Jump to content

2014+ Leveling Kits

bcazier

By bcazier
in Modifications & Accessories

 Share

Recommended Posts

'17 Sierra Enthusiast

'17 Sierra

Posted
Posted (edited)

I've been doing some digging and watching some YouTube tutorials and it does seem pretty easy. I'm going to go with the 2" Rough Country spacers. I figured I'd buy the part and whatever I was going to spend on labor, I would just spend on tools haha your replies are very much appreciated my friend!

I too read up on everything I could find. I've always done my own wrenching on my cars and motorcycles....airplane too but only what was legal on the plane. The only problem I had with the leveling kit was getting the ball joints free. I got the passenger side free but not the driver side. I was able to get the spacer in that side without releasing the ball joint. Took a bit of muscle though. I got the alignment done today and it was just a bit off...actually could have gotten away without the alignment but I'm glad I had it done anyway. The height looks really good. Had a 3" rake now only 1". That's all I'm going to do too. I might switch over to Bilsteins at some point but we'll see.

Good luck....let us know how it turns out!

Edited by '17 Sierra
  • 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

Sierra Jon Enthusiast

Sierra Jon

Posted
Posted

I own a 2016 Silverado, and it comes equipped with lane keep assist and forward collision warning systems. My question is, will adding a leveling kit affect the functionality of the systems? Has anyone had any issues, or have you had no issues at all? Thanks in advance!

Does not affect it at all. I have both systems as well and they utilize the camera on the windshield. I have not noticed any difference.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

spartantx117 Enthusiast

spartantx117

Posted
Posted (edited)

Is there a advantage/disadvantage to using the upper lift kit over the lower? I've seen both but from what I've searched and read a lot of people seem to use the lower rough country kit. I seem to research everything and over think almost everything before I do it.

 

I have also seen some that use both the upper rings and lower blocks. Just trying to figure out what is best.

Edited by spartantx117
'17 Sierra Enthusiast

'17 Sierra

Posted
Posted

Rough Country makes their spacers out of a composite material which doesn't corrode. Good quality stuff. Not that the others aren't good either. Anytime you go more than 2", you want to split it up between upper and lower because you're limiting suspension travel by that much so if you put it all on one side, you're more likely going to max out in that one direction more often and that's what is hard on the ball joints.

  • Like 1
jeter33 Enthusiast

jeter33

Posted
Posted

Question: Has anyone noticed that the lower control arms have notches that the lower crossbar of the strut sits against when bolted down...and the level kit lower spacer plates don't have one built in and essentially makes the bolts bear all the force? Is this something to be concerned about and how strong are those bolts? Sorry if a little confusing just doesn't seem to be the best design. Would like to hear opinions if this matters at all.

 

I have the ReadyLift 2.25 waiting to install once my wheels come in since the Bilstein 6112's arent out yet and noticed this. I'll try to find a pic.

'17 Sierra Enthusiast

'17 Sierra

Posted
Posted

I see what you're talking about. I just installed mine and didn't think anything of it. They act as a stop, probably in case the bolts loosen up. As long as you torque them down good (37 ft lbs), I think you're good. I went to 45 since more is always better right?! I think if it were a problem, we would have heard by now.

  • Like 1
'17 Sierra Enthusiast

'17 Sierra

Posted
Posted

Has anyone ever experienced warranty problems after adding leveling kits?

  • Like 1
Rolling Thunder Enthusiast

Rolling Thunder

Posted
Posted (edited)

Has anyone ever experienced warranty problems after adding leveling kits?

 

That depends on how you interpret this GM advisory, or rather how GM will interpret a level / lift kit:.

:

Edited by Rolling Thunder
jeter33 Enthusiast

jeter33

Posted
Posted

I see what you're talking about. I just installed mine and didn't think anything of it. They act as a stop, probably in case the bolts loosen up. As long as you torque them down good (37 ft lbs), I think you're good. I went to 45 since more is always better right?! I think if it were a problem, we would have heard by now.

Yeah they do and the only level kit I see having something similar to incorporate is the Zone kit which is made out of a composite...but the lip is super small. If it was machined out of aluminum and substantial would make me feel better. Not that I will be mashing this thing off-road but still better piece of mind.

tyrich88 Enthusiast

tyrich88

Posted
Posted

Has anyone ever experienced warranty problems after adding leveling kits?

My dealer installs mine. So, no.

gorskimc Enthusiast

gorskimc

Posted
Posted

2" RC, 275/65/20 KO2's.

 

attachicon.gifOptimized-2014 AT.png

 

I'm just curious why you stayed with 275/65's instead of going with something wider? Maybe a 305/55R20? The diameter is only slightly different (33" with the 275/65's vs. 33.2" with the 305/55's.)

 

I suppose there is more patch contact area from a 305 vs a 275, so you will get a little more drag (ie. less fuel mileage) but I personally just think that the wider tires look so much better on a lifted/leveled truck.

