Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Good looking truck and nice wheels. The 305/45/22 is 32.8 in diameter and the 285/45/22 is 32.2. That's about 9/16" total O.D. and only about 1/4" on sidewall height. I don't see how 1/4" would be too short for your liking or even noticeable by just looking at the tire. The 305 is a bit wider with a 12" tread width compared to 9.5" tread width on the 285. I think the 305 is a little too wide for factory 9" wheels on a stock suspension and is why they rub. The 305 is designed for a 10" rim and will give the "balloon" look on a 9" rim. I'd stick with the 285. I have similar wheels (CK159) instead of your CK158. I'm running Cooper Discoverer SRX 285/45/22. They fit the 9" wheels perfect, were road force balanced and ride great.

 

I agree that the difference in sidewall and OD is minimal, but I wanted a little something extra all around. I have 285/45/22s on my lowered Tahoe and love the way they look. However, these trucks have a completely different look than Tahoes, so I don't mind the extra bulge around the rim (I know exactly what you're talking about. I saw that size on a Tahoe and thought they looked like balloons).

 

Very nice ride, by the way. I was debating between the CK158s and CK159s. You can't go wrong with either.

  • Like 1
Posted

 

I agree that the difference in sidewall and OD is minimal, but I wanted a little something extra all around. I have 285/45/22s on my lowered Tahoe and love the way they look. However, these trucks have a completely different look than Tahoes, so I don't mind the extra bulge around the rim (I know exactly what you're talking about. I saw that size on a Tahoe and thought they looked like balloons).

 

Very nice ride, by the way. I was debating between the CK158s and CK159s. You can't go wrong with either.

Thanks for the compliment bud. I was debating on the 158s and 159s myself. Ditto that, can't go wrong with either.

  • Like 1
Posted

Has anybody had the Wheel Theft Deterrent System (Tilt Sensor) installed on their 2014? Looks like a great add on. Shows that is is available for up to 2014 Sierras.

 

Any info on installation and dealer reprogramming would be greatly appreciated if anyone has had this done!

 

http://www.gmcaccessories.com/en-US/Sierra/2014/Accessories/Electronics/Wheel%20Theft%20Deterrent%20System/

Posted

Anybody running 0 offset wheels with 33x12.50's and have a 2.5" leveling kit and no rubbing? I have the 2" kit and rub at full lock in reverse. I know some people zip tied part of the liner. Would the extra .5" spring spacer eliminate the rubbing or should I use the zip ties? If any of you have used the zip ties can you post a pic of where you used them? Thanks in advance!

Posted

Good looking truck and nice wheels. The 305/45/22 is 32.8 in diameter and the 285/45/22 is 32.2. That's about 9/16" total O.D. and only about 1/4" on sidewall height. I don't see how 1/4" would be too short for your liking or even noticeable by just looking at the tire. The 305 is a bit wider with a 12" tread width compared to 9.5" tread width on the 285. I think the 305 is a little too wide for factory 9" wheels on a stock suspension and is why they rub. The 305 is designed for a 10" rim and will give the "balloon" look on a 9" rim. I'd stick with the 285. I have similar wheels (CK159) instead of your CK158. I'm running Cooper Discoverer SRX 285/45/22. They fit the 9" wheels perfect, were road force balanced and ride great.

 

I did something a lil different today. I went with a 285/50-22 terra grappler. Its aprox 33.3".only rub i had is against my front mud flap at full lock in reverse. I trimmed aprox 1inch square and all is well. Love the stance now. Much better than my old 305 40 22s

20151109_165230.jpg

  • Like 2
Posted

I did something a lil different today. I went with a 285/50-22 terra grappler. Its aprox 33.3".only rub i had is against my front mud flap at full lock in reverse. I trimmed aprox 1inch square and all is well. Love the stance now. Much better than my old 305 40 22s

Offset on your wheels?

Posted

anyone have pics of their silverado/sierra with 24 or 26" replicas and stock height ? my friend and I have been fighting about this... been going thru these pages but some people dont mention if stock height or not.

thx

Posted

Anybody running 0 offset wheels with 33x12.50's and have a 2.5" leveling kit and no rubbing? I have the 2" kit and rub at full lock in reverse. I know some people zip tied part of the liner. Would the extra .5" spring spacer eliminate the rubbing or should I use the zip ties? If any of you have used the zip ties can you post a pic of where you used them? Thanks in advance!

Can anybody weigh in on this? Thanks!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted (edited)

Can anybody weigh in on this? Thanks!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ive got 285/50-22 terra grap g2s (33.3") wheels are 22x9.5 with 8mm offset, with 2" front level. I did the zip tie trick. Ill post pics tmrw as its too dark now. Edited by dbcooper748
Posted (edited)

Can anybody weigh in on this? Thanks!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Heres where i ziptied mine (will be changing to black zip ties today). Both driver and passenger sides to the rear, and just above existing wiring harnesses which is what i tied my liners to

Driver- Screenshot_2015-11-11-08-10-03.jpg

Passenger- Screenshot_2015-11-11-08-09-46.jpg

Edited by dbcooper748
  • Like 1
Posted

Heres where i ziptied mine (will be changing to black zip ties today). Both driver and passenger sides to the rear, and just above existing wiring harnesses which is what i tied my liners to

Screenshot_2015-11-11-08-10-03.jpg driver

Screenshot_2015-11-11-08-10-03.jpg

Passenger

Pics of the whole truck with the new setup???

