Jump to content

2014+ Leveling Kits

bcazier

By bcazier
in Modifications & Accessories

 Share

Recommended Posts

Smoothbassman Enthusiast

Smoothbassman

Posted
Posted (edited)

NEOutdoors, did you ever find out if the 275/65/20 would work with the 2" level?

 

or does anyone else have thoughts on this? there seem to be a lot of mixed opinions.

I think it will work if your tire is less than 12" wide and 34" tall on stock wheels.

 

You are right there at that measurement.

 

275 tires vary in width wide by brand. Check the width of your tire choice and it might fit.

 

I have a 2.5" lift to fit my tires. I have very little clearance on stock wheels running 285s.

 

An aftermarket wheel would allow it to fit with no issues except pulling back the inner fender skirts.

 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Edited by Smoothbassman
  • Like 1
  • Replies 7.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Saleenpowr
Saleenpowr

So i put my RC 2" level kit and Toyo 295/55/20's on this weekend. Install was simple, just like on my 2011. It definitely helps to have an extra set of hands when wedging that spacer in there. 295/

Saleenpowr
Saleenpowr

Thanks. Here is one more from yesterday. Considering we're getting 8-10 inches of rain the next two days, I won't be taking any better pics soon.  

FH212
FH212

Mine is finally done! After months of research I went with the RC 2.5" level kit front only, stock rear block. 20"x9" Fuel Nutz w/ +1 offset, 33x12.50x20 Toyo M/T tires. No rubbing, No trimming, yet a

Posted Images

GoBlue2014LT Enthusiast

GoBlue2014LT

Posted
Posted

Not the best pic but wanted to show what the 2.5 front and 1 rear level looks like with a loaded trailer. Not too much squat

 

5c5bc6f753e29144b089fa8894811eb7.jpg

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
NEOutDoors Enthusiast

NEOutDoors

Posted
Posted

NEOutdoors, did you ever find out if the 275/65/20 would work with the 2" level?

 

or does anyone else have thoughts on this? there seem to be a lot of mixed opinions.

Just put them on yesterday. Seems like they are good to go. I had to zip tie the liners to make them fit but other than that, they fit with he 2" level. I'll be driving it a bit over the weekend so we'll so if there are any rubbing issues but so far I haven't noticed any. It seems that as long as you stick with the stock tire width you can go up to a 34 with the 2" level.

Iceman22 Enthusiast

Iceman22

Posted
Posted

Just put them on yesterday. Seems like they are good to go. I had to zip tie the liners to make them fit but other than that, they fit with he 2" level. I'll be driving it a bit over the weekend so we'll so if there are any rubbing issues but so far I haven't noticed any. It seems that as long as you stick with the stock tire width you can go up to a 34 with the 2" level.

Mind posting pics? Along with listing the tire you chose?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NEOutDoors Enthusiast

NEOutDoors

Posted
Posted (edited)

Mind posting pics? Along with listing the tire you chose?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

69b7fd2cbfb9a980541820e7f5c5384b.jpg

 

BFG KO2 275/65/20 - no rubbing issue with 2" RC level and zip tied liners.

Edited by NEOutDoors
  • Like 1
Iceman22 Enthusiast

Iceman22

Posted
Posted (edited)

Thanks man! I didn't think there would be anyway to run a 275/65/20 on a 2" level without trimming or the NorCal mod.

 

Do you think anything other than factory offset/backspacing would have been a no go? Or is there a little wiggle room?

 

I'll be buying aftermarket 20's and trying to figure out if I have to stay exactly at factory specs or if I could get away with say something in the +18 range? There just isn't a lot of 20x9 options out there with exact factory offset

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited by Iceman22
paulz71 New Member

paulz71

Posted
Posted

post-143945-0-15451700-1506025395_thumb.jpg

 

Wanted the "should have come from the factory this way" look. Just got a RC 2" front Level. I went with P rated 265/70-18 Firestone Destination AT's on stock wheels. The tires are the same width as stock and 1.1" taller. Rides and accelerates just like stock. So far mileage seems to be unchanged as well. Just for fun I also had the stock muffler replaced with a Flowmaster 40 which gave me the sound I wanted to go along with the new look.

