Jump to content

Alignment after Leveling

Black and Blue Z71
 Share

Recommended Posts

Black and Blue Z71 Enthusiast

Black and Blue Z71

Posted
Posted

Hey all, recently put Pro Comps 1.5 leveling kit on my 2020 Silverado 1500 z71. Got it aligned after and the shop said my caster was almost maxed out from the factory and were only able to make some adjustments. I put the print out below. Is this normal or cause for concern? Appreciate any insight.91821.thumb.jpeg.2130a3665969564b8ef32d8a3845c7a2.jpeg

  • Thanks 1
winks79 Enthusiast

winks79

Posted
Posted

I have a 2019 Sierra SLT 4wd that I put Bilstein 5100's on and leveled at 1.5 inch. When I had mine realigned was nothing like that. Guy had to do very little and everything was put back to normal. Have not had any issues. If that is the specs after an alignment something is bad wrong. I would have someone else check.

Black and Blue Z71 Enthusiast

Black and Blue Z71

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Interesting to hear that minimal adjustments were needed on your truck compared to mine. Those are the specs after the alignment was done. Truck tracks straight and drives normal. Definitely thinking I should go to another shop and have them take a look.

rbdjr Enthusiast

rbdjr

Posted
Posted

For me those readings would be perfectly fine as long as truck tracks straight and handles ok down the road, cross caster is a bit higher than I like to set, I prefer 1/2deg more on RS than left to fight road crown on most secondary roads( yours currently 1 deg) , but if it tracks straight and handling ok leave it alone, Caster has no effect on tire wear, so those are good if good for you. Camber and Toe looks fine. Keep a close look on tires and rotate tires every oil change its worth it in the end. 

 I also installed a level kit in my 2021 RST4x4 3.0L 4door,short bed. I installed top spacers in front and 1" spacer in rear. redid alignment , I did notice you must really torque lower control arm eccentrics to spec and they do tend to slip when hitting large bumps/potholes especialy if you sprayed with penatraint before adjusting( lesson learned myself) I did have plenty adjustment as they are very adjustable if needed, Caster/Camber and Toe. Some times you must start from scratch and create a new starting  point with eccentrics,  and not try to just to adjust from where they set from factory.

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted

Why would anyone tell anyone else that a spec out of spec it okay?

😡

 

Needs MOOG extended caster bolts installed and your alignment man replaced. 

:idiot:

 

 

LEFT side IF different not more than 1/4 degree MORE positive caster. Equal is fine. 

LEFT side 1/4 degree MORE positive camber which when you decide to run negative camber is less negative left. 

.04 to .05 POSITIVE toe is great and there is no reason other than laziness for it to not be dead on identical. It is literally the easiest of the specs to hit. 

 

Trust angle as close to zero as possible. Steer ahead zero. 

 

This alignment was good for 125K miles on factory 60K tires when rotated, balanced and inflated routinely. 

 

HUGE caster angles make the ride harsh and adds stress to the power steering. Makes it heavy and turn in lazy. Corner like a snow plow. 

 

 

 

AlignmentSilveradoAfter.thumb.jpg.aff58cc4e7a400382ae677338215973a.jpg 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'd try another shop or have them redo it.  Did they give you a "before" and "after" printout?  

 

"Technically" they used the wrong specs and your caster was probably fine to begin with.  Look at the top of their screen it says "Silverado 1500 4x4 dblcab +Z7X".  RPO code Z7X is Trail Boss suspension, and you didn't install the GM Trail Boss kit, so those specs should NOT have been used during the alignment.  

 

They should have aligned it as "-Z7X (minus Z7X)".  

 

I cut the chart down just to double cab 4x4 with and without Trail Boss so you can see the difference in GM's specs:

 

aligin.thumb.png.a44f543d5207be7f6dfc0b9ccafac811.png

 

Edited by newdude
SilveradoRST Enthusiast

SilveradoRST

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, newdude said:

I'd try another shop or have them redo it.  Did they give you a "before" and "after" printout?  

