Jump to content

Bilstein shocks thread

yanzhixiang

By yanzhixiang
in Modifications & Accessories

 Share

Recommended Posts

jimmyboy8301 Senior Enthusiast

jimmyboy8301

Posted
Posted
Burns gmc did my 2 fronts for $120.
 
Do the rears yourself, literally takes 5-10 minutes if you have an impact gun.

Really? Burns did that? That’s a good price too. We got my wife’s Denali there lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • 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

truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, jimmyboy8301 said:


Really? Burns did that? That’s a good price too. We got my wife’s Denali there lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, but all I said was “how much to change my front shocks out if I have the shocks” service advisor said “oh no biggie 1/2 hour labor each one.”

 

I don’t think they realized they had to convert the spring over to the new one. Probably assumed I had the whole assembly to swap out or something. I too got much higher estimates from other places.

 

that did not include alignment because I left it at factory height

jimmyboy8301 Senior Enthusiast

jimmyboy8301

Posted
Posted
Yes, but all I said was “how much to change my front shocks out if I have the shocks” service advisor said “oh no biggie 1/2 hour labor each one.”
 
I don’t think they realized they had to convert the spring over to the new one. Probably assumed I had the whole assembly to swap out or something. I too got much higher estimates from other places.
 
that did not include alignment because I left it at factory height

Hahahahaha that’s funny


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yondu Enthusiast

Yondu

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, truckguy82 said:

Yes, but all I said was “how much to change my front shocks out if I have the shocks” service advisor said “oh no biggie 1/2 hour labor each one.”

 

I don’t think they realized they had to convert the spring over to the new one. Probably assumed I had the whole assembly to swap out or something. I too got much higher estimates from other places.

 

that did not include alignment because I left it at factory height

HD trucks use front shocks like the pre 2007 trucks. Those trucks are really fast the front shocks are very similar to the rear shocks and how easy they are to install.  I could see a shop charging 2 hours her front strut, but I don't know what the book time is. Rear shock would probably be half hour.

chuckworkb Enthusiast

chuckworkb

Posted
Posted

Has anyone replaced the fronts on a 2015 Sierra themselves?  I think I'm going to get the 5100's for my truck and replace the stock Ranchos. If so how hard was it to do in the driveway? 

 

 

Yondu Enthusiast

Yondu

Posted
Posted

I did on a 18 Silverado, same process.  I feel like both took 4 hours.  I found it easiest to use my jack to compress the strut setup as I installed it after I loosely bolted in the top. Jack stands under the truck.  That and a pry bar and it wasn't too bad.  

 

To compress the existing spring to fit it on I used 3 spring compressors, usually you use 2 but I had to really compress it and the 3 compressor seemed a lot safer.  

FlipZ71 Enthusiast

FlipZ71

Posted
Posted
On 12/8/2018 at 8:11 AM, Yondu said:

Mine had some gap when they were assembled and not installed. The weight of the truck compressing it further took that gap away.  It's kind of a pain to check for installed and the truck on the ground, but I did last night.  

Hey , Yondu...   I found I have the same problem...  but mine is multiplied with an additional issue.. 

 First off I noticed the billies helped the ride significantly but had harshness with up travel and the truck would spring off.... 

Everyone I spoke too said... hard tires , lifted , gonna ride that way....   I refused to believe it....  research,  researched....  

And checked...   my bump stop is resting as you stated yours is.....   the bump stops are an important part of the suspension system , but my truck should not be sitting on them....  

Bilstein... 24-238304 is 15" collapsed and 18.860 extended...   nets only 3.860 worth of shock travel , then the bump stop slows down the hard upper hit to keep from bottoming the shock.  The shock is supposed to be designed in conjunction with our truck spring rates....  

  But I'm finding out that isn't necessarily optimized for the quality of ride I was looking for.  As to why um resting on the bumps ?? Not sure yet...   I've been told by 2 separate suspension companies that the 5100 on our trucks on the lowest setting is not true factory set up....  they said it is in height , but the valving set up in conjunction with our spring rates does not allow for the 5100 to soak up the hard hits correctly....  I felt the 5100 certainly improved over stock issues.....  

   To compound my issue is that I have a zone 4.5 lift.  I found out from zone the other day that this lift nets in 3/8 worth of loss in total shock travel in the front ...  

  So...  I'm currently waiting on info back as to why my set up is sitting against bump stop.

  Anyway ...  I'm rambling.....   but curios to hear if you found any info as to why yours is hitting the bump stops????

