Jump to content

Bilstein 6112 installed!

99bluebird
 Share

Recommended Posts

99bluebird Enthusiast

99bluebird

Posted
Posted

Installed the 2" lift kit bilstein 6112 shocks and springs on my otherwise factory 2015 gmc sierra crew cab 6.2 SLT.  

Kit number was 47-273702 and included both front shocks, springs, mounting cups/hardware etc.  I put a set of 5160 rears on it.

 

These showed up and wow!  Shocks are huge diameter almost 3".  Giant pushrods.  Everything looked extremely stout, bigger and equal quality to the $2k+ set of fox I put on my last cummins.

Installation went smooth, no hangups although I am surprised at how fast GMs rust given the truck is 4 years old.  

 

I've driven 800 miles so far so presumably everything has settled nicely.  The top setting (4 adjustments) gave me 1.8-2" of lift, which makes the truck appear level in stock form.  Ride is VERY controlled, does not feel stiff to me at all, but the bounce and rock from the stock ranchos is now completely gone.  Quite fun hitting speedbumps and joints quick, the truck just absorbs the hit and there is no jounce or jar.   Very stable.   I would even venture to say the ride soaks hits better than the 2.5 fox setup, although this truck is lighter and independent front so never a fair comparison.  Overall just wanted to post this up since I did not see many reviews for this product related to GM trucks, so I was a bit weary on the initial purchase!

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

99bluebird
99bluebird

Installed the 2" lift kit bilstein 6112 shocks and springs on my otherwise factory 2015 gmc sierra crew cab 6.2 SLT.   Kit number was 47-273702 and included both front shocks, springs, mounting c

kennerz
kennerz

cool color... kinda rare.

Pivot
Pivot

Just returned from the shop that installed my 6112's up front and 5100's in rear.   I have the Z60 suspension and liked it. Truck is basically new and has 4k miles on it.    I was

Posted Images

Mike GMC Enthusiast

Mike GMC

Posted
Posted

Where did you buy your kit and how much?  I've been considering this so I appreciate your review.

99bluebird Enthusiast

99bluebird

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thats the best part, only $600 for both fronts, includes shocks and springs etc.  I bought it from battle born offroad but have no connection to them, so I would just find the best price.  They had a coupon code for gmtrucks at the time I purchased.  Shocks are 2.7" diameter.  The rears are a bit smaller I think 2", but they have reservoirs so should even out. 

bilstein 1 gmc.jpg

bilstein 2 gmc.jpg

  • Like 1
SoCa2ID Enthusiast

SoCa2ID

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, 99bluebird said:

Thats the best part, only $600 for both fronts, includes shocks and springs etc.  I bought it from battle born offroad but have no connection to them, so I would just find the best price.  They had a coupon code for gmtrucks at the time I purchased.  Shocks are 2.7" diameter.  The rears are a bit smaller I think 2", but they have reservoirs so should even out. 

bilstein 1 gmc.jpg

bilstein 2 gmc.jpg

Wow Truck looks great!  I love the stance.

Lgetz Senior Enthusiast

Lgetz

Posted
Posted

99BB congratulations on your 6112's.  Nice write up and they look good.  Bilstein makes good products for the money.

Pivot Enthusiast

Pivot

Posted
Posted
On 6/3/2019 at 4:35 PM, 99bluebird said:

Installed the 2" lift kit bilstein 6112 shocks and springs on my otherwise factory 2015 gmc sierra crew cab 6.2 SLT.  

Kit number was 47-273702 and included both front shocks, springs, mounting cups/hardware etc.  I put a set of 5160 rears on it.

 

These showed up and wow!  Shocks are huge diameter almost 3".  Giant pushrods.  Everything looked extremely stout, bigger and equal quality to the $2k+ set of fox I put on my last cummins.

Installation went smooth, no hangups although I am surprised at how fast GMs rust given the truck is 4 years old.  