 

 

post-143945-0-15451700-1506025395_thumb.jpg

post-143945-0-15451700-1506025395_thumb.jpg

post-143945-0-15451700-1506025395_thumb.jpg

  • Like 1
JayIPT Enthusiast

JayIPT

Posted
Posted

Rough Country level/lift and working great

 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

JayIPT Enthusiast

JayIPT

Posted
Posted

Rough Country 3.5. Highest I could go and still reverse it if I want to.

 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

mnm99 Enthusiast

mnm99

Posted
Posted

Who has some GOOD pictures of your CV angles and ball joints with a 2 inch Level? The angle thread has a lot on lifts, not so much on level. Thanks

ChevyGuy72 Enthusiast

ChevyGuy72

Posted
Posted

So I was excited about getting my 2.5" Rough Country leveling kit on my 2017 Chevy High Country 4x4. I put it in yesterday, the lower piece on the bottom of strut, removed the strut spring and put in the round preload spacer, and then put in the 2" blocks. No issues installing. Have my factory 20" 275/55/20 tires and ordered Open Country II Extreme 285/55/20 and will leave them on factory rims for now.

SO IT RIDES LIKE A TANK after install!!! Is this normal? Rough Country says you can keep factory shocks. It feels like there is very little give. I see on so many posts that their trucks ride so good, man I'm jealous. I tried to upload photos but it says files are to big.

 

Do y'all have any ideas why it's riding so rough?

Should I take out the preload spacer?

  • Like 1
nmyron Enthusiast

nmyron

Posted
Posted

I'm confused, I guess, by your replies. You stated my comment made no sense. A truck is manufactured to a certain specification, including the overall length of the strut at rest, length of the lower control arm, length of the upper control arm, and height of the spindle/knuckle. Combined with steering rack and tie rods these elements all work to create steering/suspension geometry. By installing the block that lengthens the strut, pushing the lower control arm down, requiring the upper to be pulled down as well (effectively creating the suspension lift), this changes the factory steering/suspension geometry by moving the knuckle "down", and induces positive camber which must now be aligned out. To remove that positive camber in my case required that so much negative camber be induced by tightening the eccentric bolts in the upper control arms to near their maximum amount of movement. The result being, at steering lock on a level surface caused my sidewall to rub the front of my upper control arm. However later I did find that in certain circumstances during suspension action while turning that rubbing would also occur on the back edge of the wheel, probably due to sidewall roll.

 

I'd be happy to send some photos when I get back to Ohio from Utah on Sunday. But I guess I'm confused by the fact that your confused.

 

 

So, here are the photos from the rubbing at lock between my wheel/tire and Upper Control Arm. 2017 GMC Sierra Elevation, 20" stock GMC wheels, stock 275 55 20 Continental ContiTracks.

 

This is the small polished spot on the driver upper control arm after lift kit installation and realignment; passenger shows the same wear in the same place.

20170923 155449

This very outer lip is polished all the way around the wheel on the inner side of the driver front wheel; passenger is the same.

20170923 155511

nmyron Enthusiast

nmyron

Posted
Posted

As far as having the lift in, I did 2" MotoFab. Same overall height as the RC blocks, just CNC aluminum instead of plastic.

 

To @ChevyGuy72 - Ride felt very similar to stock. Just a tad stiffer. However, something to consider is that since these trucks have coilovers in the front, you're not going to get much deflection out of them. Those springs are designed to carry the weight of the entire front end of the truck. I noticed while reinstalling that if I applied too much jack pressure to the underside of the lower ball joint (to hold the spindle in place while I reinstalled the upper ball joint nut) it would start lifting the truck off the stands before it began compressing the springs. I have no experience with preload spacers, so I can't speak to if that is contributing to your rough ride.

 

I'd have loved to keep it lifted. As you can see, I took the blocks out and reverted to stock. I ran the lift for a week, and after encountering the rub even when I was trying actively to avoid it, I gave up and decided it wasn't for me. I loved the look, it gave it a much more aggressive stance. But I'm already in the hole enough with the cost of the alignment, I don't want to risk any severe damage to the wheels, tires or control arms.

2017SierraSLT Senior Enthusiast

2017SierraSLT

Posted
Posted

I used the RC lower spacers to give a 2" level. I have not experienced any ride quality issues, rubbing, etc. I too have the stamped steel upper and lower arms.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • 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. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...