Jump to content

Why does a F350 Tremor Ride So Much Nicer Than My Silverado?

UWSkier

By UWSkier
in 6.6L Gas V8 (L8T)

 Share

Recommended Posts

UWSkier Enthusiast

UWSkier

Posted
Posted

This is my first HD truck after a lifetime of half tons.  I figured the rough ride was simply to be expected.  I'd always read that amongst the HDs, GMs tend to ride the nicest.  So I was absolutely shocked last week when I spent considerable time in an F350 Powerstroke w Tremor package and the ride quality was far far superior to my LTZ Z71 with 18k miles.  Over road cracks and potholes that would have me bracing for impact in my truck, the Ford barely flinched.  It wasn't as composed as my previous 1500 Denali, but it was closer to it ride-wise than it was to my LTZ.  If Denali is 0 and LTZ is 10, the Tremor was probably a 3.5 or 4.0.

 

I know the Rancho shocks suck... but is this just a matter of putting Bilstein 4600s on all corners and calling it good?  I've already reprogrammed my TPMS to run lower tire pressures, running 55 PSI all around.

UWSkier Enthusiast

UWSkier

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 hours ago, Another JR said:

Bigger tires at low pressure?

I have the 18" rims and run low pressures already so not likely that.

ShotgunZ71 Senior Enthusiast

ShotgunZ71

Posted
Posted

Ford figured something out with the 23 update. They absolutely ride much better than previous generations. I went from a 2021 Silverado 3500HD High Country to a 2024 F-350 Lariat Tremor and the ride is much better. I was thinking tires, too, but others that have been in a 2023 or 2024 Super Duty say that they are smooth as well.

 

One thing is sure, the GM seats suck and get worse with every generation or update.

lineman1234 Enthusiast

lineman1234

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Pryme said:

Whenever I hear tremor I think of that old movie with big worms. That’s all I got. 

When i think of pryme, spelt different, i think of that movie with the trucks and such that transform. 

  • Haha 2
newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted (edited)
21 hours ago, UWSkier said:

This is my first HD truck after a lifetime of half tons.  I figured the rough ride was simply to be expected.  I'd always read that amongst the HDs, GMs tend to ride the nicest.  So I was absolutely shocked last week when I spent considerable time in an F350 Powerstroke w Tremor package and the ride quality was far far superior to my LTZ Z71 with 18k miles.  Over road cracks and potholes that would have me bracing for impact in my truck, the Ford barely flinched.  It wasn't as composed as my previous 1500 Denali, but it was closer to it ride-wise than it was to my LTZ.  If Denali is 0 and LTZ is 10, the Tremor was probably a 3.5 or 4.0.

 

I know the Rancho shocks suck... but is this just a matter of putting Bilstein 4600s on all corners and calling it good?  I've already reprogrammed my TPMS to run lower tire pressures, running 55 PSI all around.

 

 

Tremor has slightly softer suspension.  That is also why you can't order plow prep or heavy springs/camper package on them.  It also has 35" tires (LT285/75R18) so more compliancy in its ride.  So shock change, 35"s and springs all add up to the better ride.  

 

If you drove a ZR2 HD you'd find that it probably drives like the Tremor as that has the Multimatic DSSV shocks and 35" tires (LT305/70R18).  I drove one around the block at work and it was almost 1/2 ton in its ride compared to an equivalent regular HD.  

 

ZR2 HD (and AT4X HD), GM put the DSSVs and 35" tires but left the springs alone so you get the softer, more compliant ride but don't lose on getting plow prep or 5th wheel or heavy spring packages.  

Edited by newdude
  • Like 1
KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted

Some trucks have suspension geared to going fast off road. Others geared for hauling. That’s the difference. If you ever road a Raptor your mind would be blown. 

  • Like 2
BuckWallace Enthusiast

BuckWallace

Posted
Posted

Interesting. I drove a 2022 F250 Tremor before I ordered my 2024 AT4 3500, and the rough ride and heavy steering in the Tremor is what pushed me to the GMC. It sounds like post-2022 is much better, though? 

UWSkier Enthusiast

UWSkier

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, newdude said:

 

 

Tremor has slightly softer suspension.  That is also why you can't order plow prep or heavy springs/camper package on them.  It also has 35" tires (LT285/75R18) so more compliancy in its ride.  So shock change, 35"s and springs all add up to the better ride.  

 

If you drove a ZR2 HD you'd find that it probably drives like the Tremor as that has the Multimatic DSSV shocks and 35" tires (LT305/70R18).  I drove one around the block at work and it was almost 1/2 ton in its ride compared to an equivalent regular HD.  

 

ZR2 HD (and AT4X HD), GM put the DSSVs and 35" tires but left the springs alone so you get the softer, more compliant ride but don't lose on getting plow prep or 5th wheel or heavy spring packages.  

Makes sense I suppose.  Know of anyone making a multimatic type shock that doesn't completely break the bank?  I have the 18" rims and can try to fit some 35s next time around.

 

8 hours ago, BuckWallace said:

Interesting. I drove a 2022 F250 Tremor before I ordered my 2024 AT4 3500, and the rough ride and heavy steering in the Tremor is what pushed me to the GMC. It sounds like post-2022 is much better, though? 

Guess so.  I was quite impressed.

Edited by UWSkier
Chuck FB Enthusiast

Chuck FB

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 4/9/2025 at 3:42 PM, UWSkier said:

I have the 18" rims and run low pressures already so not likely that.

You got me curious as to what torsion bar rating you have on your truck, if its the standard 4800 pound front axle rating or a higher rating. Also have you tried weighing the trucks individual axles with the people and typical stuff you pack in the truck to get a handle on what the axles are actually carrying for weight ?.

