Jump to content

Bilstein 5100 vs. Leveling Kit

Xterrable

By Xterrable
in Modifications, Wheels & Tires

 Share

Recommended Posts

Xterrable Enthusiast

Xterrable

Posted
Posted

I do not think I have seen a comparison looking at the pros and cons of the Bilstein 5100's vs. a leveling kit.  Here are my thoughts, but I am interested in your thoughts:

 

I think install time is wash, because on a leveling kit, you dont have to compress the spring, but you have to install spacers and on some, replace the upper control arms.  Where the bilsteins, you dont have to do any of that, but you do have to compress the spring. 

 

Both kits require an alignment afterwards.  

 

Spacer kits actually make the shock "longer" so to speak to raise the suspension.   Spring compression rate remains the same.

 

Bilstein changes the mounting point for the spring, thus using the springs compression to raise the suspension.    Changes the spring compression at neutral stance thus giving a bit more firmer of a ride..? 

 

Better leveling kits account for the difference in the upper ball joints and replace the UCA.  I would assume the Bilstein kits also change the ball joint angle, but they do not account for it.

 

Is all that accurate?  Is everyone doing the Bilstein 5100's just leaving the UCA and ball joint stock?

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Dunn
Dunn

if you want to go 2" it wont matter what kit gets you there (2" is 2").....you can buy eibach or bilstein kit and they will mimick the gm kit and they are cheaper and better quality.....the gm kit get

lapoolboy
lapoolboy

I just installed Bilstein 6112s up front with Icon tubular UCAs and Bilstein 5160s in the rear.  I already had the "Trailboss" 2" lift so I have the longer axles...the Bilsteins I bought were for TB/A

lapoolboy
lapoolboy

Yep, I've run across all kinds of ignoranance and misinformation on the lifts for regular trucks vs. TB/AT4.    It will ALL bolt up just fine....but like you said, it may not level it and yo

Posted Images

EagleRising Enthusiast

EagleRising

Posted
Posted

I am interested in this thread. I have a leveling kit(lower) I have been sitting on debating to install it, or wait and do the 5100 package.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Gangly Senior Enthusiast

Gangly

Posted
Posted

Whether you lift through suspension upgrade, or spacers, the angles are affected equally and the forces applied to your ball joints by the wheel hub are equal between the two styles.  By changing springs and shocks you are changing ride characteristics.

 

Most people lift through a spacer because it is cheaper and less work which makes it a GREAT kit for those who only want a taller stance.  However, for those who find the stock suspension lacking, or just want a higher quality suspension and have the available funds and know-how, they will generally do a shock and spring lift to get the characteristics they are looking for. 

 

Regardless, the forces on the ball joints for a 2" spacer or a 2" suspension lift are the same with all other things being equal.  The only way to alleviate that is to replace your control arms.  Equally important is your CV angle, and to correct that you most often need a differential lowering bracket which effectively reduces your ground clearance negating the lift you just put on.  Tires are the best way to increase lift without affecting your suspension geometry.

Donstar Senior Enthusiast

Donstar

Posted
Posted

This topic is discussed extensively in this forum and elsewhere.   I wrestled with the same dilemma on my '15 and have read literally 100's of pages on level kits and Bilstein's.  You will find lots of support for both.  Maximum setting on a Bilstein gives you <2" of lift.  Installing a level kit with the same amount of lift will not noticeably impact your ride.  Problems are more likely to occur with the larger spacer kits of greater than 2" unless you replace other components.  FWIW, I concluded that a 1.5" spacer kit made the most sense for me. Someday, I might even have it installed!  

Gangly Senior Enthusiast

Gangly

Posted
Posted (edited)

General consensus is to purchase an up-top spacer as opposed to a lower mount spacer.  The lower mount spacers create a situation where a CV boot could potentially be affected by the shock during operation of the vehicle.

Edited by Gangly
RWTJR Enthusiast

RWTJR

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Xterrable said:

I do not think I have seen a comparison looking at the pros and cons of the Bilstein 5100's vs. a leveling kit.  Here are my thoughts, but I am interested in your thoughts:

 

I think install time is wash, because on a leveling kit, you dont have to compress the spring, but you have to install spacers and on some, replace the upper control arms.  Where the bilsteins, you dont have to do any of that, but you do have to compress the spring. 

 

Both kits require an alignment afterwards.  

 

Spacer kits actually make the shock "longer" so to speak to raise the suspension.   Spring compression rate remains the same.

