in some states, it is a cheap way of doing things.

I completely agree with everything that @Grit dog and @bucket have already posted. That truck would look and work best with 33s. The 35s require more lift.

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[Shorty81]

The "leveled" look looks like a saggy a$$. Needs rake.

 

[mcarlo86]

Ditto ^^^

33's are a much more practical size with a small lift.

 

[Grit dog]

Echo what @Redfish said…maybe ran out of money or something?
Front lift blocks are a hard no. Actually makes you doubt
Unrelated comment, if that’s what the underside of a $23k truck looks like, I’m even happier with the value of ours…lol.

Edit, I’m sure the blown LS adds value though.

 

[Fastduramax]

Totally agree with Shorty and Gritty gotta have rake ! I currently run a 4" Skyjacker all springs NO BLOCKS best riding lift kit ever and I've run them all... I'll share my little secret to get perfect height and clean rake if that's your preference... I always remove the bottom flat "helper" spring from the stock spring pack, sand blast and paint it up pretty, buy a pair of longer center bolts and add it to the new spring pack and bam got rake ! Its clean looks really cool and does not affect ride quality what so ever.... Oh and I currently run 33x12.50x15 BFG's on AR 15x10 and have a very slight rub at full turn...

 

[Redfish]

@10scoops I don't know if you are focused on 35s and want the right lift for that or you want to get a certain look. The Truth that @mcarlo86 posted is worth listening to. My truck has just over 2 inches of lift and is running on 33s. 35s would definitely rub without more than 2 inches of lift.

Here are a couple pics so you can see what that actually looks like:

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach