Jump to content

Lift + Spacers?

NorEaster
 Share

Recommended Posts

NorEaster Enthusiast

NorEaster

Posted
Posted

I was just curious as to whether people ran spacers after they did their lifts. I have read that you need a 1.5" spacer on the rear after adding a 4.5" lift to compensate for the front track width being wider.

SSchup Enthusiast

SSchup

Posted
Posted

Depends on the lift and also depends on personal choice. I have a 4 1/2" CST bracket lift, so no track width increase. No spacers needed.

However popular lifts like the Zone or BDS 4 1/2" are knuckle lifts, so they increase front track width 1 1/2" per side. I would say most people running a knuckle lift,  add 1.75" spacers to the rear to even front and rear trackwidth.

Jetiemann Enthusiast

Jetiemann

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, NorEaster said:

I was just curious as to whether people ran spacers after they did their lifts. I have read that you need a 1.5" spacer on the rear after adding a 4.5" lift to compensate for the front track width being wider.

Personal preference. Like said above, some lifts will add width to front and not rear due to being independent front suspension. So you'll front tires will stick out further than your rear tires. It bugs the hell out of me when i see this on the road so i would definitely add spacers if it were me.

Jetiemann Enthusiast

Jetiemann

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, NorEaster said:

Awesome guys. Yeah that's what I've read, just wasn't sure on spacers because I know it's a lot of wear and stress on a vehicle 

Not the best but Not so bad as long as they're torqued right and not huge spacers. Also make sure your studs are long enough to get enough threads on the lugs nuts.

  • 3 years later...
06Cateye New Member

06Cateye

Posted
Posted

Why would you run 1.75 spacers for the rear if the difference is 1.5? Just curious because I am trying to figure out which size to order.

06Cateye New Member

06Cateye

Posted
Posted
On 4/4/2020 at 9:23 AM, SSchup said:

Depends on the lift and also depends on personal choice. I have a 4 1/2" CST bracket lift, so no track width increase. No spacers needed.

However popular lifts like the Zone or BDS 4 1/2" are knuckle lifts, so they increase front track width 1 1/2" per side. I would say most people running a knuckle lift,  add 1.75" spacers to the rear to even front and rear trackwidth.

Why would you run 1.75 spacers for the rear if the difference is 1.5? Just curious because I am trying to figure out which size to order.

mikeyk101 Senior Enthusiast

mikeyk101

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, 06Cateye said:

 

Why would you run 1.75 spacers for the rear if the difference is 1.5? Just curious because I am trying to figure out which size to order.

I could be wrong but I believe that the front wheel base is slightly wider than rear to begin with. When doing the various lifts, the fronts will stick out more and past the wheel well. Not using a wide enough rear spacer and the amount the front wheels stuck out will be greater than the rear ones and give an "unusual" look. By using slightly wider rear spacers, it will put the rear wheels on same track as front wheels and will give a more balanced look.

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

    • Chuck FB
      Joke Thread

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      This video may not be the exact content for the joke thread but its a lot of laughs so here it is, I've only watched a portion of it so far but if anyone is looking for some light hearted good soap box driving action, its here. As a note in the upper left of the screen it shows the number out of 100 to refer back to any particular vehicle for comment !.    https://www.facebook.com/reel/1351928276956715
    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...