Jump to content

Too lift more than a level or not, 3 or 3.5 inch.

Flatblack83

By Flatblack83
in Modifications, Wheels & Tires

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

lapoolboy
lapoolboy

4" ReadyLIFT SST....very easy install....did it myself over the weekend.  Shops around here wanted $800+ to install!  ?  

lapoolboy
lapoolboy

Length

Dunn
Dunn

coilovers for sure....cst does offer 7 stages in their kits and upper end stages come with rear shocks as well, and resovoirs but just don't know much about their shocks   cant go wrong with

Posted Images

KevinO Enthusiast

KevinO

Posted
Posted

I had had a few leveled with the 2-2.5" kits (RC) and was always happy.  This time around, I figured it might be my last new truck for a bit so I wanted to do a little more.  I was going to do a 3-4" lift but ran into several tech telling I'd had to change the control arm, larger rims (the stock 17 won't fit) and a few other things.  So I went to a dealer that was well known for lifting.  After talking we decided to go with a 6" lift and 35" tires on 20's.  All in all I love the outcome,  maybe 33's when I need to replace the tries??  RC 6" lift, Nitto 12.5x35 Ridge series,  XD black 20",  AMP power steps.

519.jpg

  • Like 1
Dunn Senior Enthusiast

Dunn

Posted
Posted

yeah I have to work out of my truck so 6 in is too much.....and I will never need it, but everyone is different

 

still stuck on 3in front with king and 1.5 block in back and UCA's....

 

the new T1 is tough truck to get looking proportionate, seen many lifted but not many that fit my eye

 

most crucial for me is performance as stated earlier, if it doesn't perform better for what I want its useless, just looking taller or "cool" isn't enough.... truck above is one of better ones I seen @ 6in height....looks like a bigger TB

 

I mean after all I didn't buy a brand new truck to go fuk it up either with cheap lift (done that) or by beating crap out of it offroad

 

of course I want it to look good but that's preference anyhow,  only matters to one making payment every month, lol

JoeZee Enthusiast

JoeZee

Posted
Posted

I went with the arc 3.5 on my high country. So far it’s great not to high for the wife and not to low. I did get the upper control arms also and going into 4x4 is seamless.
 

Currently on 275/60r20 and my snow tires come summer I have the GM 22 inch wheels and tires can’t wait to see them on the truck. The kit says you can do 295/55r20

 

 

ECFDA338-90B2-4FC2-B3BC-775FB63AA3F7.jpeg

Flatblack83 Enthusiast

Flatblack83

Posted
  • Author
Posted
20 minutes ago, JoeZee said:

I went with the arc 3.5 on my high country. So far it’s great not to high for the wife and not to low. I did get the upper control arms also and going into 4x4 is seamless.
 

Currently on 275/60r20 and my snow tires come summer I have the GM 22 inch wheels and tires can’t wait to see them on the truck. The kit says you can do 295/55r20

 

 

ECFDA338-90B2-4FC2-B3BC-775FB63AA3F7.jpeg

Looks great...!  You can go bigger than that, I have now with a 2 inch level 295-60-20s which is a 34.  I bet 35s fit with no problem at all.

Flatblack83 Enthusiast

Flatblack83

Posted
  • Author
Posted
13 hours ago, KevinO said:

I had had a few leveled with the 2-2.5" kits (RC) and was always happy.  This time around, I figured it might be my last new truck for a bit so I wanted to do a little more.  I was going to do a 3-4" lift but ran into several tech telling I'd had to change the control arm, larger rims (the stock 17 won't fit) and a few other things.  So I went to a dealer that was well known for lifting.  After talking we decided to go with a 6" lift and 35" tires on 20's.  All in all I love the outcome,  maybe 33's when I need to replace the tries??  RC 6" lift, Nitto 12.5x35 Ridge series,  XD black 20",  AMP power steps.

519.jpg

Looks awesome with a 6 inch, I'd like to go that big but won't. After having a 2500hd with a 7 inch  for the last 15 years it would be too hard to use it as a truck. 

JBski Enthusiast

JBski

Posted
Posted
On 11/28/2019 at 8:52 AM, Flatblack83 said:

Please let us know how they are, I'm interested..!!