 

"Technically" they used the wrong specs and your caster was probably fine to begin with.  Look at the top of their screen it says "Silverado 1500 4x4 dblcab +Z7X".  RPO code Z7X is Trail Boss suspension, and you didn't install the GM Trail Boss kit, so those specs should NOT have been used during the alignment.  

 

They should have aligned it as "-Z7X (minus Z7X)".  

 

I cut the chart down just to double cab 4x4 with and without Trail Boss so you can see the difference in GM's specs:

 

aligin.thumb.png.a44f543d5207be7f6dfc0b9ccafac811.png

 

 

Sorry to hi-jack but this got me thinking.  I had the GM Trail Boss Accessory Suspension installed back in Feb '21.  So the dealer (further away from me) did the lift and alignment.  They also did the power steering controller calibration as stated in the instructions.  Fast forward months later, I felt my steering wheel was off-center.  Constantly had to hold the wheel slightly left to track straight.  

 

I went to my local dealership and had them do an alignment again, they said the toe was off a bit.  The wheel is centered now but I get a bit of wandering, not terrible.  I did mention to my local dealership I had the Gm 2" lift done at another dealer when I went in for the alignment.   Is this something they would have know by looking up the VIN?  Because an authorization code, VIN and a call to Techline was needed to do the power steering controller (per Lift Kit Instructions), is my VIN in the GM system now reflect that I have the 2" lift?   Or am I completely wrong, VIN will show I have an RST and I'll have to always remind the dealer to use +Z7X when getting an alignment done?  

c.schill Enthusiast

c.schill

Posted
Posted

I just put 2.5" leveling struts on the front of my 2019 LT, and the alignment went fine. They were able to get everything perfectly in spec. Seems odd to me that with a lesser height spacer, they had that much trouble getting everything in spec. 

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Black and Blue Z71 said:

Great info and good catch on the trail boss specs. Yes they provided the before specs, I put them below. I scheduled an appointment for at a local dealership on Monday to have them look at it. Definitely not ideal....

Screenshot_20220310-104411_Chrome.jpg

 

 

Yea, see your before caster is much more in line with the non Trail Boss alignment specs, perhaps even in the green if they had loaded in with the correct specs to start with.  It should have been a toe and go more likely, or possibly a quick caster tweak followed by a toe adjust.  

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, newdude said:

I'd try another shop or have them redo it.  Did they give you a "before" and "after" printout?  

 

"Technically" they used the wrong specs and your caster was probably fine to begin with.  Look at the top of their screen it says "Silverado 1500 4x4 dblcab +Z7X".  RPO code Z7X is Trail Boss suspension, and you didn't install the GM Trail Boss kit, so those specs should NOT have been used during the alignment.  

 

They should have aligned it as "-Z7X (minus Z7X)".  

 

I cut the chart down just to double cab 4x4 with and without Trail Boss so you can see the difference in GM's specs:

 

aligin.thumb.png.a44f543d5207be7f6dfc0b9ccafac811.png

 

 

I'm going ask a question before I step in IT. Does this lift change the frame rake angle? Ever measure it?

 

I ask because when I did my lower via the back end it of course changed the frame rake when also changes the caster angle by the EXACT same amount. These numbers in this chart reflect the exact change in frame rake which means the 'ideal' caster angle is "Ideal' for GM in that changing the spec means no alignment required. 

 

IF that sounds absurd I direct you to the TSB on the 2.4 ring and piston replacement that states that even at the 150K warranty limit to NOT hone the cylinders. 

 

Or to the GM memo on further reducing of the OCI beyond the 2014 OLM recalibration to 7.5K. 

Recalibration of the ABS to 'Band-Aid" a brake vacuum pump. No need to go on, eh? 

 

Point is there is nothing in a lift or lower that would change the 'ideal' caster value Think about it. They have a habit of moving a spec instead of doing the work. IMHO of course. 

 

The recalibration of the power steering adjust the 'assist' to reflect the higher input effort required to overcome an extra degree of two of caster. 

