Jump to content

My idea for a semi "custom" lift kit...will it work?


Recommended Posts

Posted

After hours and hours of research on different lift kits I've come up with my own version of a 3" lift. Start with some Bilstein 5100's, add a Rough Country 2" front level kit, and get a 3" block for the back. You can set the front Bilstein on a high setting, so that with the RC front kit should be 3-3.5" or so. That will leave the rear a little higher but I don't mind a small amount of rake because I do tow a boat.

 

I'm working on a budget here, so I'm looking at $400 for the 5100's and about $125 for the front and rear blocks from RC. $525 for a 3" lift that rides good and is relatively easy to install sounds pretty good to me.

 

My question is, will the ball joints hold up on a lift like this? Is 3-3.5" in front too much without upgrading the upper control arms? Ideally I would add something like the Icon control arms with the much improved ball joints, but those are almost $800 on their own.

 

Has anyone else done a similar set-up without upgrading control arms?

 

I thought about the RC 3.5 kit but the reviews are horrible, the shocks suck and the ball joints go bad in 5k miles sometimes. Plus it's almost $800 if you get their struts to go with the kit.

 

Posted

All I gotta say is, don't exceed 2.5" up front unless you're looking for issues. It's worth it to save up for the proper lift

Posted

your idea is not possible and will tear the shit out of your front end. you fail to consider that your BJ's, CV's, and TRE's will be at horrible angles. this is a fast way to snap a ball joint and watch your tire go rolling by you on the highway

Posted

Yep well that all makes sense, and that's why I asked. Thanks for the input fellas.

 

I guess I'll just get the 5100's or the spacer kit and save up for a real lift.

Posted

The Bilsteins and a 1.5" Zone body lift is another option without tearing up the front suspension.

Posted

RC 2.5 kit or bilisteiens on highest setting with the .5 spacer on the TOP of the coil will work for 2.5 inches. block for the rear. then do a body lift. there is your kit. dont go over 2.5 on the front

 

* a 2.5 kit will love the upper control arm if you can swing the money.

Posted

I have a 3 inch and haven't had one problem. Drove from Mass to Florida as well and all good. She doesn't see off road so I can't comment on that. But for a budget 3 inch just get the motofab 3 inch spacers for the front and get the readylift or rc 3 rear blocks and you won't even touch 400 bucks...240 at the most

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Posted

There is a reason why a real lift kit costs as much as they do, they keep the OEM suspension geometry pretty close to stock so your ride doesn't suffer.

 

do not stack the Bilsteins and another leveling kit. Good way to ruin your front suspension, really fast.

Posted

The Bilsteins and a 1.5" Zone body lift is another option without tearing up the front suspension.

I'd second this. I have this setup in my truck and am very happy with it. Definitely something to consider

Posted

I've looked into this set up as well looking for a budget lift. It's not worth the headache on this with premature wear on the front end. Just save up and get the right lift. That's what I'm in the process of doing now. Will have it by early next year. I'm happy with that and still lets me do little things to mod my truck for now.

Archived

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
    • 2024 Silverado 2500 HD LTZ grille no camera Parts list   84603331 84913656 84913657 84913654 84913655 84911567 84911568 85646092 85646093 85797921 85797922   11570637  x10-15   grille/bumper bolts 11546500  x10      grille clips 11571006  x10      push/retainer clips 11546454  x6       nut retainers 11611609  x6       M5 bolts 11610700  x6       molding/trim retainers
    • And use RA's 5% discount code if you buy from them.  google for the code, one is always available.
    • Just don't turn the steering wheel as much?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...