 

I've driven 800 miles so far so presumably everything has settled nicely.  The top setting (4 adjustments) gave me 1.8-2" of lift, which makes the truck appear level in stock form.  Ride is VERY controlled, does not feel stiff to me at all, but the bounce and rock from the stock ranchos is now completely gone.  Quite fun hitting speedbumps and joints quick, the truck just absorbs the hit and there is no jounce or jar.   Very stable.   I would even venture to say the ride soaks hits better than the 2.5 fox setup, although this truck is lighter and independent front so never a fair comparison.  Overall just wanted to post this up since I did not see many reviews for this product related to GM trucks, so I was a bit weary on the initial purchase!

 

Thanks for the write-up and review. I have a set of 6112's in garage waiting for installation on Tuesday. Been back and forth on what setting. I also was thinking setting #4. Installer suggested 3# setting and that made me second guess myself. Have a few days to deceide and 2" blocks for rear if I go #4. 

Red_5 Enthusiast

Red_5

Posted
Posted

Glad I looked for a 6112 thread before starting one. I also ordered 6112 front and 5160 rears from Battle Born. The 5160s arrived yesterday but I ordered complete, built 6112s so I can install myself without a spring compressor. I had Battle Born assemble the 6112s on the highest setting. I bought new block for the rear that will raise it by 3/4" so I should still have some rake for towing. I'll install everything later in the week.

 

One thing I noticed about the 5160s is that the steel bodies seem to be machined but with no coating, I'm wondering how long they'll take to rust.

Pivot Enthusiast

Pivot

Posted
Posted

Clear Coat would be best, but you might take a look on Amazon at two products I've used to keep corrosion down on sleds, quads, dirt bikes, spare tire hardware , hitch receivers, tools. I've had ACF -50 for awhile and just ordered another can of Corrossion X.  I like Corrosion X better. I've never used on shocks, but don't see how it could hurt. Obviously keep that far away from brake pads, rotors.

 

I have to drop truck off later today and have changed my mind 10 times if I want to do 3rd setting and leave rear alone or 4th setting and add 2" block in rear. 

 

 

Mike GMC Enthusiast

Mike GMC

Posted
Posted

Well, it your truck and you can set it up how you like.  But if you want my opinion, use the 3rd notch.  It's plenty for a 33" tire (maybe 34") and is easier on the ball joints, steering components and CV joints.  Plus you don't need blocks for the rear.

 

That's how I plan to set mine up.

Sierra Dan Senior Enthusiast

Sierra Dan

Posted
Posted

Nice review and post Doug. Thanks for sharing.

These have been highly anticipated since 2015 when they were introduced. I gave up on them and went with 5100s.

Painful as to why it took 4 years for them to be released on the GM trucks.

Question is, are they really worth the $400 more than a front set of 5100's ?

My 5100s provided a tremendous positive result over the worn out Ranchos on my truck.

I dog on the Ranchos any chance i can get!     :loser:

Your ride experience compares to the feel of the 5100s.

Maybe the spring is softer for these than the factory spring for the 5100s.

Pivot Enthusiast

Pivot

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Mike GMC said:

Well, it your truck and you can set it up how you like.  But if you want my opinion, use the 3rd notch.  It's plenty for a 33" tire (maybe 34") and is easier on the ball joints, steering components and CV joints.  Plus you don't need blocks for the rear.

 

That's how I plan to set mine up.

That's the way I'm leaning. 

Sierra Dan Senior Enthusiast

Sierra Dan

Posted
Posted

I wish Bilstein would offer an equivalent bodied rear shock to accompany this 6112 front.

The 5160 is a 5100 with a reservoir. Smaller body and rod.

Mike GMC Enthusiast

Mike GMC

Posted
Posted

There is so much less weight to damp in the rear, why would need a bigger shock body and piston?  Even loading up the bed and putting  1000 pounds on the hitch barely balances out the weight.  For road driving, 5100 rear is fine, for off-road, the 5160 provides additional cooling.  Are the rear shocks from other manufacturers bigger?

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

    • 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...