Jump to content

How much rake stock?

1990dtgl98
 Share

Recommended Posts

1990dtgl98 Enthusiast

1990dtgl98

Posted
Posted

Just wondering if anyone had pre-leveling measurements?

 

My 2015 z71 double cab sits at 36.25" in front and 39.25". I planned on getting the rc 2.5 lift level, but it seems the front won't be level even before adding the rear spacer. Then I thought about a motofab 3" front, 1" in rear for a bit of rake, but heard 3" might be too much for the front ball joints.

 

Anyone have a large amount of factory rake (3+ inches)? What was your solution?

 

Thanks!

Cooldaddygroove Enthusiast

Cooldaddygroove

Posted
Posted

FWIW, my 2015 Z71 Regular cab measured 36.25" front and 40" rear on the drivers side. Not sure if you have the aluminum block in your rear suspension like I had, but removing that yields a 1 3/8" drop

  • Like 1
1990dtgl98 Enthusiast

1990dtgl98

Posted
  • Author
Posted

FWIW, my 2015 Z71 Regular cab measured 36.25" front and 40" rear on the drivers side. Not sure if you have the aluminum block in your rear suspension like I had, but removing that yields a 1 3/8" drop

Did you level it? Since you have almost the same rake I was curious as to your solution.

Donstar Senior Enthusiast

Donstar

Posted
Posted

There is a lot of information and opinions on this forum regarding your question. I believe that if you level your truck so that the top of the front and rear wheel wells are equal distance to the ground your truck will look nose high.

  • Like 1
Jdkno Enthusiast

Jdkno

Posted
Posted

There is a lot of information and opinions on this forum regarding your question. I believe that if you level your truck so that the top of the front and rear wheel wells are equal distance to the ground your truck will look nose high.

Ding...ding...ding.. we have a winner. If the top of both wheel wells are level the truck will look nose high. You have to measure top of hood and top of bedrail then look at how much to lift the front.

1990dtgl98 Enthusiast

1990dtgl98

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Ding...ding...ding.. we have a winner. If the top of both wheel wells are level the truck will look nose high. You have to measure top of hood and top of bedrail then look at how much to lift the front.

Interesting. I know everyone uses the wheel well measurements. Guess I'll need to do some more investigation.

Donstar Senior Enthusiast

Donstar

Posted
Posted

Interesting. I know everyone uses the wheel well measurements. Guess I'll need to do some more investigation.

You are right that this is "interesting". It is a matter of personal preference and the positioning of your vehicle. Unless you can afford some "trial and error" installs then I recommend more investigation. My wife doesn't always share my "priorities" so I want to get it right the first time! I would go with a 2.5" level if I was adding a 2" block to the rear. (I believe stock block is 1.25"). I would only go this high if I was going to go to 33" tires. I was set (until yesterday) on a 1.5" level with and a slightly over stock tire size. My dealer currently has a truck in the showroom with a 2" bottom of strut spacer and upgraded stock size tires. To me, this is a perfect look! It looks great without my neighbours thinking I'm going through a late mid-life crises!

BigBadSierra Senior Enthusiast

BigBadSierra

Posted
Posted

I'm probably the only person on here who likes the factory rake. It reminds me of my 91 Silverado as they raked them as well.

 

But as for changing ride height on other vehicles the tape measure only ever comes out once I find a profile I like.

 

By that I mean I take the tires off set them just off of the studs.

 

Then raise and lower the back and front until I like it then measure so I can order the parts to give me what I want.

 

I'm not sure why people buy stuff then decide they don't like it after the fact.

 

A set of adjustable jack stands and a couple of jacks is all it takes.

1990dtgl98 Enthusiast

1990dtgl98

Posted
  • Author
Posted

here to pic whore.

2.5" rc level. nothing touched out back (lulz)

looks good to me

 

Vl9RJqk.jpg

That does look good. What size ko2, and do you like them? They're on my short list to put on my 18" wheels.

Deanjo Enthusiast

Deanjo

Posted
Posted

I'm probably the only person on here who likes the factory rake.

