Yet another rockwell question

[rustwagon]

I searched through all the rockwell threads on here and still couldn't find an answer to my question. I fell onto 2 arb lockers for a set of rockwells, so the dana 60 and corp 14 are out of the picture now.

From looking at the pictures of Lawlors truck that are running around here it looks like the front springs will clear the brakes no problem. Is this a correct assumption?

If I move the rear springs under the frame, how much lift does that add over what the front is sitting at?

Plan is to get the axles under it and keep it moving while I save up the money and gather parts to drop in the lockers and rebuild the axles along with disc brakes this summer after we move.

[Hammer]

Front springs clear with a lot of room for the brakes.



Rears are a lot closer though.
I took the brakes off before putting them under the truck though.

[rustwagon]

I finally found the pics I needed with a stock rockwell under the rear of a rig with stock mounted springs. I think it was the canadian build rig.

[Hammer]

My rear shackles are flipped, but it does show the clearance from the spring to the backing plate for the brakes.

[rustwagon]

what height tires are pictured on your rig? How much lift did it give you overall? How far is the botom of the door from the ground?

[Hammer]

FAR!
Tires were about 52" tall.
16.00x20R Michelin XL.

The axles gave me about 1-2" of lift. The axle tube is bigger, and the perches are also fairly tall (unless you make your own).
You can see that I didn't finish this project (got an offer I couldn't refuse). Here it is loaded on the trailer to go to another home.
And I can't really remember my measurements on this one. Sorry.

[rustwagon]

Don't think i'll end up going that big on the tires, but the picture gives me some food for thought.