Yondu Enthusiast

Yondu

Posted
Posted

I had considered removing them to cut the bumpstops back some, so there is a gap. In the past I did this when I lowered a car. I ended up throwing weight in the bed (started with 240lbs, I think - terrible memory) and my highway bounce got significantly better and the ride was a lot nicer.  This told me the front wasn't the issue, so I kind of forgot about the front struts and their bump stops.  

 

I'm not sure if I have the energy to disassemble everything to see if it ride any better after taking an inch or so out of the stops.  Unless of course you tell me how great it rides after...hahaha

MBSierra17 Enthusiast

MBSierra17

Posted
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, FlipZ71 said:

Hey , Yondu...   I found I have the same problem...  but mine is multiplied with an additional issue.. 

 First off I noticed the billies helped the ride significantly but had harshness with up travel and the truck would spring off.... 

Everyone I spoke too said... hard tires , lifted , gonna ride that way....   I refused to believe it....  research,  researched....  

And checked...   my bump stop is resting as you stated yours is.....   the bump stops are an important part of the suspension system , but my truck should not be sitting on them....  

Bilstein... 24-238304 is 15" collapsed and 18.860 extended...   nets only 3.860 worth of shock travel , then the bump stop slows down the hard upper hit to keep from bottoming the shock.  The shock is supposed to be designed in conjunction with our truck spring rates....  

  But I'm finding out that isn't necessarily optimized for the quality of ride I was looking for.  As to why um resting on the bumps ?? Not sure yet...   I've been told by 2 separate suspension companies that the 5100 on our trucks on the lowest setting is not true factory set up....  they said it is in height , but the valving set up in conjunction with our spring rates does not allow for the 5100 to soak up the hard hits correctly....  I felt the 5100 certainly improved over stock issues.....  

   To compound my issue is that I have a zone 4.5 lift.  I found out from zone the other day that this lift nets in 3/8 worth of loss in total shock travel in the front ...  

  So...  I'm currently waiting on info back as to why my set up is sitting against bump stop.

  Anyway ...  I'm rambling.....   but curios to hear if you found any info as to why yours is hitting the bump stops????

Could you take a picture of the contact you have? I've also got Bilstein 5100 at stock height with zone 4.5. I don't think I've got any contact like you're describing. 

Edited by MBSierra17
FlipZ71 Enthusiast

FlipZ71

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, MBSierra17 said:

Could you take a picture of the contact you have? I've also got Bilstein 5100 at stock height with zone 4.5. I don't think I've got any contact like you're describing. 

 My replacement upgrade should be here in a couple of days. If I have a chance for install il get some pics 

Mozzer Enthusiast

Mozzer

Posted
Posted

5100s compared with non Rancho original GM.

Having read through hundreds of posts I haven't seen much in the way of comparison between standard GM shocks (not Rancho, Black shock). Mine is a 2014 5.3 WT.

I don't feel the jitters over small joints in the road etc that most describe for their Ranchos but I hate the feel over big bumps/undulations at high speed & speed bumps at low speed. The front wheels feel like they're actually bouncing off the ground when they rebound.

Any feedback on this application would be greatly appreciated.


Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Tapatalk

Grjfer Enthusiast

Grjfer

Posted
Posted

@Mozzer I had the Bilstein 5100's on my 2015 GMC sierra 1500. Original setup was RC 2.5 level / lift with the Ranchos. I had about 30000 miles on that set up and switched to the Bilstein's. The overall feel of the Bilstein's was a firmer more precise ride. It was a bit harsher over bumps, but settled out much quicker.I found the trade of to be well worth it. 

 

Fast forward to my current truck. 2018 GMC Sierra 1500. It has the z60 suspension package (aka black shocks) the overall ride quality is much softer. It still has some bounce, but not as bad as the Ranchos on the 15 had. I will say when I put a load on the black shocks the bounce over bumps is pretty bad. That being said I'll probably put Bilstein's on the 18, but I may just go with the 4600's. 

Mozzer Enthusiast

Mozzer

Posted
Posted

Thanks very much for your input.

I think I'll give the 5100s a try, difficult to see if my standard shock is the same or similar to your 2018 as oem sites list 4 or more different standard front shocks depending on model reference (6A1, 6A7 etc, etc) & I haven't found what those codes relate to yet.

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Tapatalk

Sierra Dan Senior Enthusiast

Sierra Dan

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Grjfer said:

@Mozzer I had the Bilstein 5100's on my 2015 GMC sierra 1500. Original setup was RC 2.5 level / lift with the Ranchos. I had about 30000 miles on that set up and switched to the Bilstein's. The overall feel of the Bilstein's was a firmer more precise ride. It was a bit harsher over bumps, but settled out much quicker.I found the trade of to be well worth it. 

