Jump to content

Bolstering 5100 vs. eibach pro truck sport

Nick z71

By Nick z71
in Modifications & Accessories

 Share

Recommended Posts

Yondu Enthusiast

Yondu

Posted
Posted (edited)

Anyone ever compare these to Bilsteins?

 

Also curious if Eibach has an opinion on ride quality/harshness using stock springs or the Eibach springs.  Seems the Eibachs use a coil with more wraps (longer) which could make it softer.  

Edited by Yondu
1940ModelB Enthusiast

1940ModelB

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, Yondu said:

Anyone ever compare these to Bilsteins?

 

Also curious if Eibach has an opinion on ride quality/harshness using stock springs or the Eibach springs.  Seems the Eibachs use a coil with more wraps (longer) which could make it softer.  

I specifically asked Eibach about their spring rate when I bought my shocks from them.  Their statement was that their springs were designed for trucks with winches and other accessories.  If you dont have a heavier front end than stock then their springs arent going to help as they are stiffer than the stock spring rate.

RHStansbury Enthusiast

RHStansbury

Posted
Posted

Are y'all replacing UCA's when you install the eibach kit?  Ready lift makes it seem like it's an absolute must to run anything larger than stock tires.  I'm looking to run 275/65s or 285/60s on my stock rims.  Maybe....the ridge grapplers in 35x11.50s if they'll fit.  Somehow Readylift is claiming they'll fit with their 2.25" kit. 

bcj001 Enthusiast

bcj001

Posted
Posted
On 11/4/2018 at 4:46 PM, RHStansbury said:

Are y'all replacing UCA's when you install the eibach kit?  Ready lift makes it seem like it's an absolute must to run anything larger than stock tires.  I'm looking to run 275/65s or 285/60s on my stock rims.  Maybe....the ridge grapplers in 35x11.50s if they'll fit.  Somehow Readylift is claiming they'll fit with their 2.25" kit. 

I didn't change my UCA's, and have no issues with rubbing,  (Eibach kit including springs installed on lowest setting). I am running 275/65/R2 BFG KO2's on factory rims.

Lgetz Senior Enthusiast

Lgetz

Posted
Posted

Another option to consider is the Halo Kifts Boss Kit.  Somewhat pricey but includes springs and rear blocks.  Reviews have been positive from those who have installed them.

  • 8 months later...
spenpet Enthusiast

spenpet

Posted
Posted

I know this is an old thread, but can anyone report on their experiences since posting on Eibach with factory springs?  Any comparisons to Bilstein(better worse same)... I’m in the market and comparing the two.. thanks.

  • 10 months later...
oldhick New Member

oldhick

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 10/29/2018 at 1:45 PM, Waterfowler41 said:

 

 


2.5” on the lowest setting only if you install the springs. If you do not install eibach’s springs, the lowest setting is stock height.


Waterfowler 41’s Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/brittmork

 

 

So 2.5" lift at the Lowest setting With their springs, can you get More height with the higher notch settings? if so, how much height is each notch?

 

I have a 2014 Silverado, and I am Currently running Bilstein 5100 in all 4 corners, but want just a little more up front. Bilstein states 1.85"  lift, while Eibach is 2.5". I would like to get closer to 3" without going over, but will be Happy with the 2.5" Eibach's 

 

Good Video by the way

Edited by oldhick
  • 1 month later...
oldhick New Member

oldhick

Posted
Posted

I know old post, but I went ahead a went with the Eibach kit set on 1st notch which is 2.5" lift and stock UCA's, and sitting at 38.5" Drivers side, and 38 3/4 Passengers side.  

I have a SuperSprings helper spring on the rear of my truck to help with towing a Travel trailer. The helper spring took the rear up to 40", so almost an inch higher in rear now, which gives the truck the front down rake again. Thinking of getting rid of the helper spring and staying stock in rear. That way it'll sit fairly level.

What are some thoughts about keeping rear helper spring and going up to the SECOND notch on the Eibachs, and getting Cognito upper control arms. The second notch on the Eibachs with their springs say 3.2" online, but in the instructions that came with my kits, it says second notch is 3"

 

Below my 2014 Silverado LT with Eibach PRO lift front struts and springs, and Eibach rear shocks, along with a SuperSpring helper spring in rear.

