Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

lowered a few of these rigs so far including my 2016 escalade. my customers said it help a lot with vibration. I have a feeling the stock stance of these suvs causes air turbulance around vehicles at stock ride height which is amplified inside.

 

 

my escalade

WWW.ESKYOWNERS.COM

20160322_155630.jpg

 

That might work where you live but the first rain rutted gravel hill dirt road you drive on or snow/ice covered back road, that low rider will be begging for AAA to tow it back to the asphalt where it came from. No disrespect intended but that is a very limited use garage queen now.

Posted

 

That might work where you live but the first rain rutted gravel hill dirt road you drive on or snow/ice covered back road, that low rider will be begging for AAA to tow it back to the asphalt where it came from. No disrespect intended but that is a very limited use garage queen now.

not true. Many of my 15 up customers go with my 2/3-4 drop kit and no issues going from northern california ie bay area to lake tahoe which is 220 miles. Snow up there has not been a issue also. I also am doing the road racing event for the good guys coming up in my escalade. Thing corners like on rails now. OH also the 26 inch rims/tires are lighter than stock

 

26s 88.6 pounds

20160301_184825.jpg

here is the oem 22s with tires 90.6 pounds

20160301_184735.jpg

 

 

 

  • twitter.png
  • digg.png
  • delicious.png
  • reddit.png
  • stumble.png
  • email.png

 

5 user(s) are reading this topic

here is the 2/3-4 kit which has more than enough level for snow. best of all handles and rides better then stock. GM needs to address the height issue.. but by doing that lots of people will have trucks that will need to be at least 1.5 inches lower in front and 3 in rear

 

20160228_151411.jpg

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

no they do not the vibration is almost gone. One even went to the dealer and they confirmed it with the tool they put inside the truck and stewart chevrolet sent this into gm since gm wanted to see readings. The rear of these trucks sit much higher then previous generations. Also gm lengthened the rear lower control arms so there are difference. I lowered a lot of these trucks current and previous generation. Some customers say they have no vibration while others notice it and after lowering they said the noise pressure is gone while the vibration is barly noticeable its actually pretty drastic. My truck is slammed to the fullest and I have NO vibration at all. The trucks where they siad its almost gone are only at the 4.5 option of my drop kit so me being 1.5 lower just tells me its a airflow turbulence issue. The truck handle SO MUCH better also when lowered its just a win situation. Mine is a 3/6 drop

 

also on my truck i did front/rear swaybars along with shorter endlinks both front and rear MAJORRRR difference. Now we know gm wont lower these rigs but so far ALL THE THINGS THEY HAVE TRIED failed and I feel the design these trucks have is the killer. Well at least those customers that lower them will be happy

 

stock front links vs the new ones i install in customers trucks. Swaybar angle fixed and better cornering since bar is no parallel with ground

 

Very fascinating. I don't doubt you that the lowered vehicles have less vibration, although I am surprised. That said, I personally don't find vibration a major concern with my Yukon. It's certainly worse than most vehicles, including my F-350 one ton! But, the big issue is the noises. The boominess at lower speeds, and the "buffeting" at higher speeds. So the question is, did any of the vehicles you lowered have the booming and buffeting before lowering, and were they gone after?

 

I don't think any of the issues most of us are experiencing with these SUVs is aerodynamic. Maybe the buffeting at higher speed. But for sure the low speed boominess is mechanical in nature. At 20 kph, there is virtually no aerodynamics at play, so the harshness is mechanical. I would love to ride in your lowered version and compare that lower speed ride to mine. Mine is much better withe the 20" winter tires compared to the 22" factory, by the way. But still pretty noisy for example,min a parking lot over the gravel left over from winter, it's pretty noisy. Only on glass-like pavement is it reasonable with the 22"s on. And no, it's not in my head! I can drive one of my other two vehicle and they are very quiet and smooth. The Yukon is definitely noisier.

 

I'm also curious to know the extent of the parts changed with the lowering. Bushings? Links? It's amazing that you put such uber-low profile tires on and the vibration goes down. Completely opposite to what most folks are saying about tire profile. Most see improvement with higher profile tires. Although, myself I found all the rentals I had aboutbthensame, regardless of 18", 20" and 22".

