Jump to content

Which level kit for RST?

jb177
 Share

Recommended Posts

c1823a Enthusiast

c1823a

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, xsquid said:

Yes don't install them the bolts come to close to the axle boots. Hit at full droop and turning. I removed them two weeks after and use Rough Country 2 inch 

leveling strut. Ride is way better the stock. You will  love  them. Have Beilstein in the rear. Will eventually put them in front. They weren't out yet when I did it. Settled at about 1 5/8 of lift. Perfect. Don't install them . Don't take the chance.  P.S Moto Fab  Fine for 2 wheel drive 

Are these the Rough Country's you're referring to?

RC Struts Lift Capture.JPG

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Jmike
Jmike

Finally got it back. turned out pretty good in my opinion. 35x11.50r20 ridge grapplers have just enough space between ball joint and tire. No rubbing no trimming. They do run a little small so same si

Jay Teez
Jay Teez

2019 RST Z71  2 inch Southern Truck Level kit lower strut mounted paid $395 out the door with alignment at local shop which did my last truck. My Closest dealership was using exact

Jay Teez
Jay Teez

updated with 285 60 20 Nitto Ridge Grapplers. No rubbing      

Posted Images

xsquid Enthusiast

xsquid

Posted
Posted

Yes don’t install them. The bolts come to close to the axle boots touching at full droop and turning .  I removed them like two weeks after I installed them. Went with Rough County fully assembled 2 inch struts. I posted somewhere about it. Like 320 for the pair. Ride is better then stock. They have settled to about 1 5/8 of lift. Perfect with or without the 1 inch rear block. Don’t use the lower space. 

xsquid Enthusiast

xsquid

Posted
Posted

Yes those  are the ones. You will love the ride quality Better then stock plus the lift. Get alignment done after. This was the day I installed. Did further test. It did hit when I jacked up the truck let tire hang. 

287C4F69-0BAE-452E-B2FD-649335C815AD.jpeg

SILVER SLED Senior Enthusiast

SILVER SLED

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, c1823a said:

Ah, Ok.  Thanks for the update. Was planning to install this weekend but, glad I got in touch with you first.

I can vouch for not using the 1.5" bottom spacer.  Installed it pushed my shock into the cv boot.  I went with a 1.5" top mount spacer.  My truck now sits at about 39 1/4" from ground to top of wheel well opening on all four corners.  

c1823a Enthusiast

c1823a

Posted
Posted
On 1/19/2021 at 2:17 PM, SILVER SLED said:

I can vouch for not using the 1.5" bottom spacer.  Installed it pushed my shock into the cv boot.  I went with a 1.5" top mount spacer.  My truck now sits at about 39 1/4" from ground to top of wheel well opening on all four corners.  

Which 1.5" top spacer did you use?

SILVER SLED Senior Enthusiast

SILVER SLED

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, c1823a said:

Which 1.5" top spacer did you use?

The front spacer is a ProComp I got through American trucks.   I tried to copy the page but couldn't.  Here is the part/item# info.

 

S111877 - Pro Comp Suspension 1.50-Inch Leveling Lift Kit (19-21 Silverado 1500)
Item #: S111877
bluemonstercali Enthusiast

bluemonstercali

Posted
Posted

just wanted to get some info out there. i just installed a motofab 1.5" leveling kit. bottom mount. it definitely is really close to level but I would say there is a small rake. I previously had a top mount 2" kit on 2008 sierra. that kit was border line level/nose up, hence why i wanted the 1.5". install went smoothly, had a second set of hands and didn't need to loosen the top strut mount nuts. make sure if you order for a 2021 that the correct bolts come with the order. they should be 3/8x 3 1/2" long. the standard 3" barely catch any threads on the nut. my vehicle is a 2021 satin steel gmc elevation 2wd.

c1823a Enthusiast

c1823a

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, bluemonstercali said:

just wanted to get some info out there. i just installed a motofab 1.5" leveling kit. bottom mount. it definitely is really close to level but I would say there is a small rake. I previously had a top mount 2" kit on 2008 sierra. that kit was border line level/nose up, hence why i wanted the 1.5". install went smoothly, had a second set of hands and didn't need to loosen the top strut mount nuts. make sure if you order for a 2021 that the correct bolts come with the order. they should be 3/8x 3 1/2" long. the standard 3" barely catch any threads on the nut. my vehicle is a 2021 satin steel gmc elevation 2wd.

