Jump to content

Bilstein shocks thread

yanzhixiang

By yanzhixiang
in Modifications & Accessories

 Share

Recommended Posts

Ezekiel2517 Enthusiast

Ezekiel2517

Posted
Posted

Holy cow. The ones being sold for Tundras are almost $800. I think I just lost interest :-)

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

bwilloby46
bwilloby46

I put the bilstein 5100s on the rear of my 14 High Country with a new 2" block a few weeks ago. Ride is unbelievable compared to stock. Liked it so much I got the adjustable 5100s for my front, remove

schloppy
schloppy

Hello, I'm not new to the forum but I just joined and figured I'd contribute to the community.   2016 Silverado 1500 "Z71" removed rancho's and swapped with Bilstein 5100's all around. So after d

Jullian is not my name
Jullian is not my name

I just got done with installing my 6112's on my 2014 GMC Sierra Crew Cab.  Reading some install guides on here really helped, along with printing some Chilton Repair guide torque specs that I got from

Posted Images

nadrojcote Senior Enthusiast

nadrojcote

Posted
Posted

They're designed for heavy off road use and come with coils, those are a lot cheaper than other competitors. Still lots of people will think more $ means a better shock, then they will throw them on their mall crawlers and wonder why they ride so stiff.

WendysOrBust Enthusiast

WendysOrBust

Posted
Posted

Holy cow. The ones being sold for Tundras are almost $800. I think I just lost interest :-)

That's really not all that bad. Fox coilovers for our trucks run around $1,600

  • Like 1
WendysOrBust Enthusiast

WendysOrBust

Posted
Posted (edited)

Exactly

I most truck guys, think in terms of $$$ to amount of lift. So for $800 one could get a 4-6"lift. But buying parts that increase actual off-road performance and suspension travel are expensive. I'd hate for Spurshot to come around and let people know how much his front King coilovers cost.

 

Not saying Zuhl did that. But coming from someone who has spent $2k on coilovers for his auto-x car, $800 is a really good price for someone looking for better off-road, on-road performance without breaking the bank.

Edited by WendysOrBust
  • Like 4
Crf450r420 Enthusiast

Crf450r420

Posted
Posted

I've got $2400 in my cars coil overs, so $800 isn't bad at all. These are suppose to be a lifetime shock also. I won't be going off road at first as the truck is to pretty, but that will change. As a matter of fact I already have 2 dents, a scratch, and a door chip in the right rear corner thanks to other thoughtful people (I'd be in jail if I caught them). For that reason I'll be putting these on soon and not using them for off road right away.

Spurshot Senior Enthusiast

Spurshot

Posted
Posted

I think there's a big misunderstanding of large off-road shocks. These large off-road shocks are generally damped to much lower values than on-road shocks. This allows the suspension to move much more freely when driving down that bumpy two-track at 50 mph. The large diameters are for added capacity of fluid to remain cool. Also, expensive off-road shocks usually have sophisticated variable damping rates. I don't mean "adjustable rates", but they often have adjustable rates along with variable rate damping. A good off-road shock doesn't act anything like those factory Ranchos.

  • Like 2
Ezekiel2517 Enthusiast

Ezekiel2517

Posted
Posted

I just wanna lift my front end an inch or two to allow for some 33s. And to get a better ride. It currently sucks. I think toward that simple goal, $800 is a lot. For other goals, such as hard core offroad capability, $800 is peanuts. But that is what the polaris is for :-)

 

I guess its all about personal context...

  • Like 1
WendysOrBust Enthusiast

WendysOrBust

Posted
Posted

I just wanna lift my front end an inch or two to allow for some 33s. And to get a better ride. It currently sucks. I think toward that simple goal, $800 is a lot. For other goals, such as hard core offroad capability, $800 is peanuts. But that is what the polaris is for :-)

 

I guess its all about personal context...

I would just go with the 5100's then.

Crf450r420 Enthusiast

Crf450r420

Posted
Posted

Spur is right larger capacity will handle more movement and not get as hot. Also the variable in the valves is the flex in valve stacks, so the quicker the move the more they bend and close of the passage to control rapid movement different from low speed changes. The large valves allow for more progressive control.

Spurshot Senior Enthusiast

Spurshot

Posted
Posted

I just wanna lift my front end an inch or two to allow for some 33s. And to get a better ride. It currently sucks. I think toward that simple goal, $800 is a lot. For other goals, such as hard core offroad capability, $800 is peanuts. But that is what the polaris is for :-)

 

I guess its all about personal context...

 

One of the members here got some standard black shocks that were someone's take-offs. I don't recall what he had to say about them. Might be a path worth exploring if budget is limited.

nadrojcote Senior Enthusiast

nadrojcote

Posted
Posted

The black shocks ride a lot nicer than z71's. My friends silverado LT with black shocks is night and day difference compared to mine.

yuhdabest Enthusiast

yuhdabest

Posted
Posted (edited)

The 6112 are not out yet for the trucks, only the 5100. The 6112 is much more massive compared to the 5100 and is designed for the weekend offroader.

 

Let us know if we can answer any questions!

 

I have a 2015 Sierra 1500 5.3 SLT I know the part numbers for the Bilstein 5100 (24-238304) fronts but I can't find anybody who has them in stock. Why?

Edited by yuhdabest
yuhdabest Enthusiast

yuhdabest

Posted
Posted

I have a 2015 Sierra 1500 5.3 SLT I know the part numbers for the Bilstein 5100 (24-238304) fronts but I can't find anybody who has them in stock. Why?

Jon A Senior Enthusiast

Jon A

Posted
Posted

The larger body and piston basically allows the shock to do a better job at whatever it is valved to do. I wouldn't be surprised if these both ride better over bumps offroad and handle better. They look like a higher quality shock than the 5100's all around.

 

My concerns personally are:

 

1) The spring rate. Some of their advertising mentions using softer than stock springs which might ride nicely offroad but wouldn't be what you want for towing. I'd want to verify that before jumping.

 

2) Length. I think anybody wanting to spend this much money on front shocks probably is best served with a shock that gives proper suspension travel on a "leveled" front end. If they're the same length as stock you run into the same limitation you do with the 5100s.

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      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? 
    • Coastie05
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Coastie05 · Posted

      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. 
    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      AFM is confirmed in the Corvette engine, so I'm assuming the higher volume trucks will get it as well
    • NDKoze
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By NDKoze · Posted

      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.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      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...