Jump to content

Bilstein shocks thread

yanzhixiang

By yanzhixiang
in Modifications & Accessories

 Share

Recommended Posts

badfnz Enthusiast

badfnz

Posted
Posted

Here is where I stand but need some opinions. I currently have the stock Ranchos and a 2" level (below the shock only). I can:

 

1. Keep the level, and install 5100s on the bottom level. The problem with this is the 5100 is a longer shock so coupling this with the level is no bueno.

2. Lose the level and install 5100s on the highest level. This will give me about the same height, but having the shocks at the highest level preloads the springs, giving me a worse ride.

3. Keep the level and install 4600s. This will give me the same height and an improved ride with the Bilsteins over the Ranchos.

 

Choice 3 seems obvious to me but am I thinking choice 2 correctly? Does the ride get worse as you raise the spring bases up? I've read on here that it does but since the whole point of raising the spring bases is to raise the truck, I'd think the spring should have the same preload on it no matter the level.

 

Halp?

  • 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

Dana Mills Enthusiast

Dana Mills

Posted
Posted

I'm running option 2 - the ride is a vast improvement over the stock Ranchos. The only time you will increase preload is if the shock absorber is topped out and cannot extend any further, thus limiting the distance between the top plate and the perch. This doesn't appear to be the case on the Z71, at least its not apparent to me.

 

If there is still room for the shock to extend with the perch used, the overall length of the whole assembly will simply increase instead of adding to the preload of the shock, thus leaving the weight of the vehicle as the only source of preload.

 

It is like the difference between the two types of spacer lifts. a coil spacer will usually achieve the top out of the shock and so preload the coil. A top plate spacer does not preload the coil, but merely extends the length of the strut. The 5100's simply do this at the other end of the strut.

 

That being said, if you use a long enough coil with the 5100's to achieve top out of the shock on the perch you are using, you will begin to preload the coil and that preload will increase with every perch you move up.

 

Here is where I stand but need some opinions. I currently have the stock Ranchos and a 2" level (below the shock only). I can:

 

1. Keep the level, and install 5100s on the bottom level. The problem with this is the 5100 is a longer shock so coupling this with the level is no bueno.

2. Lose the level and install 5100s on the highest level. This will give me about the same height, but having the shocks at the highest level preloads the springs, giving me a worse ride.

3. Keep the level and install 4600s. This will give me the same height and an improved ride with the Bilsteins over the Ranchos.

 

Choice 3 seems obvious to me but am I thinking choice 2 correctly? Does the ride get worse as you raise the spring bases up? I've read on here that it does but since the whole point of raising the spring bases is to raise the truck, I'd think the spring should have the same preload on it no matter the level.

 

Halp?

aaronarf Enthusiast

aaronarf

Posted
Posted

 

Great to hear!!

 

 

 

Thank you for the business!! These will be a nice upgrade over the stock gear.

 

 

We JUST got a new boatload of these shocks (50 units) but Im already down to just 12 pairs.

6848902c79bbb5a19fed26da7cc12c50.jpg

 

Super fast shipping, great prices. Thank you ! Highly recommend MRT.

 

They came in already...looking forward to installing them when I have some free time. Going to PM you on some wheel prices here in a little bit.

 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
tanner709 Enthusiast

tanner709

Posted
Posted

Here is where I stand but need some opinions. I currently have the stock Ranchos and a 2" level (below the shock only). I can:

 

1. Keep the level, and install 5100s on the bottom level. The problem with this is the 5100 is a longer shock so coupling this with the level is no bueno.

2. Lose the level and install 5100s on the highest level. This will give me about the same height, but having the shocks at the highest level preloads the springs, giving me a worse ride.

3. Keep the level and install 4600s. This will give me the same height and an improved ride with the Bilsteins over the Ranchos.

 

Choice 3 seems obvious to me but am I thinking choice 2 correctly? Does the ride get worse as you raise the spring bases up? I've read on here that it does but since the whole point of raising the spring bases is to raise the truck, I'd think the spring should have the same preload on it no matter the level.

 

Halp?

 

I've only heard one member say he's running a 2.5" level kit with bilsteins at the lowest setting but has a spectacular ride. I want the best ride but still achieve the 2-2.5" of lift - bilsteins are ordered.