 

Nope, you are not the only one. I personally do not like the levelled look as the top of the truck box is lower than the hood on this body style. Put a bit of weight in the back and it looks like a dog dragging it's *** on the ground.

 

If I were to do anything it would be a lift and level with a 2.25" in front and a 3" in back.

jerseytaylor Enthusiast

jerseytaylor

Posted
Posted

That does look good. What size ko2, and do you like them? They're on my short list to put on my 18" wheels.

love em.

285/65/18

Donstar Senior Enthusiast

Donstar

Posted
Posted

I like a bit of a rake as well for functionality and looks. I also like a bit of height in the front of a 4x4. A little lift (1.5 - 2") of the front end won't reduce your load carrying ability or necessarily cause your truck to squat. If you want to maximize the lift from a level kit (2.5" - 3") and maintain load carrying integrity then rear blocks will be a solution.

  • 5 years later...
TexasAggie19 New Member

TexasAggie19

Posted
Posted

Have done some research and wanted to follow up with a question regarding my truck (shown here)...after taking measurements (from ground to edge of wheel well) Im noticing a 3" difference from front & back (36" in front, 39" in the back) and when looking on RC website, it looks like the standard level is 2" -- they also have a 2.5" level kit as well but the price jumps $100

 

Why is the 2.5" kit so much more money and am I even looking at the right one? Any help from someone who has done this before is super appreciated!

 

https://www.roughcountry.com/gm-leveling-lift-kit-1305-10.html?find=2018-chevy-silverado-1500-4wd-739610#278=516

 

 

ML Chevy Silverado.JPG

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

    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That makes sense, and I agree with most of that.   I think the product would need both: 1. a default powertrain template, so it is useful out of the box; 2. user-selected priority parameters, so the owner or shop can choose what they want to see first.   Different users are going to care about different things. One owner may care about oil pressure and voltage. Another may care about misfire trend, AFM/DFM behavior, or U-codes. A shop may want communication events and repeatability first. Your baseline point is probably the most important one. Raw data is not very useful unless the report can show what normal looked like for that vehicle under similar conditions.   The way I would think about it is: - start with a basic known-good baseline - learn normal behavior for that specific vehicle over time - allow the event to be overlaid against baseline - show whether the event was a one-time spike or a repeatable pattern - provide a simple severity level, but with clear limits on what that severity means   For example, early severity could be something like: - Info: event captured, no obvious abnormal pattern - Watch: value moved outside baseline, but not repeated - Warning: repeatable abnormal pattern under similar conditions - Critical: communication loss, voltage drop, bus-off, reset, or severe repeated event   I would not want the first version to say “replace this part.” That would be overclaiming unless there is repair-confirmed data behind it. It would be more honest to say “this pattern deserves inspection.”   On the OBD port question, I think OBD absolutely has a role. OBD is probably the right place for: - DTCs - freeze frame - VIN - calibration information - normal scan-tool parameters - Mode 6 / enhanced diagnostic data if available The reason I am still looking at an ECM-side recorder is that the failure may happen before anyone connects a scan tool. If the owner plugs in a scanner after the event, the pre-event evidence may already be gone unless the ECU happened to save it. So I do not see this as “OBD versus ECM-side.” I see it more like: - ECM-side recorder: always armed, rolling buffer, event evidence - OBD/DLC companion: DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration, normal scan data - phone/cloud: status, notes, upload, report generation, notifications   I agree that phone connection and push notifications would be useful. I just would not want the phone or cloud connection to be required for capture. The recorder should save the event locally even if the phone is not connected. The phone should help with event marking, download, notes, upload, alerts, and report viewing.   For a default GM V8 event report, would this list make sense? - RPM - calculated load / MAP - throttle position - vehicle speed - gear / torque converter state if available - coolant temperature - oil pressure - oil temperature if available - battery voltage - commanded AFM/DFM state if available - actual AFM/DFM state if available - misfire counters / roughness by cylinder if available - fuel trims - relevant U-codes / communication events - bus-off / lost periodic message / module reset / voltage drop events Which of those would you remove, and what would you add?

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...