Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Just a heads up to anyone running the McG front spindles, your spare won't fit without trimming the bolt on the bottom of the spindles. Found that out last night.

Posted

Just a heads up to anyone running the McG front spindles, your spare won't fit without trimming the bolt on the bottom of the spindles. Found that out last night.

THis....had to cut end off to run 17" cookies.

  • Like 1
Posted

Got any pics of that setup?

unfortunately not...but it is about 3/4" off the ball joint bolt end. It is pretty much now flush with the ball joint nut.

Posted

Need some new shocks now. My bilstiens are making a funky sound. Belltech or?

Posted

Pretty sure it said that in the instructions.... I lopped mine off after torqing the nut.

 

RT

Mine said there could be an issue with 17's but nothing about you'd be in a situation with your spare, lol.

  • Like 1
Posted

That are lowering shocks but I think they're to short for when I enter from 6 to 7

Posted

That are lowering shocks but I think they're to short for when I enter from 6 to 7

I have the belltech street performance shocks on all 4 corners... loving the ride

Posted

It's not the ride. It's the length

Agreed, the McG fronts ride great, rears are terrible. The Belltechs are brutal on a RCSB on the rear too. Prime example of a shock designed for a heavier truck not adapting well. Not to mention the passenger side is longer than the driver side and yet it's the same part number.

Posted

Mine said there could be an issue with 17's but nothing about you'd be in a situation with your spare, lol.

McG spindles have been that way forever, the 17+ spindles will always need the ball joint trimmed. Lol... 17" wheel is a 17" wheel whether spare or not. You could always swap the wheels on the side of the flat and put the spare on the rear.

 

That are lowering shocks but I think they're to short for when I enter from 6 to 7

You mean too long going from 6-7, spec out shorter bilsteins. This part #33-062518 can use the same bushing/sleeves from current ones and 2in shorter.

 

Agreed, the McG fronts ride great, rears are terrible. The Belltechs are brutal on a RCSB on the rear too. Prime example of a shock designed for a heavier truck not adapting well. Not to mention the passenger side is longer than the driver side and yet it's the same part number.

Out of the box they're same size, not labeled L or R. When installing the rear shock passenger side appears to be longer if the truck is in the air; if the truck is on the ground they're same length eye-to-eye.

  • Like 1
Posted

Agreed, the McG fronts ride great, rears are terrible. The Belltechs are brutal on a RCSB on the rear too. Prime example of a shock designed for a heavier truck not adapting well. Not to mention the passenger side is longer than the driver side and yet it's the same part number.

 

I have the belltech 2210FF on the rear of my RCSB, and it rides phenomenally. Currently looking into Timbren products to use as the bump stops. The ones from mcgaughys aren't cutting it.

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

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,758
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Randy Ginoza
    Newest Member
    Randy Ginoza
    Joined
  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,903 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Paid $2.72 for E85 today.
    • Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
    • 2024 Silverado 2500 HD LTZ grille no camera Parts list   84603331 84913656 84913657 84913654 84913655 84911567 84911568 85646092 85646093 85797921 85797922   11570637  x10-15   grille/bumper bolts 11546500  x10      grille clips 11571006  x10      push/retainer clips 11546454  x6       nut retainers 11611609  x6       M5 bolts 11610700  x6       molding/trim retainers
    • And use RA's 5% discount code if you buy from them.  google for the code, one is always available.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...