Jump to content

2014+ Leveling Kits

bcazier

By bcazier
in Modifications & Accessories

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 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

Rick Burnham Enthusiast

Rick Burnham

Posted
Posted

Used Bilsteins for 1.8" up front coupled with 275/60/20 Dura Tracs on my stock rims, really happy with the ride, MPG's with the cruise set at 88mph was terrible though....IMG_6432.thumb.jpg.1d73d84f23114695ca76405cc6f6d67c.jpg

theJman Enthusiast

theJman

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, Rick Burnham said:

Used Bilsteins for 1.8" up front coupled with 275/60/20 Dura Tracs on my stock rims, really happy with the ride, MPG's with the cruise set at 88mph was terrible though....

Surely you expected crappy mileage though, right?  If you increased the tire size the speedo is off so you were doing well in excess of 90 MPH.  The leveling also raised the front end so now you have more air going underneath, which means more turbulence.  Couple that with a vehicle as aerodynamic as a cinder block and mileage is going to be in the toilet.

Rick Burnham Enthusiast

Rick Burnham

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, theJman said:

Surely you expected crappy mileage though, right?  If you increased the tire size the speedo is off so you were doing well in excess of 90 MPH.  The leveling also raised the front end so now you have more air going underneath, which means more turbulence.  Couple that with a vehicle as aerodynamic as a cinder block and mileage is going to be in the toilet.

yeah I had low expectations, it was just worse than expected.  I used GPS so the cruise was set at an honest 88 and calculated the MPG manually using the NAV.  I knew the level and 33's wasn't going to help it any LOL!  I just bought this truck to replace my trusty 06' Silverado SS (2wd), it would get 17mpg driving it hard through the mountains....different animal though..

bowhunter8 Enthusiast

bowhunter8

Posted
Posted
CA313A6B-7235-48D5-A0A0-6A3DA20F2248.thumb.jpeg.933604e7d830faa5e326b8c86cb94959.jpeg



Good looking truck... what are the specs on the level kit and tires/wheels?

Looks like you do use it off-roading, did you replace the factory upper control arm or keep it stock?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ryan Z71 Enthusiast

Ryan Z71

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, bowhunter8 said:

 

 


Good looking truck... what are the specs on the level kit and tires/wheels?

Looks like you do use it off-roading, did you replace the factory upper control arm or keep it stock?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

It’s a stage 5 Icon suspension set at about 2” of loft in the front. 17” procomp wheels. 33” ko2’s. 

D8C05AAB-BB3D-4D4F-A404-7FAC9F4BAA5D.jpeg

  • Like 3
malibu43 Enthusiast

malibu43

Posted
Posted

Hello all.  New to this forum!

 

I am looking at leveling my 2015 Silverado.  I was initially thinking of a 2" spacer in front, but then was considering going with 1.5 due to concerns with the truck squatting with any sort of load in the back.  I've been reading up on things online and now I wonder if my rear is sitting lower than normal.  Measured from the ground to the center of the wheel well lip, my front is at about 36.25" and the rear is at about 38.375". (This is with 265/70r17 tires).  Is this normal or could there be something up?  Looks like the stock block is still in there (didn't get a chance to measure, though).  See the image below.

 

Also, here's pic of my truck this last weekend with a typical weekend getaway load for us.  It certainly doesn't look like this every day, but it's often enough that I don't want my truck to squat when I do it.  I actually measured when we got home, and the rear was about 1" lower than when unloaded.  The cost to add a rear block isn't much componenet-wise, but I've gotta pay someone to install and it doubles the installation costs...

 

 

20200211_150229.jpg

20200211_150117.jpg

20200210_141000.jpg

malibu43 Enthusiast

malibu43

Posted
Posted (edited)

So after thinking it over a little more and watching all the install videos out there, I think I'm going to do the install myself.  I'll give myself a full day for each of the front and rear, and see who I can round up to help me out.  That kinda takes cost out of the equation and lets me do what I know I'll like.

