Jump to content

SHocking Question


Recommended Posts

Posted

I have a 14 Sierra SLT All Terrain. Have the Rancho shocks on the rear. 22980432. 8500 miles on my truck. I carry about 400 lbs of part and tools in the back of my truck, and the truck bounces about 3 times with every bump. Never had the problem on my 91 GMC I just sold. This truck had the Monroe shocks. Id like to install Monroe rear shock on my truck (911533) but i'd like to compare the specs to see if this is going to accomplish anything. Cant find any specs of the Ranchos. Does anyone know where i can get the specs? Also waiting on my Back ordered headlights! Will be nice to see on a dark road.

Posted

I just want to compare the piston sizes and whatever specs are avalable. I need to find a shock that doesnt allow my truck to bounce with such a light load.

Posted

You need to compare damping rates. Nothing else will give you info about ride quality.

 

Most off-road racing shocks have huge pistons and very low damping rates. The two are independent of each other, especially in the off road applications.

 

It's unlikely that you'll consistently find the full specs with damping rates for all makes, especially a GM OEM shock.

Posted

Just go 4600 or 5100....you will be very pleasantly surprised if you're wanting a controlled ride.

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Today I took off my rear Rancho shocks, and replaced them with Monroe Magnum 34690. ($64.00 for two) Fit perfect, and cured my problem. My truck no longer bounces 3 times with a light load. I feel no difference in the ride. Still smooth.

Posted

It wouldn't have been a warranty issue because the ranchos were working. The were still fully pressurized. They just cant handle much weight in the bed. The Monroe's are working perfect. And cant beat the price. Now to deal with my headlight problem. still waiting on the dealer to get the new bulbs in

Posted

The Rancho shocks have damping characteristics that never suited me. Too much damping (stiff on the little bumps).

 

Monroe shocks are owned by the same company, Tenneco.

Posted

Couldn't that have been a warranty issue with your truck being so new and low miles?

No, not at all.

It's not a warranty issue, his shocks did not have a defect. They are GM factory junk. GM has Tennoco build their shocks and in this case, painted them white and slapped a Rancho sticker on them.

They are terrible, have been for years and the only fix is to replace them with a better quality shock/strut.

GM should go back to using the Bilstein's from the factory like they used for the Z71 suspension years ago. 7100's or 4600's, much better than the Tennoco ones they use now.

 

I recently tossed the factory shocks (Rancho/Tennoco) on my 2010 after a horrible trip to WV with 2 atv's on the trailer. It was the worst haul ever. Replaced them with the Rancho RS9000XL. Fronts with their Quick Lift, uses the same shock. Best decision I've made and the adjustability is amazing. It was either those or Bilstein 5100's. Went with the Rancho's simply because they offered a complete strut assembly and Bilstein did not.

Going to be replacing the shocks (blue Tennoco) on my 08 V-Max as well. Factory shocks are terrible towing the camper.

 

 

Sent from my crappy iPhone 6

using Tapatalk

Posted

Sounds like I need to put the Bilstein's on my AT as well then. I had mine leveled in the rear and as someone else stated when I run over a dip in the road the rear end blows thru the shock travel and then bounces for a bit.

Posted

I'm a shock/suspension newbie. I know that I don't like the ride of my '15 Z71 compared to my 2010 Z71 or my 2000 Z71. In fact, the 2000 probably had the best ride. It sounds like the Bilstein 4600's would be a good choice. I've also read that the 5100's would work - but I have no interest in leveling.

 

Should I go 4600 or 5100? If someone could help with specific part numbers, that would be great. It seems the info on Bilstein's site is somewhat dated.

 

Thanks.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.6k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    343,007
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Brendan C
    Newest Member
    Brendan C
    Joined
  • Who's Online   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,179 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • The oil filter has NOTHING To do with oil leak. GM sources parts from 1,000's of vendors and as with anything mass produced, flaws are unavoidable.    Putting a larger oil filter will do nothing but satisfy emotions. The OEM filter is designed for the engine and perfectly capable of handling the demands on the engine. Oversize oil filter could result in reduced flow and overall lower oil pressure.
    • You're better read than that Atlas. 😏   British science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke formulated three adages that are known as Clarke's three laws, of which the third law – that "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" – is the best known and most widely cited.   Stribeck and the pivotable Hersey Number isn't voodoo nor snake oil. That part is physics. It's what marketing and bean counters do with it that is snake oil and voodoo.    Stribeck is the relationship between Hersey and the Coefficient of Friction. Within the Hersey Equation if viscosity and viscosity is 'Dependent' on.......heat.......and.......viscosity index or the temperature to viscosity slope.    Specifically Hersey is the viscosity AT THE TEMPERATURE IN THAT LOCATION FOR THAT SLOPE.   Hydrodynamic lubrication exist when the film thickness in the location is 3X the Ra roughness of the surface. This is irrespective of the hardness of the substrate. To obtain that thickness X viscosity is required for Y velocity at Z load. That's a lot of moving parts. It is also impossible to maintain in an ICE but nearly possible with a turbine under constant load.    What does that mean? Error heavy and operate light. Wear is inevitable but the rate of wear and the milage obtainable are a function of prevailing conditions and HABITS. The only penalty is viscous drag and at fractions so low as to be well worth the effort. Double the life, half the manufacturing carbon foot print. Greed is the only impediment.    The materials generated by SwRI are the RESULT not an estimation or a hypothesis.    Don't delude yourself sir, EV's have as many pitfalls as ICE's. We just don't know what they are yet and it will take longer to sort as MARKETING and GREEDY CEO's have had more time to polish the turd they are selling. 
    • You can always count on greed to prey on ignorance and stupidity.    Friend bought a 2019 Ford Flex and asked me about using Valvoline R&P 5W30 in it. Told him give the miles on it and the fact it wasn't yet using oil that it was a good plan. He uses a Valvoline quick change shop for his oil service.   First they tell him that isn't the oil the OEM recommends. He told them he didn't care what the OEM thought. Then they floated the, "But it will void your warranty"    His reply was it's a 2019, there is no warranty and informed them their knowledge of the law was lacking.    Then they tell him 'But it will ruin your motor"!.    Mine to ruin he says. Finally they give in and charge him 150% the semi-syn price    Point it the brainwash is so embedded that even the service industry is drunk on their swill. The public is right behind them. Echoing the same lies on every forum and media platform. If the end goal is indeed EV then I'd say that ship is about built. 
    • Diesel hit $6.00 here today at the truck stop.   Payed $2.79 for E85 today too.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...