Posted

Heres where i ziptied mine (will be changing to black zip ties today). Both driver and passenger sides to the rear, and just above existing wiring harnesses which is what i tied my liners to

Driver- Screenshot_2015-11-11-08-10-03.jpg

Passenger- Screenshot_2015-11-11-08-09-46.jpg

 

Thanks man, greatly appreciate it! Mine rubs in the middle of the liner oddly enough, gotta figure out how to fix that section!

Posted (edited)

Pics of the whole truck with the new setup???

Gladly! Here ya go... i am very pleased

 

2015-11-10%2015.28.36_1.jpg

20151109_165230_1.jpg

2015-11-11%2008.27.22.jpg

20151110_145604.jpg

20151110_145725.jpg

20151110_145544.jpg

Old setup

Screenshot_2015-11-03-22-15-59.jpg

Edited by dbcooper748

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Okay Punch What year is your truck or did you already mention that ? Can you link the TSB is about that noise ? 
    • Thrust bearing is a very small window.  But nice try.   Turbo oil filter?  Haven't seen any failures.  Change your oil more frequently.  Use a better oil than the factory oil.  
    • There is a p/n called out in the one PI that GM has.  Curt 57003 inline load adapter that is used for LED trailers that are having trouble with these newer trucks.  No cutting, no splicing, etc.  GM did update the lighting module around 2023 to better pick up trailers with LED lighting, but it still can happen.     Here's the link to the Curt site for it - 7-Way RV Blade LED Electrical Adapter (Not a Wiring Extension) SKU #57003 by CURT   The PI I am referencing - MC-10208985-9999.pdf   Its not just a GM deal either.  Newer Fords and Rams have this same problem.       In another PI, they recommend that the trailer has a Pollock brand 7 way on it as that is who makes the truck sides for the OEMs.  GM is also big on making sure the trailer is trouble free.  So no wiring issues, all lights are functional, better quality 7 way plug, etc.     The other PI I am referencing - MC-10178359-9999.pdf   The model year range is older but it is the current PI for 2014-2026.  It calls out the Pollock RV HD 7 way they recommend.  
    • That's part of the problem...the EGR has already been replaced, and I've already had the complete intake assembly removed, and the EGR passages were clear at that time. That leaves wiring, PCM, or another variable that I wasn't expecting. Best I can tell, it's not wiring or the PCM, so I'm grasping for straws.   The PCM uses the MAP reading to confirm the requisite loss of vacuum in the manifold when the EGR activates. Since that's vacuum related, it involves a lot of other systems which could play a role.   The overall diagnosis has to be considered too. The fuel lines in the intake had rubbed through and were dumping fuel into the intake, drowning the cylinders in fuel, and putting raw fuel into the sump and cat converter. The fuel system has been fixed but the complete path of damage may not be. If the cat was damaged and melted the internals, it could be partially obstructed and also playing into the EGR issue.   I'm retracing my steps; trying to go back to thinking thinking Horses not Zebras based on the clues I've been given. These engines aren't *that* complex.   Could it be, now that the truck is running well, that carbon and crud from being run with the fuel system in disarray is now dislodging and clogged my clean EGR passages where I can't see?  That's what the code is actually saying. The flow is restricted, dummy. Retrace step 1.   I may just need to remove the lower intake again. Before I do that I'm going to try removing the EGR and running the engine for a few seconds to see if it will blow anything lodged in the egr passages out through the open ports.     That's been helpful in the past. For the spider injector, there's no guarantee I'll get a working one. The spider I have seems fine now that the high pressure fuel line isn't making an early delivery via large hole. SO at least I'm not marooned and looking for one of those.   Row52 (dot com) is also a good one for watching for vehicles at local yards.  
    • Disassembly may be Required!   Every blender makes claims but do  you ponder those claims? What was really said? Was it true?  Motive for saying it? What does in infer?  Is that inference true?    Let's do one.    Claim: Made from shear stable base oils.    What was said: Base Oils are shear proof.   Was it true: Yes.  ALL base oils are Newtonian.    Motive / Inference: To imply the fully formulated product is Shear Proof.    Is the Inference true?: Most fully formulated multigrade oils contain Viscosity Modifiers or VM's, sometimes called VII or Viscosity Index Improvers. There are four types. One is in fact shear proof but it also has a bad effect on extreme cold flow and is restricted to use in specialty oils. A second has limited shear called a 0-5 SSI polymer. Meaning its shear is limited to a range of zero to five percent as reported by the ASTM D6278 Shear Stability Index test. A few high end oils, like Torco SR-5, use them and brag about it profusely. Actually all that use it point it out. The last two shear dramatically and are often marketed as a 'feature' of the product aiding the oil to meet fuel standard requirements of ever stricter rules. One shears more than 5% and the other up to 20%. As you make guess, cost is directly linked to shear down and as such the majority of oils use the cheapest organic polymers sold to make grade and pass stringent tests.    PPD's or Pour Point Depressants also shear a bit, only a few percent and hide inside the 0-5 SSI capabilities.    The blender knows he can not out engineer Stribeck. Physics is not a suggestion. But he can wordcraft the unsuspecting toward believing a false claims INFERENCE. This is LEGAL. It is COMMON, and it is EFFECTIVE.         
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...