 

more confused each day.

  • Like 2
Dana Mills Enthusiast

Dana Mills

Posted
Posted

A buddy of mine went with Bilsteins on the lowest setting combined with the ReadyLift leveling kit, which uses small spacers that sit at the bottom and top of the strut. It's more expensive than the RC kit but I like the way it's designed. My buddy's truck looks perfect - it has just under a 1/2 inch rake (not noticeable) and rides great. That said, I didn't see a major difference when driving his truck versus mine with only has the Bilsteins at the highest setting

 

 

 

I've only heard one member say he's running a 2.5" level kit with bilsteins at the lowest setting but has a spectacular ride. I want the best ride but still achieve the 2-2.5" of lift - bilsteins are ordered.

 

more confused each day.

Skeeter McSkeet Senior Enthusiast

Skeeter McSkeet

Posted
Posted

I got my set of billys on all four corners for a steal a couple years ago bc another member was running them with a spacer on top of them. Said the ride was horrible, took them off after less than a week. Adding a spacer with the billys above stock setting kind of defeats the purpose of them.

 

 

Sent from my kayak

brownclown01 Enthusiast

brownclown01

Posted
Posted

Just got a set for the front . Now I'm thinking I should be doing the rear at the same time. I don't want to raise the back should I still go with 5100s . Also read somewhere but can't fund it that maybe better to use a different model. I will be towing a travel trailer cross country this summer . Any recommendations? I think I read the maybe 5160s would be better?

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

aaronarf Enthusiast

aaronarf

Posted
Posted

Just got a set for the front . Now I'm thinking I should be doing the rear at the same time. I don't want to raise the back should I still go with 5100s . Also read somewhere but can't fund it that maybe better to use a different model. I will be towing a travel trailer cross country this summer . Any recommendations? I think I read the maybe 5160s would be better?

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

I would definitely do the rears too. I don't think they make any 5160s that are meant for stock ride height.

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

tanner709 Enthusiast

tanner709

Posted
Posted

Anyone else have the bilsteins coupled with a level or spacer? Looking for feedback asap.

Ezekiel2517 Enthusiast

Ezekiel2517

Posted
Posted

I had 4600s on the front with a 1.5" level. It was terrible. Had it replaced with 5100s on third setting. Night and day difference.

 

If anyone in Houston wants some front 4600s that have less than 3000 miles on them, PM me.

cmatt Enthusiast

cmatt

Posted
Posted

I had 4600s on the front with a 1.5" level. It was terrible. Had it replaced with 5100s on third setting. Night and day difference.

 

If anyone in Houston wants some front 4600s that have less than 3000 miles on them, PM me.

Is that the 1.6" setting on the 5100s? How much did it lift the front? I need 1.5-2.0" on my Yukon.
tanner709 Enthusiast

tanner709

Posted
Posted

I had 4600s on the front with a 1.5" level. It was terrible. Had it replaced with 5100s on third setting. Night and day difference.

 

If anyone in Houston wants some front 4600s that have less than 3000 miles on them, PM me.

 

But do you know if it was the kit or the 4600s? Did you run either setup by themselves?

 

 

Is that the 1.6" setting on the 5100s? How much did it lift the front? I need 1.5-2.0" on my Yukon.

 

1st setting - 0"

2nd - 0.75"

3rd - 1.26"

4th - 1.85"

Sikk50 Enthusiast

Sikk50

Posted
Posted

Installed mine today at the highest setting. I also upgraded the stock 255/70r17 tires to 285/70r17 Nitto's

 

Before:

FD 38 1/4

FP 37 7/8

RD 38 1/4

RP 39 1/4

 

After:

FD 40 7/8

FP 41

RD 39 3/8

RP 40

 

646BC1A2-091F-477D-AE8F-8465F7109CE5_zps

  • Like 1
MRTMotorsports Enthusiast

MRTMotorsports

Posted
Posted

Truck looks great! Thanks for posting the before/after heights!

 

 

I would definitely do the rears too. I don't think they make any 5160s that are meant for stock ride height.

 

No, those are "supposed" to be released with the 6112s up front.

