Jump to content

Installing a Trailboss 2" rear lift block on a non-trailboss truck

fondupot
 Share

Recommended Posts

fondupot Senior Enthusiast

fondupot

Posted
Posted

Hi all, I installed the 2" block from a Trail Boss on my non-trail boss truck (2022 Custom). The part number I used was 84379975.

 

I was wondering if these blocks are tapered? I didn't think to measure them when I installed them, and now I am having second thoughts.

 

I can't seem to get an accurate measurement with them installed on the truck. As far as I can tell there wasn't any indication of a forward/backward indication on the block itself, which makes me think they are not tapered.

 

But I developed a very slight "rumble" coming from the rear of the truck after installing the blocks and I am not sure what it is. It's not that bad, but definitely noticeable. I also installed new Bilstein 5100's out back and have new Bilstein 5100's up front set on 1.5".

 

Any input is appreciated. Thanks

Diamond817 Enthusiast

Diamond817

Posted
Posted (edited)

So you added 1/2" more rake to your truck? 2" rear lift and 1.5" front lift?

 

The blocks are flat. The axle might be bound up a bit depending on the angle of the axle when the u-bolts were tightened. On a flat/level surface I would loosen all 4 U-bolts, bounce the rear of my truck with my body weight, then torque the U-bolts to 85lb-ft.

 

 

-

Edited by Diamond817
  • Like 2
fondupot Senior Enthusiast

fondupot

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Yea, so the truck was pretty much level, before the lift, because I have a toolbox in the back with a bunch of stuff in it on a regular basis. But I wanted to get a little rake back. The rear lifted 2" with blocks, and I did 1.5" with the Bilsteins, because I read reports of them lifting more than what they were rated, so I didn't want to go too high. I ended up only getting about 1.25" up front, so I may have to do an adjustment and put the fronts on the 2" setting to bring it up a bit. Either way, the truck has about 1" of rake right now from rear to front. Not bad.

 

As for your recommendation, thanks. That seems logical. I can try that this weekend and see what it does.

Edited by fondupot
Vincej138 Enthusiast

Vincej138

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, fondupot said:

Yea, so the truck was pretty much level, before the lift, because I have a toolbox in the back with a bunch of stuff in it on a regular basis. But I wanted to get a little rake back. The rear lifted 2" with blocks, and I did 1.5" with the Bilsteins, because I read reports of them lifting more than what they were rated, so I didn't want to go too high. I ended up only getting about 1.25" up front, so I may have to do an adjustment and put the fronts on the 2" setting to bring it up a bit. Either way, the truck has about 1" of rake right now from rear to front. Not bad.

 

As for your recommendation, thanks. That seems logical. I can try that this weekend and see what it does.

 

Your springs will settle also after a few days of driving. I think that's a bit of thing people see when they post higher #'s. Even on my 2.7L the 0" was a bit higher, then settled to be true. 

Diamond817 Enthusiast

Diamond817

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, fondupot said:

Yea, so the truck was pretty much level, before the lift, because I have a toolbox in the back with a bunch of stuff in it on a regular basis. But I wanted to get a little rake back. The rear lifted 2" with blocks, and I did 1.5" with the Bilsteins, because I read reports of them lifting more than what they were rated, so I didn't want to go too high. I ended up only getting about 1.25" up front, so I may have to do an adjustment and put the fronts on the 2" setting to bring it up a bit. Either way, the truck has about 1" of rake right now from rear to front. Not bad.

 

As for your recommendation, thanks. That seems logical. I can try that this weekend and see what it does.

Interesting. How much does that tool box weigh? I got exactly 1.5" of front lift from installing the Bilsteins. The weight of the tool box might be compressing the front end that 1/4".

fondupot Senior Enthusiast

fondupot

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 1/12/2024 at 11:14 AM, Diamond817 said:

So you added 1/2" more rake to your truck? 2" rear lift and 1.5" front lift?

