Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

So it's just getting the right person to install it? Going to have to ask around here, i have no idea who to go to.

 

So leaving the 2" rear block out of the 2.5" leveling kit doesn't hurt anything?

Posted

Have another question, why go spacers like RC if you can get Rancho quicklift loaded or Bilstien 5100?

Posted (edited)

Have another question, why go spacers like RC if you can get Rancho quicklift loaded or Bilstien 5100?

Probably because Rancho says the quicklift loaded won't fit a z71 and the bilstein 5100's arent available yet. Me personally I'm trying to hold out for the 5100's but Bilstein is now saying January availability but as everyone knows it was Oct then Nov now Jan so who knows.

Edited by never_rested_24-7
Posted

hey guys,

Sorry to be a johnny come lately. I have had my 2015 2500 HD for 2 weeks now. I am also looking to level out the front end.

I have not seen a lot on the 2500 HD front lift and I have the Z71 Rancho package.

Are there any recomendations on a leveling kit for this truck. I think a kit that includes new upper control arms is probably the right way to go.

I was surprised to not see Rancho as I am looking at a lot of kits.

Don

Posted

Probably because Rancho says the quicklift loaded won't fit a z71 and the bilstein 5100's arent available yet. Me personally I'm trying to hold out for the 5100's but Bilstein is now saying January availability but as everyone knows it was Oct then Nov now Jan so who knows.

 

http://www.gorancho.com/products/leveling-systems/quicklift-7000mt-leveling-system

 

So this one will only fit the non z71 SLTs? If so that sucks. Might hold out as well, guess the spacer route worries me a bit.

Posted

Awesome, it will be awhile before i can get some savings together for a kit and installation. Likely by that time Bilstein should have their 2014 5100 series adjustable out i would think. Though if i went this route i wouldn't be putting in a rear spacer, so 2.5 in the front my not be required. Another question is this, replacing the front shocks/struts would you not go ahead and replace the back as well? Or can you leave the back stock and it would be okay?

 

I also talk to a buddy of mine who had a 2" spacer on his Sierra he had, he put that truck through hell with 265,000 miles on it. Replaced the ball joints at 115,000 and replaced the transmission at 220,000 IIRC. So he didn't really have any problems.

 

Sorry about the constant batter of questions, trucks are new to me. Well any form of mechanics in general. If we were talking Computers or Guns it wouldn't be such a foreign subject as those have been my hobbies for years.

Posted

Finally got my new wheels installed..

 

20x9 Fuel Maverick (+20)

2.5" Rough Country leveling kitpost-135785-141679331197_thumb.jpg

post-135785-141679331197_thumb.jpg

post-135785-141679331197_thumb.jpg

post-135785-141679331197_thumb.jpg

  • Like 5
Posted

Finally got my new wheels installed..

 

20x9 Fuel Maverick (+20)

2.5" Rough Country leveling kitattachicon.gifImageUploadedByTapatalk1416793309.652235.jpg

 

how far do those stick out? I'm looking to upgrade my rims this summer and am considering this size and offset. Still not sure what I want to do though. IF you could post a pic with how far they stick out it would help me greatly!

Posted (edited)

I went to the dealer tonight and took a look at some of their lifted trucks. They have a bunch of trucks with 6" of lift on 35"s and man, they look good. But, I need to be able to park in the garage and I don't want to get 12MPG. They had a truck with a 2" level and 305/55-20s (33.4"x12.4") on aftermarket wheels. Here's a photo comparison to stock height.

 

IMG_1939_zps623ca973.jpg

 

Now, what I'm wanting to do to a Z71 is run a RC 2.5" level kit with the 2" rear blocks on factory 22" wheels and 33x12.50 Toyo M/Ts with 1" spacers. From my research it should work out about perfect. What do you guys think?

Edited by AndrewGS
Posted

I went to the dealer tonight and took a look at some of their lifted trucks. They have a bunch of trucks with 6" of lift on 35"s and man, they look good. But, I need to be able to park in the garage and I don't want to get 12MPG. They had a truck with a 2" level and 305/55-20s (33.4"x12.4") on aftermarket wheels. Here's a photo comparison to stock height.

 

IMG_1939_zps623ca973.jpg

 

Now, what I'm wanting to do to a Z71 is run a RC 2.5" level kit with the 2" rear blocks on factory 22" wheels and 33x12.50 Toyo M/Ts with 1" spacers. From my research it should work out about perfect. What do you guys think?

 

Not sure I would even consider buying a dealer lifted truck only because you end up paying more for the lift and all than if you had it done on your own. Plus just more that's financed. The only good thing would be that the lift wouldn't void any warranty, but I've also read where some people just get a dealer to install a lift or level of their choice.

 

Plus personally I'm picky on things so I would rather have the ability to choose which lift, rims and tires I want.

Posted

 

Not sure I would even consider buying a dealer lifted truck only because you end up paying more for the lift and all than if you had it done on your own. Plus just more that's financed. The only good thing would be that the lift wouldn't void any warranty, but I've also read where some people just get a dealer to install a lift or level of their choice.

 

Plus personally I'm picky on things so I would rather have the ability to choose which lift, rims and tires I want.

 

Yeah, I'd have to go over everything with the aftermarket people first. I know what I want and if they can give it to me for a reasonable price, recalibrate the speedo and warranty it then I'll put it into the loan. If they try to screw with me on pricing then I can always just save up and do it myself. I'd also be looking at the GM-Borla exhaust and AMP Research steps.

Posted

 

 

Now, what I'm wanting to do to a Z71 is run a RC 2.5" level kit with the 2" rear blocks on factory 22" wheels and 33x12.50 Toyo M/Ts with 1" spacers. From my research it should work out about perfect. What do you guys think?

I want to see this when you do it! I'm thinking about same thing!

 

Sent from my XT1096 using Tapatalk 2

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,947
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Sothpaw27
    Newest Member
    Sothpaw27
    Joined
  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 528 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • 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.         
    • I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...