Edited by Wrench589
Posted

 

no they do not the vibration is almost gone. One even went to the dealer and they confirmed it with the tool they put inside the truck and stewart chevrolet sent this into gm since gm wanted to see readings. The rear of these trucks sit much higher then previous generations. Also gm lengthened the rear lower control arms so there are difference. I lowered a lot of these trucks current and previous generation. Some customers say they have no vibration while others notice it and after lowering they said the noise pressure is gone while the vibration is barly noticeable its actually pretty drastic. My truck is slammed to the fullest and I have NO vibration at all. The trucks where they siad its almost gone are only at the 4.5 option of my drop kit so me being 1.5 lower just tells me its a airflow turbulence issue. The truck handle SO MUCH better also when lowered its just a win situation. Mine is a 3/6 drop

 

also on my truck i did front/rear swaybars along with shorter endlinks both front and rear MAJORRRR difference. Now we know gm wont lower these rigs but so far ALL THE THINGS THEY HAVE TRIED failed and I feel the design these trucks have is the killer. Well at least those customers that lower them will be happy

 

stock front links vs the new ones i install in customers trucks. Swaybar angle fixed and better cornering since bar is no parallel with ground

 

Very fascinating. I don't doubt you that the lowered vehicles have less vibration, although I am surprised. That said, I personally don't find vibration a major concern with my Yukon. It's certainly worse than most vehicles, including my F-350 one ton! But, the big issue is the noises. The boominess at lower speeds, and the "buffeting" at higher speeds. So the question is, did any of the vehicles you lowered have the booming and buffeting before lowering, and were they gone after?

 

I'm also curious to know the extent of the parts changed with the lowering. Bushings? Links? It's amazing that you put such uber-low profile tires on and the vibration goes down. Completely opposite to what most folks are saying about tire profile. Most see improvement with higher profile tires. Although, myself I found all the rentals I had aboutbthensame, regardless of 18", 20" and 22".

 

 

 

 

 

 

oh yah rear swaybar upgrade/endlinks and greaseable bushings

20160311_175724.jpg

 

stock bar left vs bigger bar right

20160311_163159.jpg

 

 

 

 

just like the other 07-14 with autoride if you go onto tahoeyukonforum people running my custom kits agree rides better then oem. I will keep everyone updated as I go on and do more trucks.

 

POTHOLES like crazy in san francisco I have no issues driving mine on 26s. If you want a tire with more sidewall you can do a 24x10 with 30mm offset and a 305 35 24.

Posted (edited)

not true. Many of my 15 up customers go with my 2/3-4 drop kit and no issues going from northern california ie bay area to lake tahoe which is 220 miles. Snow up there has not been a issue also. I also am doing the road racing event for the good guys coming up in my escalade. Thing corners like on rails now. OH also the 26 inch rims/tires are lighter than stock

 

I know you're a (proud) vendor but statements like this can highlight your objectivity

 

I live in SF, not valid that a dropped SUV on 26s can make it *safely* to Tahoe during real snow unless you're creeping along at 10mph

 

A light dusting at lower elevations maybe but that usually means there is 4-12 inches on the roads closer to Tahoe, which would be havoc on a vehicle with no road clearance, and we're not even mentioning you'll have almost no grip on non-winter tires plus no room for chains when required

 

If the CHP doesn't turn you around, you'll get turned around on your own

Edited by boazEarl8
Posted (edited)

Never have had any of my customers have issues wuth 4wd on my 2/3-4 kit going to tahoe

 

Leveled another 15 tahoe today. Vibration she stated is gone. Progressive rate springs are working.

 

64 year old lady also happy she can get in easier.

 

Another tahoe travelers truck I did. Nnbs but same deal no probs going to tahoe.

 

http://www.tahoeyukonforum.com/threads/come-along-with-norcal-ss-on-a-lowering-escapade-on-a-2011-tahoe.73989/

Edited by NORCAL SS
Posted

If that should aggravate you, well that's just too bad.

Having a little trouble with your memory, are you? Your words, not mine. Check you own posts.

 

And really, referring to me being in Canada? That's the best you got? LMAO at how silly that is. Ohhhh, maybe you're going to build a wall here now! LOL!

Posted

I hope when im as "old" as you I have better things to do then what your doing

Ah NORCAL, The trick is to first become old. Then you can focus on all the exotic things you're going to do, heh, heh! No easy feat. Sometimes, between posting on this forum and watching Man vs Food reruns I reflect on how is it possible that I'm still here! Lots of luck and the good Lords guiding hand for sure!

 

Btw, noticed that you have a 2011 Avalanche? How do you like it? When the Avalanche first came out I came within an inch of buying one instead of a truck. How does it ride, more like a Suburban or more like a truck?

 

Well, take care of yourself and keep working on your old age. You'll be amazed by how fast you get there :)

Posted (edited)

No I have a 2011 escalade and 2016 escalade..... and 2016 z06 and 2013 ctsv and 96 impala ss with 33k miles. I love my gm vehicles

Edited by NORCAL SS
Posted

No I have a 2011 escalade and 2016 escalade..... and 2016 z06 and 2013 ctsv and 96 impala ss with 33k miles. I love my gm vehicles

I have the exact same collection, minus the 2016 vehicles.

Posted

Never have had any of my customers have issues wuth 4wd on my 2/3-4 kit going to tahoe

Leveled another 15 tahoe today. Vibration she stated is gone. Progressive rate springs are working.

64 year old lady also happy she can get in easier.