There's been a lot of communication (and photos) on here about the CV boots contacting the bolts/mount on the bottom mount leveling kits when at full drop. How does yours look?  Are the boots really close to the bolt heads when the wheel is at full drop?  Just curious.

c1823a Enthusiast

c1823a

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, bluemonstercali said:

that seems to only be an issue on the 4wd model trucks

 

Ah, sorry.....I didn't see that yours is 2WD until I read it again.....  Yeah, you shouldn't have any problems.

  • 2 months later...
c1823a Enthusiast

c1823a

Posted
Posted
On 1/21/2021 at 3:27 PM, SILVER SLED said:

The front spacer is a ProComp I got through American trucks.   I tried to copy the page but couldn't.  Here is the part/item# info.

 

S111877 - Pro Comp Suspension 1.50-Inch Leveling Lift Kit (19-21 Silverado 1500)
Item #: S111877

Another question, after you installed the Upper Strut spacer, how close did it put the Lower Strut mounting bolts to the CV boot?  Since the lower strut bolts are installed from the bottom and the end sticks up towards the CV axle/boot.

SILVER SLED Senior Enthusiast

SILVER SLED

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, c1823a said:

Another question, after you installed the Upper Strut spacer, how close did it put the Lower Strut mounting bolts to the CV boot?  Since the lower strut bolts are installed from the bottom and the end sticks up towards the CV axle/boot.

Installing the upper strut spacer didn’t change anything with the bottom mounting of the strut.  

  • Like 1
c1823a Enthusiast

c1823a

Posted
Posted
On 4/9/2021 at 9:48 PM, SILVER SLED said:

Installing the upper strut spacer didn’t change anything with the bottom mounting of the strut.  

So the increased angle on the lower control arm, caused by the upper strut spacer, didn't put the ends of the lower strut bolts closer to the CV boot?  Or, not close enough to matter maybe?  Just trying to get as much information as possible on this before I buy and install. Was curious if you or anyone else may have turned the lower strut mount bolts over so the threaded end isn't pointing at the axle/CV boot. Granted, it may require new/different bolts if that's the case.

SILVER SLED Senior Enthusiast

SILVER SLED

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, c1823a said:

So the increased angle on the lower control arm, caused by the upper strut spacer, didn't put the ends of the lower strut bolts closer to the CV boot?  Or, not close enough to matter maybe?  Just trying to get as much information as possible on this before I buy and install. Was curious if you or anyone else may have turned the lower strut mount bolts over so the threaded end isn't pointing at the axle/CV boot. Granted, it may require new/different bolts if that's the case.

No it did not.  Neither did the lower strut mounted lifts.  The problem isn't with the bolts.   The problem is that the shock is mounted so close to the cv boot, that when the bottom mount spacer is installed below the shock, it pushes the  bottom of the shock against the cv boot-on mine anyway.   My lower front shock bolts are installed like they were from the factory.  

  • Thanks 1
BigKev New Member

BigKev

Posted
Posted (edited)

Anyone know what the specs are on this RST? Im guessing RC 3.5” or 4” and either 295/60-20 or 35x12.50-20 trail grappler. Thoughts or ideas? 

2C19B4A1-52F5-41A8-9A76-4B07511308C0.jpeg

F5B89F59-D3B4-4CC6-84D6-7D84E3851AD2.jpeg

Edited by BigKev

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,947
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Sothpaw27
    Newest Member
    Sothpaw27
    Joined

  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 654 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      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.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      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.         
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • nfisherman
      Software Update

      By nfisherman · Posted

      Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...