 

Bilstein changes the mounting point for the spring, thus using the springs compression to raise the suspension.    Changes the spring compression at neutral stance thus giving a bit more firmer of a ride..? 

 

Better leveling kits account for the difference in the upper ball joints and replace the UCA.  I would assume the Bilstein kits also change the ball joint angle, but they do not account for it.

 

Is all that accurate?  Is everyone doing the Bilstein 5100's just leaving the UCA and ball joint stock?

It appears from your Bio you have an AT4. This means you already have a 2" lift over a stock 4X4 Seirra. Therefore, any additional lift should probably include properly sized upper control arms (IMHO).

 

Any lift will change your factory ball joint angle. How much is the question? The non-lifted stock Sierra and the 2" lifted AT4 share the same UCAs and ball joints. So you have a ball joint already working at increased angles to accommodate the AT4's 2" of lift. GM has supposedly engineered for this accommodation.

 

The Bilsteins only provide a maximum lift of 1.1" on the AT4 and yes some just leave the factory UCAs. I can only guess it's due to the small 1.1" or less increase. However, when you consider the AT4 already has 2" of lift on it, the 1.1" additional lift is essentially 3.1" of lift on the factory ball joints.

 

I wouldn't add additional lift to an AT4 without, at least, replacing the UCAs with some that are appropriately sized for the lift.

 

JMHO

No expertise implied or expressed

 

EagleRising Enthusiast

EagleRising

Posted
Posted
General consensus is to purchase an up-top spacer as opposed to a lower mount spacer.  The lower mount spacers create a situation where a CV boot could potentially be affected by the shock during operation of the vehicle.
It was a gift, prior to extensive research. That's why it hasn't been installed. But I've seen just as many positive no issue reviews as I've seen negative on lower kits.

I have just a standard 19 LT Z71 package so leaning more towards the Bilstein option. Just want to level and get the benefits of better shocks as well. I plan on running 275/70/18s essentially 33s on stock rims.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Xterrable Enthusiast

Xterrable

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Good information.  And yes, I have a AT4.  I just added 285/70/18 Ridge Grapplers.  They claim 34" tall. But I found real world off the truck, they are about 33 1/8....  far cry from 34"..  But to be honest, i think a 34" would have been dang close to rubbing.  And the contact patch is a hair over the factory 275's.

 

And I am fine with 1" lift up front with the Bilstein's.  Thats all I really want.

 

Does anyone make an UCA that does not bring it closer to the tire?  I have about a finger's width between the tire and UCA now....   And I do not want to run spacers.

 

When I move back north, sadly I'll have to get new wheels anyway.  I'll need to push the wheels out to get chains in.  I could never run chains being that close to the UCA... 

Gangly Senior Enthusiast

Gangly

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, EagleRising said:

It was a gift, prior to extensive research. That's why it hasn't been installed. But I've seen just as many positive no issue reviews as I've seen negative on lower kits.

I have just a standard 19 LT Z71 package so leaning more towards the Bilstein option. Just want to level and get the benefits of better shocks as well. I plan on running 275/70/18s essentially 33s on stock rims.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 

I have an LT Z71 as well and installed the Eibach kit (adjustable up to ~3") that included springs with the shocks.  Its been a really nice suspension upgrade so far and the more I use it off road the more I understand its characteristics.  For the price it cant be beat in my opinion, so check it out as well.

Xterrable Enthusiast

Xterrable

Posted
  • Author
Posted
6 hours ago, Gangly said:

I have an LT Z71 as well and installed the Eibach kit (adjustable up to ~3") that included springs with the shocks.  Its been a really nice suspension upgrade so far and the more I use it off road the more I understand its characteristics.  For the price it cant be beat in my opinion, so check it out as well.

I don’t see a listing under 2020 for the Sierra.  Only Canyon.

Dunn Senior Enthusiast

Dunn

Posted
Posted

 

issue i have with spacer kit vs coilover suspension lift is the travel of the shock......on adjustable shocks you dont lose much if any compared to spacers.....and on some you gain travel,

 

suspension over spacer 100% of the time for me

 

seems most people end up there anyway after messing around with a few spacer kits

Rtalliston Enthusiast

Rtalliston

Posted
Posted

I put the billsteins on my 20 lt z71 myself and i found the ride to be much improved over the factory...the front end felt a little squishy from the factory like riding in a buick goin down the interstate...i did the install myself which saved me a couple hundred bucks so it was a no brainer for me....if youre looking for more economical ive read that upper spacers are better.