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

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,825
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    phillja
    Newest Member
    phillja
    Joined

  • Who's Online   5 Members, 0 Anonymous, 810 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • CamGTP
      Gas Prices

      By CamGTP · Posted

      $4.00 a gallon here now.   Diesel nearly $5.00 again.
    • Atlas
      Gas Prices

      By Atlas · Posted

      If we're talking futures, yes, it's speculation.   The spot price of a delivered barrel is elevated now compared to before the conflict. And that is related more to current supply/demand.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Gas Prices

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      SPECULATION on the wars effect raised prices. AI is maximizing the profit. Refining is vertically integrated. 
    • Atlas
      Gas Prices

      By Atlas · Posted

      It's the Middle East conflict that raised prices, not AI. But nice distraction.
    • txab
      Gas Prices

      By txab · Posted

      Lauren Fix Is AI quietly deciding what you pay at the gas pump? How the algorithm picks drivers' pockets.   Every time tensions flare somewhere in the world, gasoline prices seem to jump overnight. Drivers expect it. The news blames geopolitics, oil traders blame uncertainty, and politicians blame each other. But here's the question almost nobody is asking: If computers can raise prices within hours, why do they suddenly become so patient when it's time to lower them? Americans have lived with this frustration for decades. The price of crude oil climbs, and gas stations respond almost immediately. Crude oil falls sharply, and suddenly we're told to be patient. Refiners need time. Distributors need time. Retailers need time. Somehow, that urgency only seems to work in one direction. Regulators have already gone after algorithmic pricing in apartment rentals, and they're looking at hotel rooms, airline tickets, and online retail. Now a new California lawsuit and a federal push to investigate gasoline pricing suggest there may be another piece of the story that deserves far more attention. It isn't simply about oil markets anymore. It's about artificial intelligence, algorithms, and whether software designed to maximize profits is quietly changing how fuel prices are set across America.   If that sounds like something out of a science fiction movie, think again. Kalibrating the market? Kalibrate is a real pricing platform. The company markets its software as an advanced pricing solution that analyzes competitor prices, wholesale costs, local demand, traffic patterns, and countless other variables before recommending the "optimal" price at the pump. By the company's own marketing, it serves many of America's largest fuel retailers and convenience store chains. Retailers use it because it promises to increase profit margins while staying competitive. There is nothing inherently illegal about any of this. Every major industry now runs on data analytics. The concern begins when pricing software stops simply reacting to the market and starts shaping it. On June 22, three California drivers filed a federal class-action lawsuit in Sacramento — and they didn't just sue the software company. They sued the gas stations. Kalibrate is the lead defendant, but so are Marathon, BP, Circle K, 7-Eleven, Speedway, Walmart, Sam's Club, and Albertsons. According to the complaint, Marathon alone runs more than 1,000 ARCO stations in California and has been letting Kalibrate set prices at them since 2020. Circle K, plaintiffs claim, has more than 400 stations on the software. Albertsons, they allege, has been using it since at least 2009. The complaint alleges that Kalibrate allowed competing retailers to share competitively sensitive information and receive pricing recommendations that discouraged aggressive competition. It describes a "restoration" feature that plaintiffs say lets nearly all the stations in a market raise prices at the same time. It also quotes Kalibrate's marketing, which according to the complaint tells operators that even in the face of "falling oil prices ... it's critical to avoid a race to the bottom," and warns that cutting your price to win customers "could be making a change that triggers a downward spiral." The plaintiffs call the platform the "central nervous system for a conspiracy to extinguish retail price competition among gas stations." Price pumping What does that cost you? Research cited in the complaint found that stations switching to this kind of software raise prices by about 6 cents a gallon on average — and by as much as 30 cents where most of the stations in an area are running it. Plaintiffs point to a real-world example too: They allege that when one California Albertsons turned Kalibrate on, its pump price climbed 3 to 4 cents within days. That sounds small. It isn't. By the complaint's math, a single penny on the statewide average drains $134 million a year from California drivers' wallets. Kalibrate says it disagrees with the allegations, calls its technology lawful, and intends to defend itself. The retail chains have not yet answered the complaint. No court has ruled on any of it. But what happens when thousands of competing businesses begin relying on the same algorithm to determine prices? Price fixing has been illegal in California for more than a century, and the plaintiffs are suing under that old law. What's new is a statute that took effect on January 1 — AB 325, the Preventing Algorithmic