 

I'm thinking right now about a motofab 2" spacer in the front and a 1" lift in the back to maintain some rake.  They don't offer a package with 2"/1" Front/Rear - not sure if there is a reason why...  Has anyone done the same level/lift?  On the plus side, since they're separate anyway, I can start with the front and then see if/what I want to do in the back to compensate for squatting...

 

No plans in the immediate future for new tires, but what would be the biggest I could go if I go with the setup above?

Edited by malibu43
jimbrown1 Enthusiast

jimbrown1

Posted
Posted
On ‎2‎/‎12‎/‎2020 at 12:33 AM, malibu43 said:

So after thinking it over a little more and watching all the install videos out there, I think I'm going to do the install myself.  I'll give myself a full day for each of the front and rear, and see who I can round up to help me out.  That kinda takes cost out of the equation and lets me do what I know I'll like.

 

I'm thinking right now about a motofab 2" spacer in the front and a 1" lift in the back to maintain some rake.  They don't offer a package with 2"/1" Front/Rear - not sure if there is a reason why...  Has anyone done the same level/lift?  On the plus side, since they're separate anyway, I can start with the front and then see if/what I want to do in the back to compensate for squatting...

 

No plans in the immediate future for new tires, but what would be the biggest I could go if I go with the setup above?

The level kit manufacturer will have a recommendation on the proper tire but in my personal experience, I've always been able to run stock wheels and a 275/60/20 tire due to the narrowness as compared to a 295/55/20 which might require some trimming.  Might be able to run a 285/55/20 since it's a little shorter than a 275/65/20 but I do not have any rubbing, even at full lock. with my level kit and running the 275/60/20 BFG All Terrain T/A KO2 tires. 

malibu43 Enthusiast

malibu43

Posted
Posted
On 2/13/2020 at 9:45 AM, jimbrown1 said:

The level kit manufacturer will have a recommendation on the proper tire but in my personal experience, I've always been able to run stock wheels and a 275/60/20 tire due to the narrowness as compared to a 295/55/20 which might require some trimming.  Might be able to run a 285/55/20 since it's a little shorter than a 275/65/20 but I do not have any rubbing, even at full lock. with my level kit and running the 275/60/20 BFG All Terrain T/A KO2 tires. 

Thanks for the feedback.  I honestly thought my post would get more responses and input given how popular this thread is.  Maybe it's a slow time of year...

 

Anyway.  My Motofab 2" front leveling spacers came yesterday, and I also stopped at HomeDepot and picked up a Husky Light-truck floor jack (3 tons, 21" lift) and some new jack stands. Now I just need to carve out a few (or several) hours with an extra set of hands available to get it installed.

 

Once I see how it looks with the 2" level in the front, I may a) do nothing, b) add the 1" lift block in the rear, or c) try something like a Helwig Helper Spring to keep the truck from squatting when I use the bed/hitch.  I'll cross that bridge when i get there.

moreyg1228 Enthusiast

moreyg1228

Posted
Posted

I have a 2017 Silverado 1500 CC  planning to put the 2" RC front level kit.

Which set up would give me the more beefy look without rubbing or trimming?

-275x65x18 or 285x70x17

As far as wheels, I'm thinking doing -12mm offset and 17/18x9. 

Help would be appreciated. 

 

Picture provided. My stock tires are due for tire change, so I might as well upgrade.

 

IMG_8553 (1).jpg

gm-lift-kit_13078-base.jpg

jcrowden Enthusiast

jcrowden

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, moreyg1228 said:

I have a 2017 Silverado 1500 CC  planning to put the 2" RC front level kit.

Which set up would give me the more beefy look without rubbing or trimming?

-275x65x18 or 285x70x17

As far as wheels, I'm thinking doing -12mm offset and 17/18x9. 

Help would be appreciated. 

 

Picture provided. My stock tires are due for tire change, so I might as well upgrade.