 

From everything I've read it seems like the 305/55R20 will fit on a truck with at least a 2" level. There is a possibility for a very minor rub at full lock, but if it does it would be minor. Some people have stated they had a 2" level with zero rub on the 305's.

 

I just picked-up a 2017 GMC Sierra and put a 2.5" Motofab level kit on it, and am planning on putting 305/55R20 K02's on it in the next week or two. I was just curious if there was a fit issue that prevented you from going wider, or if it was just cost and fuel mileage.

 

Your truck looks great though! I've always like BFG's for all around tires. Not too noisey on the highway and great off-road in the woods.

tyrich88 Enthusiast

tyrich88

Posted
Posted

 

I'm just curious why you stayed with 275/65's instead of going with something wider? Maybe a 305/55R20? The diameter is only slightly different (33" with the 275/65's vs. 33.2" with the 305/55's.)

 

I suppose there is more patch contact area from a 305 vs a 275, so you will get a little more drag (ie. less fuel mileage) but I personally just think that the wider tires look so much better on a lifted/leveled truck.

 

From everything I've read it seems like the 305/55R20 will fit on a truck with at least a 2" level. There is a possibility for a very minor rub at full lock, but if it does it would be minor. Some people have stated they had a 2" level with zero rub on the 305's.

 

I just picked-up a 2017 GMC Sierra and put a 2.5" Motofab level kit on it, and am planning on putting 305/55R20 K02's on it in the next week or two. I was just curious if there was a fit issue that prevented you from going wider, or if it was just cost and fuel mileage.

 

Your truck looks great though! I've always like BFG's for all around tires. Not too noisey on the highway and great off-road in the woods.

you are correct about the contact patch being wider, but the height isn't quite right. 305/55 are 33.2 as you said, but the 275/65/20 are just over 34" tall and they don't rub in most situations.

  • Like 1
gorskimc Enthusiast

gorskimc

Posted
Posted

you are correct about the contact patch being wider, but the height isn't quite right. 305/55 are 33.2 as you said, but the 275/65/20 are just over 34" tall and they don't rub in most situations.

Yep. You're right. I did the calc's with a 60 aspect ratio instead of 65. The 275/65's are actually just over 34" diameter, as you stated.

 

So, now the question is taller or wider? Do you go with 34" diameter and a 275mm (10.8") wide tire or a 33.2" diameter and a 305mm (12") wide tire? What does everyone think looks the best?

tyrich88 Enthusiast

tyrich88

Posted
Posted

Yep. You're right. I did the calc's with a 60 aspect ratio instead of 65. The 275/65's are actually just over 34" diameter, as you stated.

 

So, now the question is taller or wider? Do you go with 34" diameter and a 275mm (10.8") wide tire or a 33.2" diameter and a 305mm (12") wide tire? What does everyone think looks the best?

Well, there are other options as well. You could go in between at 285/60 (33.5*11.2) or 295/60 (33.9*11.6)

 

I do really like the 305s though.

i have 275/70R18 BFG KO2 and i love them though.

So both ways would be great, just depends on the look you want.

I think the 285/60/20 or 295/60/20 would be about perfect

Best of both worlds

 

  • 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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,962
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    contrabombarde
    Newest Member
    contrabombarde
    Joined

  • Who's Online   3 Members, 1 Anonymous, 806 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • contrabombarde
      2010 Avalanche 5.3 not running correctly after engine swap.