Collusion Act — which says plainly that you cannot escape a price-fixing charge by routing the conspiracy through software. Using pricing software is still perfectly legal, but using it to coordinate with your competitors is not. AB 325 makes it unlawful to use or distribute a "common pricing algorithm" — software that uses competitor data to recommend, align, or stabilize prices — as part of an agreement to restrain trade. Whatever you think of Sacramento, it closed that loophole first, and this case is the first real test of it. The A-word Washington is applying pressure of its own — though it is worth being precise about what kind. On July 3, the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission sent every state attorney general a letter urging them to investigate whether antitrust violations or price gouging are keeping gas prices artificially high. "Recent volatility in crude oil prices does not suspend either the antitrust laws or state consumer protection laws," they wrote, "and it does not authorize companies to manipulate retail prices or collude with their competitors." The letter followed President Trump's complaint, posted to Truth Social on June 23, that falling crude prices weren't reaching drivers. But read that letter closely and you'll notice something. It never mentions algorithms. Not once. The federal government is going after gas prices with the same tools it has always used, while the argument about the software is being made by three drivers and their lawyers in a Sacramento courtroom. Nobody in Washington has said the word yet. And whether any of these investigations turns up illegal conduct remains to be seen. Anyone who has driven for more than a few years knows the pattern. Prices spike within days of a geopolitical event, then drift down at a painfully slow pace. Economists even have a name for it: the "rockets and feathers" effect, and they have studied it for decades. Researchers point to several reasons, including inventory replacement costs, consumer behavior, and local competition. None of those explanations necessarily involve illegal activity.   Dirty work   But artificial intelligence introduces an entirely new variable. Unlike traditional pricing models, today's software can monitor competitors continuously, process enormous amounts of market data instantly, and recommend price changes faster than any human pricing manager ever could. If dozens or even hundreds of competing retailers rely on similar recommendations generated from comparable market data, the practical result may be less price competition — without anyone ever picking up the phone to coordinate prices. That possibility isn't unique to gasoline. Regulators have already gone after algorithmic pricing in apartment rentals, and they're looking at hotel rooms, airline tickets, and online retail. The Justice Department sued RealPage over the software landlords used to set rents and settled the case last November. The concern in every case is the same: that algorithms may accomplish indirectly what competitors have long been prohibited from doing directly. It's worth being precise about what that settlement did and didn't say. RealPage paid no penalty, and the government made no finding that it broke the law. What the DOJ objected to was the use of nonpublic information from competing landlords — not the software itself. Using an algorithm to price your product isn't illegal. Feeding it your competitors' private numbers is where the trouble starts. That distinction is going to decide the gas station case too. Technology moves faster than regulation. Thin margins This debate also exposes another misconception. When Americans get angry about gas prices, they aim that anger at the oil companies. In reality, what you pay at the pump includes crude oil costs, refining expenses, transportation, taxes, distribution, and retail pricing. Gas stations generally operate on thin per-gallon margins — the National Association of Convenience Stores puts the net at roughly a dime a gallon once credit card fees and operating costs come out — while state taxes and regulatory costs can dramatically affect what you pay locally, particularly in a state like California. If gasoline prices are rising because of global supply disruptions, consumers may not like it, but they can understand it. Markets move. Wars affect energy. Hurricanes interrupt refining. But if pricing software is reducing competition by encouraging retailers to move together instead of competing aggressively for customers, consumers deserve answers. Artificial intelligence is quietly becoming the invisible middleman in countless financial decisions Americans make every day — insurance rates, airline tickets, hotel rooms, online prices, and now what you pay every time you pull up to the pump. Most consumers never know an algorithm was involved; they simply assume that's what the market decided. Algorithms don't care whether you're commuting to work, driving your kids to school, or trying to keep your small business afloat. They don't understand household budgets or family vacations. They optimize. That's what they were built to do. The question was never whether artificial intelligence can set prices more efficiently. It's whether we've quietly allowed machines to redefine what competition means. Because if software can determine the price of something as essential as gasoline today, what will it be deciding tomorrow?   https://www.theblaze.com/lifestyle/is-ai-quietly-deciding-what-you-pay-at-the-gas-pump  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...