Had the CST stage 3 3.5 inch lift installed this week. Loving the ride so far. A little stiffer than I expected but that may be the new LT tires too. The body roll/boat feeling when turning, breaking and hitting speed bumps is gone. Feels much more planted to the road. With that though I can now feel every bump but I'm used to it as my daily driver is a mustang.

Photo Dec 05, 8 19 01 AM.jpg

  • Like 1
Dunn Senior Enthusiast

Dunn

Posted
Posted (edited)

yeah stock Silverado is pretty plush but body does move around too much, and it does not feel planted, it feels very loose, even in 4x4 model I have (but what do I expect from AC delco shocks).....love to retain suppleness but gain stability, firmer can be good thing....sure any shock cant be worse than stock, but I don't want mine super stiff as I have heard some complain about when lifting....ill keep my 18in wheels I like more sidewall.....and yeah tires and rim size can have huge effect on ride and when you lift and do new wheels might be hard to determine what causes what......suspension and ride is #1 priority

 

your truck looks great. love GMC's

 

think 3.5 is perfect, your truck looks well balanced and proportionate

Edited by Dunn
lapoolboy Senior Enthusiast

lapoolboy

Posted
Posted

Looks nice.  I'm preparing my tool & materials list to install my ReadyLIFT SST 4" on Saturday.  I'm hoping it doesn't look too goofy with the stock 275/60R17s for a while.  I've looked at several other trucks with same lift and they look fine on the stock tires.

Dunn Senior Enthusiast

Dunn

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, lapoolboy said:

Looks nice.  I'm preparing my tool & materials list to install my ReadyLIFT SST 4" on Saturday.  I'm hoping it doesn't look too goofy with the stock 275/60R17s for a while.  I've looked at several other trucks with same lift and they look fine on the stock tires.

just look like 2500 HD, not too bad

 

actually good, you will be able to tell how truck rides with just lift b4 tires and wheels, and how that effects ride as well...I probably do same even though it will need 2 alignments I am guessing for stock wheels and aftrmrkt

lapoolboy Senior Enthusiast

lapoolboy

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Dunn said:

just look like 2500 HD, not too bad

 

actually good, you will be able to tell how truck rides with just lift b4 tires and wheels, and how that effects ride as well...I probably do same even though it will need 2 alignments I am guessing for stock wheels and aftrmrkt

I don't think it will affect the alignment.  I can't see how wheel (or tire) size would change the camber, caster, or toe.  If it's aligned, it's aligned.  Camber and caster I would for sure think wouldn't be affected.  Toe I could see being affected if they new tires are wider maybe.

Edited by lapoolboy
Dunn Senior Enthusiast

Dunn

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, lapoolboy said:

I don't think it will affect the alignment.  I can't see how wheel (or tire) size would change the camber, caster, or toe.  If it's aligned, it's aligned.  Camber and caster I would for sure think wouldn't be affected.  Toe I could see being affected if they new tires are wider 

Yeah I wasn't sure, that's good to know

woodsnwater Enthusiast

woodsnwater

Posted
Posted
On 12/5/2019 at 12:55 PM, JBski said:

Had the CST stage 3 3.5 inch lift installed this week. Loving the ride so far. A little stiffer than I expected but that may be the new LT tires too. The body roll/boat feeling when turning, breaking and hitting speed bumps is gone. Feels much more planted to the road. With that though I can now feel every bump but I'm used to it as my daily driver is a mustang.

Photo Dec 05, 8 19 01 AM.jpg

great looking truck. do you think you could have got a 295 60 r20  on it or is it tight with the 285s ?

JBski Enthusiast

JBski

Posted
Posted
great looking truck. do you think you could have got a 295 60 r20  on it or is it tight with the 285s ?

Thanks. I wanted to do 295/60 but couldn’t confirm no rubbing with anyone so went with the 285/60. CST guys recommended I stick with 285/60 or 305/55. With my setup, At full lock the outside of the tire just touches the front wheel well liner. You could probably zip tie it back but I’m not sure how much larger the 295s would be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dunn Senior Enthusiast

Dunn

Posted
Posted

Think 3-3.5 is perfect for these trucks, way it should have come from factory....looks way more balanced and proportionate...

  • 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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • AidenVorpagel
      cam upgrade in CA

      By AidenVorpagel · Posted

      hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • B14Sierra
      Noise after AFM delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Did you figure it out?
    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...