Jump to content

Bodylift Zone 1.5” vs. RC 1.25”

deepstuff

Recommended Posts

deepstuff Enthusiast

deepstuff

Posted
Posted

I’m in the process of choosing a body lift. I’m between the RC 1.25 and Zone 1.5 –inch. I do not want to go higher but only want to add a little height to my levelling kit. I like the 1.5” but the RC kit has the best price and bumper brackets included. Both of these kits use 8 plastic spacers on the truck bed. In addition, the zone kit has 2 steel bed spacers included. These go between the bed crossmember and trucks frame near the back wheels where the crossmember would normally rest on the frame. Are these important? What purpose do they serve? Do they make one kit better than the other. If to support weight why are there only two, one per side? I can see many more points where my trucks box rests on the frame. I sometimes carry close to 1000lbs in my truck. Should I buy the Zone kit because it has these steel spacers? or should I consider adding them if I buy the RC kit? If so, should I add more than two? They appear much easier to make and add than the bumper brackets not included with the zone kit

 

 

2007 nnbs sILVERADO

pctchevy11 Enthusiast

pctchevy11

Posted
Posted

I have the RC 1.25

the kit includes front bumper brackets that work well but all they give you for the rear bumper is directions how to cut the origional bracket and drill the frame so it can be reinstalled at a higher position.

 

i bought mine to give me extra room for my new tires and it worked well for me. you cant tell it has a bodylift because i installed the rear fender wells that cover the frame perfect.

post-103656-0-27590700-1334800511_thumb.jpg

post-103656-0-27590700-1334800511_thumb.jpg

post-103656-0-27590700-1334800511_thumb.jpg

post-103656-0-27590700-1334800511_thumb.jpg

arctictwist Enthusiast

arctictwist

Posted
Posted

I did the zone 3.5" combo lift/level kit. I am not unhappy with it, but i did have to get the rear bumper brackets separate and the front bumper method seems better in the RC kit. when i say better i mean easier.

johnhankel Enthusiast

johnhankel

Posted
Posted

I am planning on the 1.25 RC kit. It is a better price than the Zone since it include the new front brackets. I will use the HD rear bumper pads and will not have to worry about relocating the rear bumper. With the ReadyLift front and rear, it will just about be a 4" lift.

lbkthree Enthusiast

lbkthree

Posted
Posted

I am planning on the 1.25 RC kit. It is a better price than the Zone since it include the new front brackets. I will use the HD rear bumper pads and will not have to worry about relocating the rear bumper. With the ReadyLift front and rear, it will just about be a 4" lift.

 

 

Where are you going to get the rear bumper pads?

johnhankel Enthusiast

johnhankel

Posted
Posted

I will probably get them on Ebay if they have some when I am ready for them. There are some sets on there now for 69 dollars with free shipping. Search for "heavy duty rear bumper pad set"...

 

 

I measured some on a HD the other day and they are exaclty 1" taller than the 1500 pads. The bottom of the bumper should line up better with the bottom of the bedside and the gap between the tailgate should be just about the same.

 

I think this will look better than rasing the bumper and having more spare tire and receiver hitch showing...

 

Hope that helps...

lbkthree Enthusiast

lbkthree

Posted
Posted

I will probably get them on Ebay if they have some when I am ready for them. There are some sets on there now for 69 dollars with free shipping. Search for "heavy duty rear bumper pad set"...

 

 

I measured some on a HD the other day and they are exaclty 1" taller than the 1500 pads. The bottom of the bumper should line up better with the bottom of the bedside and the gap between the tailgate should be just about the same.

 

I think this will look better than rasing the bumper and having more spare tire and receiver hitch showing...

 

Hope that helps...

 

 

I agree, definatly looks better IMO. I just have problems finding them sometimes.

  • 2 weeks later...
jarettg Enthusiast

jarettg

Posted
Posted

i went with the RC and have no problems with it, much cheaper than the zone with bumper brackets. The price difference isn't worth the .25"

scz71864 Enthusiast

scz71864

Posted
Posted

both kits i found are 150$? let us know which one you end up going with

johnhankel Enthusiast

johnhankel

Posted
Posted

MB2008LTZ,

 

What are the other specs on your truck? Lift, wheels, tires, etc.....

  • 5 months later...
dkj313 Enthusiast

dkj313

Posted
Posted

I am trying to install the Rc 1.25 lift. found this cable wich is on the driver side just under the door.

I do not see this in the directions. It looks like there is not enought play in the cable to lift the truck.

 

Anyone come across this and know what needs to be done?

 

thanks

post-73491-0-54868700-1352062503_thumb.jpg

post-73491-0-00426800-1352062678_thumb.jpg

post-73491-0-54868700-1352062503_thumb.jpg

post-73491-0-00426800-1352062678_thumb.jpg

post-73491-0-54868700-1352062503_thumb.jpg

post-73491-0-00426800-1352062678_thumb.jpg

post-73491-0-54868700-1352062503_thumb.jpg

post-73491-0-00426800-1352062678_thumb.jpg

scz71864 Enthusiast

scz71864

Posted
Posted

iv never seen on^ only 3 inch. but you might could buy a 3 inch and cut the pucks?

yukon25008.1 Senior Enthusiast

yukon25008.1

Posted
Posted

Thats not a bad idea to cut them.. But is cutting them the only thing id have to do..or are there other pieces that are meant to be 3" and have to be adjusted?

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,914
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    AidenVorpagel
    Newest Member
    AidenVorpagel
    Joined

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 1,000 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Sugar Bears 2015 GMC Terrain SLE-2 2.4 AWD

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      286,740 Mile Services   8/6/2026   New AC Compressor. Refrigerant oil and dye, evacuate and charge system.  New exhaust system from cat back.  New Iridium plugs plus replace #3 coil Repair/rewire headlamp wiring (passenger side) and replace all forward bulbs. Polish lenses of both assemblies.  Pull rear rotors, clean and adjust parking assembly. Inspect, clean and grease front calipers. Check pads and shoes.  4 wheel power bleed of brake system. Dot 4 Reset idle speed 50 rpm higher New Serpentine belt.    Will need new pads in the rear in about 5K more miles.    Tax Title and License out the door just short of a grand.    AC clutch had bitten the dust. 1 year warranty on the pick and save replacement. Thing will make a Polar Bear cry Uncle.  He spent quite some time on the wiring. It was in the harness and he does nothing half. I got off cheap. I have considerable more light down the road. Sylvania Silver Star replacements.  Gas seal between the porcelain and shell of plug #3 was blown, cooked the coil. That was the cold miss.  Love the new exhaust. I can sneak into the neighborhood again.  Nice to have a working parking brake again. Belle Tire never got it done. That was disappointing.    This was one of her bigger bills and still way cheaper than a payment even given the oil consumption. This thing cost me under a hundred a month in repairs and normal routine costs. What is my incentive to replace it? 🤔           
    • AidenVorpagel
      cam upgrade in CA

      By AidenVorpagel · Posted

      hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • B14Sierra
      Noise after AFM delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Did you figure it out?
    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...