 

Fast forward to my current truck. 2018 GMC Sierra 1500. It has the z60 suspension package (aka black shocks) the overall ride quality is much softer. It still has some bounce, but not as bad as the Ranchos on the 15 had. I will say when I put a load on the black shocks the bounce over bumps is pretty bad. That being said I'll probably put Bilstein's on the 18, but I may just go with the 4600's. 

The trade-off is well worth it :thumbs:

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

    • ryan35205
      Lets Talk Z60 Suspension

      By ryan35205 · Posted

      Did the KYBs keep it the same height in the front? I was concerned that pre-assembled assembly would raise it up an inch to standard non-z60 height.. I guess which it would make the rake 1 inch instead of 2 inches.
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Thank you for keeping the train on the tracks and for a thoughtful engagement. I enjoyed the reflection on a previous stance to refine and improve your position. I like that inquisitive flexibility about you Atlas.    No the process isn't sterile. Hundreds, perhaps thousands of miles of piping, vessels, pumps. Chevron, the people I worked for, were keenly aware that there is a market for what is known as their "ISOCLEAN" line of lubricants. These are lubricants that are the same as those sold bulk that are further processed by filtration to a level your particular application demands. They will filter and package and provide lab documentation as required. Do not kid yourself. Every gallon of oil that goes into a Chevron Turbine, reciprocating compressor, generator is prefiltered and tested before being charged. Lest wise it was when I was there in the plants I worked in.    There are requirements set by manufactures for the cleanliness of the oils used in their equipment. OTR such as CUMMINS has standards shared with customers on this. Commercial interest selling to Ma and Pa do, but don't share that information. Not even upon request but internally, they do exist.    The GM study sited, (Graph from Machinery Lubrication in previous post) only shows "relative" importance.  I find that fascinating. By constructing the graph like this they admit there are dozens of factors in engine life and via scientific method determined the effect of 'relative cleanliness' on engine life not in miles but in 'FACTORS'. This allows a certain amount of reverse engineering does it not?   They even provided some touchstones. Beta 75 as a reference point. Wonderful stuff!!   Smaller blenders CAN and some DO take the time and effort to do better than a refinery or large bulk blender, like Warren Oil, in improving the "in the can" cleanliness. No I don't have a list but testing could generate that information.    Again, but one of several levers we can pull to improve engine life. The simplest is keeping a clean work station while doing your own oil changes.     
    • Mykel544
      New Guy from Oklahoma

      By Mykel544 · Posted

      Thank you. I'll give it a try 
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      I just spent the last 45K miles doing samples every oil change over more than a full year to get the data for seasons and break-in to broke in.    I found the same thing to be true. Something was always teetering on done or had stepped off the cliff long before the OLM was DOA. In fact, I found about a thousand mile difference between summer and winter. That is during the winter half the OLM was STILL too long. Even the severe schedule was to long in the winter.   Now having done the work I can say I was NOT DISAPOINTED. I saw nothing I didn't already know. Nothing my father hadn't already demonstrated in his 2K OCI's pushing dated iron on dated oils and weak filters to mileages well beyond 300K.   Building on his work through use of Lab testing it wasn't hard to find the correlation between 'sight/feel/odor, the things dad relied on, and test results. Use of current viscosity stable chemistries & filters has pushed that marker for my motors out to 3K summer, 4K winter.    So the early lies were 3K on conventional oil and the lie upon the lie was 7K+. turns out to be off by a factor of two.    So... it is true that modern chemistry has doubled the useful oil life. But the base milage that came from was off by double. It's how good lies work. Partly true, sometimes mostly true so that your meter isn't set off. It also means that non-shear-stable shelf oils are only now as good as the old oils were in their best case scenario.    So the question now is how do we improve on that? Thus the question into cleanliness among the other items listed in the post quoted below.    If this bores you, feel free not to participate.       
    • newdude
      2027 Chevrolet Silverado: Official Discussion

      By newdude · Posted

      Is it though?  Like LTZ, not a high take rate.  Current Sierra has AT4, Denali and Elevation as its main bread winners.  Each trim accounting for 25-35% of sales for Sierra.  SLT makes up about 10-15% at best.        Like others have predicted here for GMC, it will be:   - Pro (equal to WT Chevy)   - Elevation (replaces SLE and SLT)   - AT4 (and X)   - Denali (and Ultimate).  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...