 

The blocks are flat. The axle might be bound up a bit depending on the angle of the axle when the u-bolts were tightened. On a flat/level surface I would loosen all 4 U-bolts, bounce the rear of my truck with my body weight, then torque the U-bolts to 85lb-ft.

 

 

-


So I did this over the weekend. Didn’t seem to make a difference. I didn’t loosen the shocks. But I loosened the u-bolts and then jumped up and down several times, til I was out of breath. 
 

I wonder if my u-joints are worn and just aren’t happy with the additional 2” in them. The truck has 95,000 miles in it. 
 

Did some highway driving today and it seems like the “rumble” is present at all speeds. It’s accompanied by a slight vibration that can be felt throughout the truck as well. 
 

Any other thoughts?

Diamond817 Enthusiast

Diamond817

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, fondupot said:


So I did this over the weekend. Didn’t seem to make a difference. I didn’t loosen the shocks. But I loosened the u-bolts and then jumped up and down several times, til I was out of breath. 
 

I wonder if my u-joints are worn and just aren’t happy with the additional 2” in them. The truck has 95,000 miles in it. 
 

Did some highway driving today and it seems like the “rumble” is present at all speeds. It’s accompanied by a slight vibration that can be felt throughout the truck as well. 
 

Any other thoughts?

 

I would look at the U joints. How do the front hubs feel when you spin them? How about the CV axles?

fondupot Senior Enthusiast

fondupot

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

I popped under the truck to inspect the u-joints. I checked for play by hand, none apparent. The rear u-joint has some grayish dust/grease around it. Maybe that’s a sign it’s going bad. I should have taken a picture. I’ll go out there later again and get one. 
 

Front CVs look fine. Front bearings appear fine. The noise feeling definitely feels like it’s coming from the “center” of the truck. 

It was definitely paired to installing the blocks. I actually did the rear blocks and shocks about a week before I had a shop do the front struts. And I noticed the noise/vibration immediately on my test drive after doing the rear shocks and blocks. 


 

 

Edited by fondupot
fondupot Senior Enthusiast

fondupot

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Here are some photos of my u-joints. You can see the grayish dust/grease on the rear u-joint. Not as much on the front one, but a little.

 

REAR

IMG_8296.thumb.JPG.aba56744f1f8633210aa7255458fe1fd.JPG

 

IMG_8295.thumb.JPG.09afe934b3ad95039d4b0a38bbb2303d.JPG

 

IMG_8294.thumb.JPG.e59f3ec1e5167e224b1b7c59816ccaec.JPG

 

 

 

FRONT

IMG_8297.thumb.JPG.3f9374a67e6addb3882b81fc98d05009.JPG

 

IMG_8298.thumb.JPG.891b6824643d5fd5fa5cd7a976d5aa56.JPG

fondupot Senior Enthusiast

fondupot

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I got curious again today and went under the truck. This time I measured from the front of the spring perch to the center of the bolt on the front leaf spring bushing. 
 

On my driver side I got 29.5”

On my passenger side I got 29.25”

 

Meaning it appears my axle is not straight. This is most likely the cause of my vibration/rumble. It has to be. 
 

I am still going to replace the u-joints as a precaution, they should arrive today or tomorrow. But I am also going to loosen the u-bolts back up and straighten the axle back so it’s even on both sides of the leafs. Maybe the centering pin on the blocks has a large enough hole so that there is some play in getting them perfectly centered. 