 

IMG_8553 (1).jpg

gm-lift-kit_13078-base.jpg

I have 285/70/18 nitto ridge grapplers on mine with a 2” RC level

B82D5439-467A-43E9-9DD4-15369E75BC4F.jpeg

C88C6183-3DC1-421D-931F-FB48E942A42A.jpeg

aleeuw Enthusiast

aleeuw

Posted
Posted

I have a 2018 with 2.5" front, 2" rear Motofab, looking to get new tires on stock 20" LTZ wheels. Current tires are stock 275/55R20. 

 

Trying to figure out my best bet on largest tire size with no rub or cutting on the following sizes:

275/60R20 (33" x 11")

285/60R20 (33.5" x 11.5")

275/65R20 (34.1" x 11")

 

Can anyone provide their thoughts and/or experience?

mdf21 Enthusiast

mdf21

Posted
Posted
On 2/21/2020 at 10:03 AM, aleeuw said:

I have a 2018 with 2.5" front, 2" rear Motofab, looking to get new tires on stock 20" LTZ wheels. Current tires are stock 275/55R20. 

 

Trying to figure out my best bet on largest tire size with no rub or cutting on the following sizes:

275/60R20 (33" x 11")

285/60R20 (33.5" x 11.5")

275/65R20 (34.1" x 11")

 

Can anyone provide their thoughts and/or experience?

I just put this kit on also and curious on tire suggestions 

 

 

19A5FA0C-B502-4D8C-BD54-C30C42EAFE5B.jpeg

ED8D2D0B-94ED-4844-92BD-707EDF92BE87.jpeg

  • Like 1

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

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      He is not saying that an SAE *W20 will have more viscosity than a *W40 due to MORE VII polymers. He is saying that although multiple *W40 may post in the PDS the same or similar 100 C and 150 C viscosities that the blenders choice of modifier TYPE and AMOUNT to get his chosen base to grade will not give identical real world viscosities in shear and at temperature. All will pass the SII test but not all will pass the 100 C HTHS (unpublished value) testing the blender does and relies on to get the required by law "percentage improvement' referenced to his last great work.    Tis the problem with the lie. Once told others are required to support it. 
    • PunchT37
      Parking Brake - Automatic Engagement Questions

      By PunchT37 · Posted

      I have a `25, 1500 that auto sets on incline. Never knew that at first. I have the electronic shifter. Just think if it didn`t do that? Unlike a mechanical shift that you can muscle out of park, how would you get this thing out? That would be a problem.   What I found out later is, I don`t have to push the button to release. Just put it in gear.   Setting parameters? Don`t know if it`s possible.
    • SoCal Angler
      Parking Brake - Automatic Engagement Questions

      By SoCal Angler · Posted

      2023 GMC 3500 HD, SLE, 6.6L Gas, 4x4, 6 Spd Options:  SLE Convenience Package; Driver Alert Package 1; Spray on Bedliner; X31 Off Road Package; TRAILERING MIRRORS, HEATED POWER -ADJUSTABLE, AUTO DIMMING, WITH TURN INDICATORS WHEELHOUSE LINERS, REAR INC. REAR AXLE - 3.73 RATIO INC. GVWR, 11,350 LBS. (5148 KG) INC. FRONT AND REAR PARK ASSIST, INC. ULTRASONIC     I have been launching my new boat and noticed some things related to the parking brake.. I usually set the parking brake (habit) when on flat ground for typical driving.    When backed down on the launch ramp to launch the boat and I place gear selector into Park, the parking brake activates automatically. My second nature is to set parking brake manually and noticed I was turing the parking brake off.  The parking brake appears to be setting itself automatically.   I looked all over my owner's manual and only found references to being on an incline and manually setting parking brake, or at times parking brake will be auto engaged, but nothing specific to my situation.    When is the parking brake automatically engaged?  Under what specific circumstances?  Can the auto set parameters be changed?     I like the auto set feature.  It would be nice if always engaged when shifted into Park and released when shifted out of Park (like my wifes 2025 RAV4).   Thanks!    
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...