Duramax3oh Enthusiast

Duramax3oh

Posted
Posted (edited)

I am not a fan of the stock shocks on my LT Z71 so replacing them was important to me. Using the 5100’s over a spacer was a no brainer in my opinion. The quality of the ride is just much more greatly improved over the stock shocks with a spacer, and the net cost all in just isn’t that much more to not do it - unless you’re on a major budget. 
 

My problem is I have a massive case of scope creep and ended up going with the 6112’s over the 5100’s. ? I also added a rear block and did 5160’s in the rear. I am extremely pleased with the result even though they’re overkill for me. My wife even made a comment that the truck rides so much better. 

Edited by Duramax3oh

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

    342,920
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Frank V
    Newest Member
    Frank V
    Joined

  • Who's Online   6 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,043 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • bwiese
      seat base height *lowering* (base 40/20/40 seat, 2026 1500 WT std cab)

      By bwiese · Posted

      Folks, Have a great new 2026 WT  (std cab, 2.7/4WD) w/base 40/20/40 mech adj bench "fake buckets"  (with lower and upper center console) heavy vinyl seats.  Overall the seats are very comfortable and the vinyl is heavy and appears less likely to 'split out'. Am very tall (6'5")  + a bad back/osteporosis/former hyperparathyroidism so ease/range of movement is a bit restricted.  The truck rides a bit high and I use a nerf step bar w/my left foot to step in, then I put right foot/leg in, drag my butt in  & get seated.  Worked fine in my 2018 RAM quadCab. But I end up dragging my butt over the left raised sidecushsion area of vinyl seat, and due to texture there's fair amount of traction on slide inward.  (ArmorAll didn't improve.) If the seat were even ~1/2" - 3/4" lower it'd be helpful, but base seats just have the forward/backward underseat bail and the side lever for tilt which really doesn't affect seat height.   I really don't want to 'de-puff' the left side sidecushion forming the  fake 'bucket'. I know one company sells 'seat elevator blocks':  but is there a simple way of lowering the height of the driver seat instead?   Thanks Bill W San Jose  
    • bwiese
      on-wheel cellphone control: 2026 1500 WT (2.7L 4WD std cab)

      By bwiese · Posted

      I have a basic 2026 1500 WT  (2.7L/4WD reg cab shorttbed). Comfy, generally happy with electronics/radio - but is there a way I can add switches to steering wheel right-side position (curr. empty) so I can adjust volume, push phone button to voice dial, etc? Bill W San Jose  
    • Tyler Gibbs
      Travel Trailer 2024 2500 HD 6.6 Gas Engine ?

      By Tyler Gibbs · Posted

      The curb weight on a 1 ton crew cab long bed is around 7k lbs.  Now, I don't know where you went to school but 9k is not more than 2x 7k lbs. More than 2x 7k lbs would be 14k+.   With that said, obviously yes you're going to feel a 9k lb trailer when slowing down.  I already said, when accelerating.  When changing lanes?  No.  But if you look at the context of what was quoted, the original person said, "after a mile or two..." which means that would be after the accelerating portion and you're driving a generally steady pace.  Please do learn to read and comprehend.
    • sFrank
      2026 Silverado Range AFM DFM ECU loaction

      By sFrank · Posted

      So I purchased the Range unit for my 2026 and I am seeing different locations suggested for the ECM . Can anyone confirm wither under hood, left side or right side or behind the wheelwell?
    • No F-bdy Bs
      Dave's Auto (custom engine builder) tear down of L8T

      By No F-bdy Bs · Posted

      Like I've said before. Di and Carbon buildup is not that big of a concern. Engine had minimal buildup, and that engine was obviously not super well maintained. Do regular oil changes, and you're gtg as long as the rest of the truck lasts. Also, the High Pressure FP that people ****** about, but can't tell you why.  Now, I wish they'd trash the variable oil pump. No real world issues with them, but I'll gladly eat whatever miniscule MPG it's saving me in favor of more oil at all RPMs.    Curious to see his assessment of the 7.3 compared to the 6.6. I expect he'll praise the port inj, but from a structural standpoint, the 6.6 is as robust as any engine out there.    Not to take away from the 7.3. I feel it's equally as good as the 6.6.     As to heat on the rear cyls, I'd have to see numerous examples before I'd say it's an issue. Especially not knowing the history of that engine. For all is known, they could have blown a rad hose, and ran it hot, and the 2 rear cyls may be the first to get hot in a low coolant situation, but not be an issue aside from that. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...