Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Yea I think that makes sense. All the force goes through the shock/lower control arm instead of through the balljoint/upper control arm. Still not a good idea to hammer on the shocks that hard. It would probably wear out the seals and stuff early. Not that you ever do that much on the road. 

 

I went with the Eibach leveling kit so I am at around 2.5in level so I definitely wanted to get some upgraded UCAs to help the angles. I don't think 1.8 inches is gonna hurt anything but I just don't like that the upper balljoint is held in by a piece of sheet metal on my truck. If I had the cast steel or aluminum I probably wouldn't have switched or waited until my baljoint was worn out to switch

 

 

Posted
On 2/16/2020 at 8:59 AM, Jdub289f said:

That’s good the hear! With my 5100s it felt more controlled but the stock coil doesn’t seem to be good at all. Almost like it’s maki  nag the shock do too much work. I’ll have to get the 6112 kit when my funds allow it. Should be an easy swap without having to align it since I already have the 5100 adjustables on there in the max height. 

actually that's what you want if you have a good shock.....spring just supports the vehicle and shock is responsible for dampening, spring shouldn't get in the way of shock doing its job....if you have more dampening maybe can get away with lighter spring.....but yeah you want the shock doing most of the work....

Posted

Ok needing some help deciding. I have a 2014 Sierra crew cab 5.3L z71. Right now I have a 2" level in front that mounts under the strut (1" in thickness for 2" lift). Nothing in the rear. I have 275/70/18 on stock rims. No rub noticed on pavement or off road.

 

I have 1-1.25" of rake and I like the way the truck sits. But I want to change the shocks to either the bilstein 5100 or eibach pro truck sport. I'm keeping the stock springs and losing the spacer.

 

I know what the literature states for what sort of height increase to expect. But I'd like some real world #s. I've read this thread and some seem to be getting more lift than the reported #s. Please let me know your rake with this setup. Thanks!!

Posted (edited)

the eibach kit with eibach spring sits higher than same kit with stock spring....i believe its about 1" difference more lift....so when your reading stuff note whether its stock spring or eibach….both work on same kit.

Edited by Dunn
Posted
6 hours ago, Dunn said:

the eibach kit with eibach spring sits higher than same kit with stock spring....i believe its about 1" difference more lift....so when your reading stuff note whether its stock spring or eibach….both work on same kit.

Yeah for sure, I'm talking about with stock springs. Just changing the shocks.

Posted
1 hour ago, BBinnj said:

not seeing that anymore- showing at $702.99 now...

Just checked. It is.

Posted

Well after as much reading as i could do on this Thread I've got everything set up to go on this month on the 26th.

 

Items are:

-6112 kit for front

-5160's rear

-Kryptonite UCA's (KRUCA13)

-Fuel Blitz 18x9 +1 offset

-275/70r18 Kenda RT

-1" Shackle for rear

-Zone trim plates

 

2018 Silverado w/ 13k miles 

  • Like 1
Posted
Well after as much reading as i could do on this Thread I've got everything set up to go on this month on the 26th.
 
Items are:
-6112 kit for front
-5160's rear
-Kryptonite UCA's (KRUCA13)
-Fuel Blitz 18x9 +1 offset
-275/70r18 Kenda RT
-1" Shackle for rear
-Zone trim plates
 
2018 Silverado w/ 13k miles 

You likely won’t need the trim plates. I would hold off on installing them until you get the tires put on


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posted
16 minutes ago, jgraves13 said:


You likely won’t need the trim plates. I would hold off on installing them until you get the tires put on


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was planning on that originally but these tires run large for a 275/70r18 at 33.45x11.23. Plus i do plan on taking it offroad so just would rather remove any risk of rubbing at the same time as getting the rest done. 

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

3f583df8f8dbae741b5044ae00ba7a6f.jpg
Quick picture after picking it up, will take more tomorrow: 6112’s and 5160’s


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Posted
3f583df8f8dbae741b5044ae00ba7a6f.jpg
Quick picture after picking it up, will take more tomorrow: 6112’s and 5160’s


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Looking forward to more pics? How did the trim plate install go?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,947
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Sothpaw27
    Newest Member
    Sothpaw27
    Joined
  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 442 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...