Jump to content

AT4 rubbing with 35s and 6” lift

Antonio Kheir
 Share

Recommended Posts

Antonio Kheir Enthusiast

Antonio Kheir

Posted
Posted

Hey guys. Just made an account! So my dad just bought a 2019 Sierra AT4 and installed a 6” RC lift with 35” ridge grapplers on a 22X10 wheel with 1/4” backspaces. He has the gmc brembo upgrade kit. He seems to be rubbing on the outer front fenders while turning with minimal flexing. I don’t have the specs for the offset nor the backspacing  yet. I will be getting that info tomorrow. Any ideas on what he needs to do to minimize or eliminate the rubbing? He put me in charge of figuring this stuff out haha. Thanks!

A7113F0F-6DF5-4DC0-94A1-49B1A94864EC.jpeg

2F5F4E87-1B58-498C-8078-1D612000733A.jpeg

2D261572-8350-4CEF-90B2-9D5D52C11D84.jpeg

jimmyboy8301 Senior Enthusiast

jimmyboy8301

Posted
Posted

first off since that's an AT4 according to RCX their 6" kit will not fit it, only their 4" kit. I'd check to confirm it actually has the 4" kit being as according to RCX the 6" kit will not AT4's. I'm assuming the tires are rubbing due to the width and backspace/offset of the wheels and the GMC's HORRIBLE fender design. Your most viable option is to trim the inside of the fenders a little

gothp28 Enthusiast

gothp28

Posted
Posted

Those rims should not need a spacer so if you removed the space and you would move the tire a little more in the Fender and it should clear no problem.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

z1boss Enthusiast

z1boss

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, jimmyboy8301 said:

first off since that's an AT4 according to RCX their 6" kit will not fit it, only their 4" kit. I'd check to confirm it actually has the 4" kit being as according to RCX the 6" kit will not AT4's. I'm assuming the tires are rubbing due to the width and backspace/offset of the wheels and the GMC's HORRIBLE fender design. Your most viable option is to trim the inside of the fenders a little

The 4" inch kit for the AT4/Trailboss turns the lift into 6".  Its on top of the 2 inch lift from the factory

z1boss Enthusiast

z1boss

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, jimmyboy8301 said:

first off since that's an AT4 according to RCX their 6" kit will not fit it, only their 4" kit. I'd check to confirm it actually has the 4" kit being as according to RCX the 6" kit will not AT4's. I'm assuming the tires are rubbing due to the width and backspace/offset of the wheels and the GMC's HORRIBLE fender design. Your most viable option is to trim the inside of the fenders a little

The 4" inch kit for the AT4/Trailboss turns the lift into 6".  Its on top of the 2 inch lift from the factory

jimmyboy8301 Senior Enthusiast

jimmyboy8301

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, z1boss said:

The 4" inch kit for the AT4/Trailboss turns the lift into 6".  Its on top of the 2 inch lift from the factory

i understand that, but he stated he has a " 6" RCX lift" which would indicate it's running at 8" since 6+2=8 , where as he's running a 4" RCX 4+2=6. If he was at 8" ride height and rubbed it would be a lot more disconcerting than being at 6" and rubbing...........

Antonio Kheir Enthusiast

Antonio Kheir

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for the responses. So I made a mistake, it’s actually a 4” lift kit but a 6” total as y’all stated. The wheels are a -24 offset and 4.5” backspacing. The front wheels would not clear the calipers of the Brembo brakes so we had to add the 1/4” backspacers. 

jimmyboy8301 Senior Enthusiast

jimmyboy8301

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Antonio Kheir said:

Thanks for the responses. So I made a mistake, it’s actually a 4” lift kit but a 6” total as y’all stated. The wheels are a -24 offset and 4.5” backspacing. The front wheels would not clear the calipers of the Brembo brakes so we had to add the 1/4” backspacers. 

those spacers are most likely the reason it rubs

f8l vnm Senior Enthusiast

f8l vnm

Posted
Posted

I have nothing to say to help but just damn! That is a nice rig mate. Love the stance 

Antonio Kheir Enthusiast

Antonio Kheir

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, jimmyboy8301 said:

those spacers are most likely the reason it rubs

So basically I need to tell the dealer to put different wheels with less offset, that way it tucks in the tire a little more.

jimmyboy8301 Senior Enthusiast

jimmyboy8301

Posted
Posted
So basically I need to tell the dealer to put different wheels with less offset, that way it tucks in the tire a little more.

Or get wheels that don’t rub the calibers (the best option)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Antonio Kheir Enthusiast

Antonio Kheir

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, jimmyboy8301 said:


Or get wheels that don’t rub the calibers (the best option)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The wheels I’m looking at are fuel D616 with -18 offset. Is that enough offset?

jimmyboy8301 Senior Enthusiast

jimmyboy8301

Posted
Posted
The wheels I’m looking at are fuel D616 with -18 offset. Is that enough offset?

Or the same size wheel that clears the brakes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
gothp28 Enthusiast

gothp28

Posted
Posted
So basically I need to tell the dealer to put different wheels with less offset, that way it tucks in the tire a little more.
Backspace 4.75 should fit no problem

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

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...