 

 

Anyone else have the bilsteins coupled with a level or spacer? Looking for feedback asap.

 

We dont recommend this, just use the preset heights on the Bilstein for the optimum ride.

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

    • Chuck FB
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I had skimmed through that article when you posted the link and honestly I felt rather defeated in a sense and realized that all these years in changing oil that in fact putting in what I was told was a good quality oil was probably not filtered as well as it should be although the filter put on the engine would be what ( as long as it never went into bypass mode ) would be the final filtering of the new oil that the engine components would first see, but then the filtering media itself is not up to par to what is ideal because a full flow filter would be too restrictive to filter fine enough for the engines best outcome in the long run. Only one of our tractors over the years which was a Versatile with a 855 Cummins had a separate bypass filter, some engine manufacturers did spec a partial bypass system within the main oil filter but I don't believe any other trucks or equipment I was servicing used such a filter. No doubt a product like the Amsoil bypass system is of benefit as long as nothing goes sideways with the extra plumbing and filter such as a rupture/leak that could cause the oil to pump out of the engine ( yes that Versatile had a remote canister with hoses routed to it as well ). With the idiot egr system on a diesel and as a result forcing a lot more soot into the oil, that certainly isn't helping the diesel engines cause or as you pointed out the GDI engine issue with creating more soot and aside from having a fancy secondary filtering system, changing the oil more often helping lower the total soot load.     So oil manufacturing and the end product is not something one can control and I wonder if there are specs on what various oil packaging companies produce in particle count or size. As to the filtering, if the OEM is not designing a filter size and spec that is really what it could be, they too are short changing the end user and so what is the answer. Of course as you say the oil side can only do so much if the air side isn't keeping up its end of the picture and air filters are only so efficient and if in a dusty environment such as farm or construction or driving gravel roads there is a lot of dirt to filter out and some of that ends up into the air stream.    Of course the irony in places like where I am where they dump the salt on the highways but also will mix in some calcium or outright pure calcium for problem road area's, or using calcium as dust control on gravel roads, the vehicle that gets used in that environment may rust out before a properly engineered engine and maintenance finally wears out so one has to face that reality in the rust belt. 
    • GAMark
      Road Master Active Suspension

      By GAMark · Posted

      Has anyone run these on their 2500?
    • Erfar
      Oil Change

      By Erfar · Posted

      have you stuck with dealer oil changes since then? I made the same switch after getting tired of crawling around under the truck, but I’ve found some dealers are way better than others about getting you in quickly. Curious if yours has been good about scheduling or if you’ve had to look elsewhere for quicker turnaround.
    • cherryred21duramax
      Can anyone decode a VIN to determine if this truck has had emissions issues or a recall?

      By cherryred21duramax · Posted

      Thank you.   I am set on a 3.0 Duramax as my previous truck with a Ford Ecoboost had just as many, if not more, "common" issues.  Cam phasers, timing chain issues, 10-speed valve body and CDF drum, emissions issues, etc.  So I figured, why not get 2x the fuel mileage (these things got 27+mpg on every mixed city/highway test drive I put them through) and better towing capability with resale value to boot?   My minimum, shortest trip will be 50 miles 1-way and I regularly go out of state with a travel trailer.  I'm planning on using this for a marketing/event promotion business also, which would require regular towing of trailers for bands, DJs, sound and lighting gear, along with my personal camera gear for filming events.   Looked at other trucks in the $30k+ price range but the issues seem to be everywhere, plus too many with gaudy mods.  I'm literally sticking with RWD trucks because they tend to be actually used as trucks, vs. the 4x4 models I've seen with unsafe lifts, huge tires, and general mods that would affect reliability (I'm wondering if some of them were tuned, hence the aggressive throttle response and hard shifting).   So my goal is to find a stock, 3.0 with 1 or 2 owners, in good physical condition, and decently well maintained.  Can't seem to find that up here, everything in the $27-30k range has had multiple owners, smoke smell, issues, or body damage.  Or the ridiculously modified trucks with 80k miles for under $27k but lots of problems...
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      That’s pretty tough Grumpy. I reread the previous few posts. They all reference oil changes. Much like your last thread. In my humble opinion it keeps things interesting.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...