Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Since I wanted to keep the factory running boards (I like AMP but the OEM ones look nice to me on the HD and hide the DEF tank) I noticed they would fit a regular DOT 1/2” round side marker perfectly and the ones I used match the OEM smoke lens and amber led. I looked on the net but could not find anyone with out trucks that has done this so I did. Found the wire needed (purple with gray stripe that is connected to the rear 194 tail light bulb) then solder the connections, 2 costs of liquid tape, then 3M electrical tape and all wire ran inside vacuume line and hidden as best as I can inside truck body supports. Cost under $50. Let me know what you think.  I will post pics on next post so the replies won’t keep posting the pics. 

 

I tied into the wire harness under the driverside cab but you can run wire all the way back to the tail light if you want. Running the wire under the cab to the other side was the hardest part but it is in the support over the trans and had to unbolt (but not remove) the exhaust heat shield. 

 

Even though the holes for the led lights are 1/2”, the grommets are 9/16”. And the Diramax running board supports (the 2 next to the DEF tank) are differint and full metal back as the others are plastic areas. Just take off one support/brace at a time, drill the hole and replace. Future replacement should be pretty easy by just pushing the light out the grommet and adding a waterproof quick connect. 

Edited by EXSlider400
Posted
7 minutes ago, EXSlider400 said:

9481F9F6-16A9-4A44-8DC8-684086A1964D.jpeg

Look's Good. I have the RECON BIG RIG LED Running Light Kit - running / turn .

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

I do like that one and may add some subtle under truck white led lighting to. 

Edited by EXSlider400
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 3 months later...
Posted

I like what you have done I also picked up some lights, in what location did you tap into the trucks wiring harness?  Also did you have to add any resistors to your LED lights or inline?

 

 

Posted

No resistors. I showed in the pics where I tapped into the harness under the frame on drivers side (purple wire with grey). I also added in one behind the new lower grill I installed when I switched out the main grill. 

D0A9C5C5-E374-47B0-B160-BBC1162F0F81.jpeg

  • 2 months later...
Posted (edited)

Wow,

 

Very nice look indeed...   Thanks for the detailed pics of the wiring, you say this harness is under the truck?  Wondering how long they will last?   One last question....    the OEM step supports are steel?  Tuff to Drill?

 

I was just about to put yellow under board lights on my 3500 but this is far more classy.

 

DS

Edited by dodge stomper
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

The supports “covers” are plastic and have enough room not to drill the actual support. Except for the two that are for the DEF tank side, those or a slight bit different design and will need to be drilled in the metal. It wasn’t hard but you have to have the right drill and bits. I took off each for support 1 by 1, drilled it and then put it back on so the runningboards never had to be removed. The ones for the DEF tank are harder to remove and mount.  

Edited by EXSlider400
  • Like 1

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
  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • He is not saying that an SAE *W20 will have more viscosity than a *W40 due to MORE VII polymers. He is saying that although multiple *W40 may post in the PDS the same or similar 100 C and 150 C viscosities that the blenders choice of modifier TYPE and AMOUNT to get his chosen base to grade will not give identical real world viscosities in shear and at temperature. All will pass the SII test but not all will pass the 100 C HTHS (unpublished value) testing the blender does and relies on to get the required by law "percentage improvement' referenced to his last great work.    Tis the problem with the lie. Once told others are required to support it. 
    • I have a `25, 1500 that auto sets on incline. Never knew that at first. I have the electronic shifter. Just think if it didn`t do that? Unlike a mechanical shift that you can muscle out of park, how would you get this thing out? That would be a problem.   What I found out later is, I don`t have to push the button to release. Just put it in gear.   Setting parameters? Don`t know if it`s possible.
    • 2023 GMC 3500 HD, SLE, 6.6L Gas, 4x4, 6 Spd Options:  SLE Convenience Package; Driver Alert Package 1; Spray on Bedliner; X31 Off Road Package; TRAILERING MIRRORS, HEATED POWER -ADJUSTABLE, AUTO DIMMING, WITH TURN INDICATORS WHEELHOUSE LINERS, REAR INC. REAR AXLE - 3.73 RATIO INC. GVWR, 11,350 LBS. (5148 KG) INC. FRONT AND REAR PARK ASSIST, INC. ULTRASONIC     I have been launching my new boat and noticed some things related to the parking brake.. I usually set the parking brake (habit) when on flat ground for typical driving.    When backed down on the launch ramp to launch the boat and I place gear selector into Park, the parking brake activates automatically. My second nature is to set parking brake manually and noticed I was turing the parking brake off.  The parking brake appears to be setting itself automatically.   I looked all over my owner's manual and only found references to being on an incline and manually setting parking brake, or at times parking brake will be auto engaged, but nothing specific to my situation.    When is the parking brake automatically engaged?  Under what specific circumstances?  Can the auto set parameters be changed?     I like the auto set feature.  It would be nice if always engaged when shifted into Park and released when shifted out of Park (like my wifes 2025 RAV4).   Thanks!    
    • 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.         
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...