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

    342,770
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Paul8556
    Newest Member
    Paul8556
    Joined

  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 592 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      I hope to high heaven this is wrong. My Chevy farm trucks frame is lasting way longer than a newer Nissan Titan XD I got for a steal, and it only pulls trailers. A decade younger and it's frame is already way rustier than the waxed Chevy I drive across longs and ditches. Also, hasn't Ford been having tones of troubles with rusted frames? 
    • Coastie05
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Coastie05 · Posted

      Batteries don’t always show signs of a few years ago my vehicle started fine in the morning and took me to work. After work the battery was completely dead and I needed a jump. No, I didn’t leave anything on and the battery was only a couple months old. It was replaced under warranty. 
    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      AFM is confirmed in the Corvette engine, so I'm assuming the higher volume trucks will get it as well
    • NDKoze
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By NDKoze · Posted

      If his battery was that bad I would think it would have been showing signs before this that were ignored. Stinks that it happened the way it did in rush hour traffic, but this seems like a pretty fringe scenario. I don't mind it that bad and never turn it off. The only slight annoyance for me is the slight delay between brake to gas, but I have gotten used to it and figure if it can save a little gas why not.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a good correction. I think “severity” was probably the wrong word for what I meant. What I really mean is closer to event priority, relevance, and actionability — not “this code is severe” or “replace this part.” I agree that a truck can have a lot of trivial or historical communication codes, and if the product starts pushing alerts for every stored or low-value event, people will ignore it very quickly. So the alert logic would need to be filtered. For example, I would not want a random old communication code to generate a push notification by itself. A useful alert would probably need to be based on things like: - new vs historical - active vs stored - repeated vs one-time - duration of the event - whether it happened near the driver-marked symptom - whether it happened together with voltage drop, reset, bus-off, misfire, oil-pressure change, etc. - whether the same pattern repeats under similar conditions So instead of saying “severity,” maybe the product should organize events by affected system and priority. For example: Misfire event: Show misfire counts / roughness first, then fuel trims, RPM/load, DFM/AFM state if available, coolant/oil temp, voltage, and related DTCs. Oil-pressure event: Show oil pressure first, but only in context — RPM, load, oil temperature, coolant temperature, DFM/AFM state if available, voltage, and baseline comparison. Communication event: Show which module/network/message dropped, whether voltage dropped, whether the recorder reset, whether it was active or historical, and whether it repeated. Voltage/reset event: Show battery voltage, crank/wake/sleep state, module reset, communication dropouts, and what came back online first. That also solves the display-order problem you mentioned. The main report should not always show the same fixed list first. It should show the system that appears abnormal first, and then the supporting values for that system. I also agree that the truck already has an oil pressure gauge and MIL. The point would not be to duplicate those. The value would be in showing what else was happening before and after the warning or symptom. For example, if the MIL comes on for a misfire, the truck already told the driver there is a problem. The useful part would be: - which cylinder or bank looked abnormal first - whether it happened after an AFM/DFM transition - whether fuel trims were already moving - whether oil pressure or voltage changed at the same time - whether the same pattern happened previously without a MIL On the OBD port point, I think you may be right for a consumer-facing version. OBD is much easier for the average owner: - easier install - easier removal - inside the cabin - easier phone connection - easier data download - easier to include a pass-through port for another scanner OBD is also the right place for DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration information, Mode 6, and normal scan-tool parameters. The reason I was looking at ECM-side recording is that some events may be gone by the time someone plugs in a scanner, and some powertrain-side network evidence may not be available the same way through the DLC. But I agree that if an OBD-based version can capture enough useful evidence for most owners, that is probably the cleaner consumer product. Maybe the split is: - OBD/DLC version for most consumers - ECM-side version only if it proves it adds evidence that the OBD version cannot get - shop/pro version if deeper powertrain-side event evidence is actually useful So I would not want to force the inline approach if the OBD workflow solves most of the real-world problem. Your last point is probably the key product requirement: the report should be specific to the system showing the abnormality. Not “here are 50 parameters.” More like: “Misfire-related event detected. Here are the misfire/fuel/DFM/context values.” or “Oil-pressure-related event detected. Here is oil pressure compared with RPM/load/temp/baseline.” or “Communication event detected. Here is what dropped, when, and whether voltage/reset happened first.” That is a much better way to think about the report.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...