That's true, and it's not like these trucks have all kinds of ride quality to begin with.

Did I mention big spacers (like 4-5") look gay?

 

yea i figured it may just a lil lol well thanks guys for all the help and not letting me spend money on somthing that would prolly mess alot of things up ha thank again!

 

I thought my 2000 rode pretty well, although the 97 ram I had rode like a caddy...thats because I pretty much trashed the 2000's suspension the first year I had it. Jumping the truck and constantly flexing it bowed the stock rears right down on the overleafs. It rode worse than my lifted '78 Ramcharger at that point...and that truck rode like a brick.

 

78 ramcharger? Now i'm getting jealous. I've always wanted a ramcharger since I was a kid and I saw lone wolf mcquade bust out of a grave in his super charged ramcharger (probably about a 78 too).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQkyi1_l6po

(Skip ahead to 2:18 for the good part. How many cops do you know keep beer in their car?)

 

That is pretty good. Dodge at there best!

 

Agreed. Dsertdog we demand pictures of the ramcharger if you have them

 

Here's a picture of mine... Not the greatest but still pretty sweet...
http://s904.photobucket.com/albums/a...90_4112226.jpg

 

With big spacers you're putting more leverage on the front spring hangers. You're not getting as much movement out of a shorter spring but, I doubt you're going to fully cycle your spring anyway. The bigger concern would be ripping your spring hangers off if you wheel it hard.

 

Nice rig, what motor?

Dsertdog, your turn...

 

You know, I'm not sure any photographs* of the old blue tub exist anymore. That was back in the day, or back in the day before cheap, quality digital cameras existed . And then there was the ravages of the ex wife....

*Photograph...back before pictures were taken by digital cameras and ran into computers then printed at home on your printer in a matter of minutes, pictures had to be done the hard way. Cameras used light to transfer images onto something called "film" which had to be kept out of light before or after it was "exposed". The film had to be sent a laboratory where stinky icky chemicals converted it into a negative which then had a special light flashed through it onto another piece of special paper to make the picture, with the help of more stinky chemicals. Obviously this long process was fraught with peril...Ask your grandparents or older aunts uncles or siblings as they may have some around...