Another tahoe travelers truck I did. Nnbs but same deal no probs going to tahoe.

http://www.tahoeyukonforum.com/threads/come-along-with-norcal-ss-on-a-lowering-escapade-on-a-2011-tahoe.73989/

So, are the factory springs constant rate? Thinking about it, a progressive rate should provide a much smoother ride than a fixed rate, shouldn't it. Maybe that accounts for the "harshness" of the ride. My dealer did the shock/strut upgrade but I think all that changed was the shocks, not the springs. Not sure, though. In my case, it made the vehicle less stable and it seems to "wallow" a bit more over dips and around corners, but the harshness over small bumps, gravel, etc is about the same. Maybe different springs are in order??

Posted

yes factory is a linear spring. here is another truck i just finished up. leveled rear ride/cornering much better.

 

So, any chance progressive springs for stock ride height are available? I'm not too keen on lowering the vehicle at all, although lowering the rear to level somewhat wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. It does sit abit high in the rear.

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

    • I hope to high heaven this is wrong. My Chevy farm trucks frame is lasting way longer than a newer Nissan Titan XD I got for a steal, and it only pulls trailers. A decade younger and it's frame is already way rustier than the waxed Chevy I drive across longs and ditches. Also, hasn't Ford been having tones of troubles with rusted frames? 
    • Batteries don’t always show signs of a few years ago my vehicle started fine in the morning and took me to work. After work the battery was completely dead and I needed a jump. No, I didn’t leave anything on and the battery was only a couple months old. It was replaced under warranty. 
    • AFM is confirmed in the Corvette engine, so I'm assuming the higher volume trucks will get it as well
    • If his battery was that bad I would think it would have been showing signs before this that were ignored. Stinks that it happened the way it did in rush hour traffic, but this seems like a pretty fringe scenario. I don't mind it that bad and never turn it off. The only slight annoyance for me is the slight delay between brake to gas, but I have gotten used to it and figure if it can save a little gas why not.
    • That is a good correction. I think “severity” was probably the wrong word for what I meant. What I really mean is closer to event priority, relevance, and actionability — not “this code is severe” or “replace this part.” I agree that a truck can have a lot of trivial or historical communication codes, and if the product starts pushing alerts for every stored or low-value event, people will ignore it very quickly. So the alert logic would need to be filtered. For example, I would not want a random old communication code to generate a push notification by itself. A useful alert would probably need to be based on things like: - new vs historical - active vs stored - repeated vs one-time - duration of the event - whether it happened near the driver-marked symptom - whether it happened together with voltage drop, reset, bus-off, misfire, oil-pressure change, etc. - whether the same pattern repeats under similar conditions So instead of saying “severity,” maybe the product should organize events by affected system and priority. For example: Misfire event: Show misfire counts / roughness first, then fuel trims, RPM/load, DFM/AFM state if available, coolant/oil temp, voltage, and related DTCs. Oil-pressure event: Show oil pressure first, but only in context — RPM, load, oil temperature, coolant temperature, DFM/AFM state if available, voltage, and baseline comparison. Communication event: Show which module/network/message dropped, whether voltage dropped, whether the recorder reset, whether it was active or historical, and whether it repeated. Voltage/reset event: Show battery voltage, crank/wake/sleep state, module reset, communication dropouts, and what came back online first. That also solves the display-order problem you mentioned. The main report should not always show the same fixed list first. It should show the system that appears abnormal first, and then the supporting values for that system. I also agree that the truck already has an oil pressure gauge and MIL. The point would not be to duplicate those. The value would be in showing what else was happening before and after the warning or symptom. For example, if the MIL comes on for a misfire, the truck already told the driver there is a problem. The useful part would be: - which cylinder or bank looked abnormal first - whether it happened after an AFM/DFM transition - whether fuel trims were already moving - whether oil pressure or voltage changed at the same time - whether the same pattern happened previously without a MIL On the OBD port point, I think you may be right for a consumer-facing version. OBD is much easier for the average owner: - easier install - easier removal - inside the cabin - easier phone connection - easier data download - easier to include a pass-through port for another scanner OBD is also the right place for DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration information, Mode 6, and normal scan-tool parameters. The reason I was looking at ECM-side recording is that some events may be gone by the time someone plugs in a scanner, and some powertrain-side network evidence may not be available the same way through the DLC. But I agree that if an OBD-based version can capture enough useful evidence for most owners, that is probably the cleaner consumer product. Maybe the split is: - OBD/DLC version for most consumers - ECM-side version only if it proves it adds evidence that the OBD version cannot get - shop/pro version if deeper powertrain-side event evidence is actually useful So I would not want to force the inline approach if the OBD workflow solves most of the real-world problem. Your last point is probably the key product requirement: the report should be specific to the system showing the abnormality. Not “here are 50 parameters.” More like: “Misfire-related event detected. Here are the misfire/fuel/DFM/context values.” or “Oil-pressure-related event detected. Here is oil pressure compared with RPM/load/temp/baseline.” or “Communication event detected. Here is what dropped, when, and whether voltage/reset happened first.” That is a much better way to think about the report.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...