20200723_163339-1.jpg

  • 4 months later...
RustyBelt New Member

RustyBelt

Posted
Posted

Installed new Arnott/Eibach rear shocks with air leveling included on our 2015 GMC Yukon XL Denali to bypass the poor performing MRC

Went in perfectly, the electronic bypass was an exact match to the GMC OEM connector, no codes so far

Auto level works the same, pumped up at install haven't heard the compressor come on since.  Ride height is about 1' higher 

Wife loves the new smoother ride over speed bumps and dips no more double or triple bounce.

Front Arnott/Eibach front struts are on order will be here next week for install

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

    • James Beyer
      Trading 7.3 (Godzilla) for G.M.C gas

      By James Beyer · Posted

      Congratulations Isttype, on your gmc. Really like my 2024 2500hd sle doublecab now with 85,500 miles.  I checked the oil today at 4800 miles since last oil change and barely reading on the stick.  I don't care if GM says it's Acceptable adding a quart every 2000 miles because that is 100% BS, It is not a 1966 Harley Shovelhead! Sounds like it's setting up a future failure like I had with my 1500 6.2l. Other than oil consumption problems, I really like the 6.6l gas and 10 speed is really nice.  Towed a light 4000 pound trailer last week and averaged 14 mpg.  I was pretty impressive that a 7300 pound gas truck did 14mpg towing, Later-
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Long Term Cold Cycle Limited Testing   Back to the 1990's and XOM's million mile test. Since then there have been others and there will be more. Schaeffer's, AMSOIL to name two. Of these Schaeffer's is the stand alone which I will explain in a bit later.    http://papers.sae.org/600190/:   http://papers.sae.org/850215/:   Up to 75% of  engine wear occurs on cold starts. These two links (above) provide the technical reasons for engine wear. In a nut shell, and by a large margin, cylinder wear is what takes out most motors and even with a pre-oiling system that part of the engine is dry enough on cold starts and cold warm up to pierce Stribeck.   So when you put a motor, or a car, on a dyno for a million miles stopping only for oil changes, (yes fuel is uninterrupted) or break down maintenance, you are depriving the test of the most important part of it's wear cycle. Yes a million is then a pretty easy walk even for a mineral oil under those conditions.    How about cleanliness during the long test cycles? Same thing. Varnishes that stick rings and insulate parts are laid down by repetitive 'heat cycles'. It's the cool down the precipitates the varnishes. These long runs also hinder acidic attack caused by cold start richness and less than optimal cold start ring sealing. They hinder water formation and enhance breathing of the crankcase; the petri dish of acid formation, the first step in sludge formation, amalgamation and precipitation. These motors are also monitored and controlled for water and oil temperatures to within the "normal operating range".      https://www.swri.org/sites/default/files/sequence-iiih-test.pdf Note the test sequence in some boutique oils literature for testing, API IIIH, is not the standard used for the ILSAC G7 testing. Does that mean it is irrelevant? No, not as used. As used as a 'visual guide' it makes it's point. The G7 weighted piston deposit minimum is lower.      Back to Schaeffer's. That was a cyclical test of an engine in fleet service and not a dyno mule and if you saw the video it was not mirror clean but wear was low.    There are oils like BioSyn and other 'Renewable" source oils that taught cleanliness and have proven themselves in fleet testing. Havoline an other example.    The newest ILSAC G-7 test prioritize cleanliness, LSPI mitigation and fuel economy OVER WEAR. In comparison Porsche C30 Specification Verses ILSAC G-7 Specification below:      Some will balk that this graph isn't apples to apples and I will challenge that in that this graph represent the SPECIFICATION and not the any One Oil Performance.   It is absolutely possible to minimize wear, maximize cleanliness and mitigate LSPI etc., It just isn't cheap and currently I see none that are not walking toward profit over performance.     
    • asilverblazer
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      I don't think you will need a split, separate product, etc., the OBD port should be able to deliver everything you need. Since your device would be plugged into it all the time, it wouldn't miss anything.    Hardware in this case will be the easiest part of your project - ELM 327 devices will already deliver all the data you need. Reporting/software is where your advantage/marketability is.
    • Coastie05
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Coastie05 · Posted

      I do too. I’ll never be stuck again 😂
    • KARNUT
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By KARNUT · Posted

      It has happened to me a few times. I carry a jumpstart-tire inflator with me.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...