      By contrabombarde · Posted

      Apologies in advance, this is a long post, there's a lot to explain.   A friend had a 2010 Avalanche with a 5.3 (LMG) that blew the head gaskets (amount other problems). He gave me a donor motor out of a 2007 suburban (LC9). I got it all installed, and everything hooked up. Went to go start it, and it stumbled a bit at first and died a couple times, but after trying a few times it sounded like it was running very well. Went out to go get some coolant, and came back the next day.    Upon trying to start it, the truck will crank and fire normally and the RPMs will raise to around 1,200 or 1,500, sounding great, and then the RPMs will decrease and it will just die. Repeat that a dozen or two dozen times, and eventually it will fire and idle beautifully. As soon as you touch the throttle, it will start misfiring and sound like absolute trash. When you let off the throttle it will come down and hunt around shaking and misfiring like crazy. A message will come up on the dash saying reduced engine power.    It is throwing codes for a map sensor circuit voltage High, as well as MAF sensor low frequency. With key on engine off, the map sensor reads about 4.8 volts on the vout pin, which the PCM interprets as about 17.8 PSI, contrasted to the barometer which my scan tool tells me reads about 13.5 PSI. However, once the engine starts and is idling this reading drops to about 5-6 PSI at a stable idle, and varies significantly when the engine is misfiring/ hunting like I said before. I should note that I used the intake and MAP sensor from the LC9 engine. I changed the connector on the 2010 harness to The 2007 connector. The pinouts for the sensors were printed right on the top, and I triple-checked that I put the correct wire into the correct place.   On the other hand, the MAF sensor reads consistently 0.0 g/s regardless of State. I have pulled my hair out trying to figure out this last detail. I have tried three different sensors, (all of which should be good, one of which was new), I have verified all the wiring from the sensor going back to the PCM, and have verified that the readings at the PCM are the same readings as at the sensor itself. The intake air temperature sensor is also functioning as normal. I verified all the voltages and grounds etc, and everything is as it should be. I don't have an oscilloscope to verify, but I probed with my multimeter (Klein mm720) on frequency Mode, and it reads that on initial cranking, the maf is producing between 3000 and 7000 HZ, and as soon as the engine fires that falls off to below, 1000, and if the engine continues to run, it will produce somewhat erratic readings between 5 and 100-200 HZ. It does increase notably when the engine is revved despite the misfirings. As I said before, I have verified all of the wires going to the PCM, and I have tried multiple known good sensors. I've tested all the pins and voltages from the sensor and verified them against the manual that they are what they should be. I tested all the wiring for both ohms and voltage drop, and everything tested fine. Like I said I tested at the sensor as well as right at the PCM, everything checked out.   The only other thing of note at least I think is the fact that the engine originally in the truck had VVT, but the engine I put in, the lc9, does not have VVT. I modified the cam sensor plug to work. I reference the wiring diagrams and double-checked that I modified the harness correctly to adapt it. There is obviously a code for the VVT solenoid, but I don't think that's the cause of my problems, and this friend will probably have the PCM sent off to tune out the codes at some point.   I'm writing this for my bed so I don't recall the exact codes, but I'll update the post tomorrow morning with the exact codes. And ideas or feedback much appreciated. 
    • Atlas
      Tire psi

      By Atlas · Posted

      It's possible the two trucks are using different body control modules which is why yours works and the OP's doesn't.   So much in these newer vehicles depends on model/trim configurations, production date. They don't all use the same modules like back in the day.
    • Chuck FB
      Tire psi

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I forgot to answer the question as per what market mine is set to and yes I finally found that area on mine and yes its also set to America.   So here's something I realized as I wasn't looking at that part in the Sierra section until now, your right that what I see here as choice 3 under Sierra which says 07/2023-06/2026 ( 433 MHz 13542523 ) it has no choice 5 for tire pressure selection. Where as it does under the Chev choice. However I kept going down the list within the Sierra and I am really wondering if choice 9 will work for your truck as it has the same model number and hertz sensor as my truck. I would say try that choice first, if that doesn't work then jump over to the Chev section and again choose that same model and hertz choice as for some reason the Chev section gives the choice 5 of tire type/pressure selection for going back a number of years. Could very well be an Autel thing that they just didn't get the updates all done properly under Sierra but anyway first try that selection 9 I suggested under Sierra and then go from there. 
    • B07
      Anyone have a spare?

      By B07 · Posted

      Looking for this piece that holds the hose clamp in place. I have the hose clamp just not that other piece. Dealers and wrecking yards in my area will not sell just that piece. They want you to buy the whole air tube $100 +/- to get that $5 part.  that piece isn't molded to the air tube as I looked at my friends truck. It's held on by a screw and nut. I'm trying to put the OEM parts on the truck as the previous owner butchered things up installing an aftermarket CAI. It really looked homemade. 🤣 Thanks
    • Chuck FB
      Tire psi

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      Ok I missed that part that yours is a GM. The strange part is that the choice for year ranges and within the year of 2026 is different on the Sierra then on the Chev for some reason as I am looking at my tool at the Sierra choices. Now I am guessing you see as to your sensor part number as it may be different on your truck for some reason and a call to GM should get you the part model number of the sensors you should have as well as which MHz your sensors are. I know mine are the ones as per what I listed but there are other choices in the Autel and got me wondering if by some chance they put different ones in your truck. Having said that, did you try using each of the choices starting from No 1 and going on down the list, not sure if that would mean shutting off the engine each time and resetting the tool and going at it again each time. Also I thought of something else which may sound retarded but if there was some stupid chance that the chev choice would work. The reason I say that is that the Sierra is showing a range up to 06/2026 for the various choices of sensors it could be where as the Chev has one choice that has that 12/2026. By the way it is possible to not run the truck and you may know that as per not pressing the brake but pressing and holding the start button for a few seconds and it lights up the dash ( its called service mode ) but that sucks battery power and if it were me doing it that way I would be throwing on a decent sized battery charger before doing it that way as killing your battery won't make you happy at me at all !.    Like I say, just a thought to try the Chev choices if you have already exhausted the Sierra choices but first it would be nice to know for sure what exact sensor model and hertz your truck uses as I assume only those choices that mention the sensor would work unless a choice that does not mention the sensor model would somehow work. Its frustrating when one is trying to use tools like this without the experience of the tool and the vehicle, as I am sure dealer techs themselves struggle with it when starting out or a new model year comes along that is slightly different. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...