 

The truck I bought recently comes with the factory 20 tire offering but weight capacity wise its almost the mirror image of the 18" tire because your sidewall is taller so your volume is pretty much the same. However you have that somewhat taller sidewall so if anything your truck would ride a bit better than on the 20's like mine. I've mentioned this elsewhere on this forum I believe and it may shock some to hear the pressures I run with the relatively empty truck ( some tool etc items in the back plus a cover and rubber bed mat etc and a full tank of fuel and just me in the truck ) but at this point not carrying very much and going on the tire size pressure chart relative to the axle weights checked on a DOT scale, I am on the line for capacity with 40 pounds in the front, and have 300 + pounds grace yet for running the 35 pounds I am for the rear axle. Of course I would have to pump the rear tires up some if I was going to be packing anything of substance or a trailer with any amount of hitch weight. But being that much lower than the 60 front/ 80 rear the truck maxes out at sure hides the little cracks in the pavement that it certainly felt when I bought it and the pressures were jacked up like that. Also with other trucks in the past and with 10 ply tires as well, it can make quite a noticeable difference even from 35 jumping up to 45/50 pounds, the harshness starts to ramp up if the weight of the truck isn't there to justify the pressure increase.

 

Weighing the axles is the only way one really knows without guessing as to what one can safely lower the pressures down to.

Edited by Chuck FB
  • Like 1
UWSkier Enthusiast

UWSkier

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 4/10/2025 at 5:36 PM, Chuck FB said:

You got me curious as to what torsion bar rating you have on your truck, if its the standard 4800 pound front axle rating or a higher rating. Also have you tried weighing the trucks individual axles with the people and typical stuff you pack in the truck to get a handle on what the axles are actually carrying for weight ?.

 

The truck I bought recently comes with the factory 20 tire offering but weight capacity wise its almost the mirror image of the 18" tire because your sidewall is taller so your volume is pretty much the same. However you have that somewhat taller sidewall so if anything your truck would ride a bit better than on the 20's like mine. I've mentioned this elsewhere on this forum I believe and it may shock some to hear the pressures I run with the relatively empty truck ( some tool etc items in the back plus a cover and rubber bed mat etc and a full tank of fuel and just me in the truck ) but at this point not carrying very much and going on the tire size pressure chart relative to the axle weights checked on a DOT scale, I am on the line for capacity with 40 pounds in the front, and have 300 + pounds grace yet for running the 35 pounds I am for the rear axle. Of course I would have to pump the rear tires up some if I was going to be packing anything of substance or a trailer with any amount of hitch weight. But being that much lower than the 60 front/ 80 rear the truck maxes out at sure hides the little cracks in the pavement that it certainly felt when I bought it and the pressures were jacked up like that. Also with other trucks in the past and with 10 ply tires as well, it can make quite a noticeable difference even from 35 jumping up to 45/50 pounds, the harshness starts to ramp up if the weight of the truck isn't there to justify the pressure increase.

 

Weighing the axles is the only way one really knows without guessing as to what one can safely lower the pressures down to.

standard bars at the factory setting I believe.  It's pretty stiffly sprung.  I run 55 PSI in the tires but could likely go lower.  Part of the problem is the Rancho shocks have all the rebound damping of a pogo stick.  

  • Like 1
Chuck FB Enthusiast

Chuck FB

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, UWSkier said:

standard bars at the factory setting I believe.  It's pretty stiffly sprung.  I run 55 PSI in the tires but could likely go lower.  Part of the problem is the Rancho shocks have all the rebound damping of a pogo stick.  

I am guessing you bought the truck slightly used ?. Odds are typically that if you don't see much for anything modified, such components as torsion bars would be the stock ones, especially if it says 4800 on the B pillar, not many are going to throw in heavier bars unless its a work truck that they intend to throw on a snow plow. However you could always measure the diameter of the bars and compare to the diameter of known stock size bars ( info that has been mentioned on this forum etc ). Mind you I have assumed yours is the standard length box, if its the long box then it would have the 5200 rated bars. Also one could look to see where the jounce bumpers are relative to the lower A arm, if for reason they were resting too hard on the rubber bumpers or the other way that someone cranked the keys up to "level" the truck which doesn't do the ride any good. Tire pressures, that might be something you have room to lower but for safety reasons the weigh scale is the way to go to make sure they are not under inflated. So far I have been happy enough with the speed bumps I have gone over in parking lots etc in that the truck didn't bounce like a basket ball after I went over them or how the truck handled them ride wise .. considering it is a HD truck, but keep in mind I only have around 750 miles on the truck, would not surprise me at all that yours could be starting to fade a bit if you have any amount of miles on them.

 

If you planned on keeping the truck for the long run and seeking out a better ride on the front anyway, yes the cognito bars would be an option, and shocks is a good question and only from reading have I sort of got it in my head for a more economy shock to replace these Rancho's when they crap out with some Bilstein 4600 series to seek out a slighly softer reaction than the 5100's. If the Cognito bars were not so expensive in Canada I would spring for a set of them myself.

Chuck FB Enthusiast

Chuck FB

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, UWSkier said:

standard bars at the factory setting I believe.  It's pretty stiffly sprung.  I run 55 PSI in the tires but could likely go lower.  Part of the problem is the Rancho shocks have all the rebound damping of a pogo stick.  

Adding another thought, it might be interesting if you were able to do a measurement from the center of the front hubs to the underside of the fender trim. It would have to be done on a level surface to be accurate with the fuel tank fairly full and nothing too insane of weight on one side or the other in the box to throw off its natural stance. That would do two things, show if there is any substantial difference between sides ( as long as a rear spring wasn't damaged, that would throw a whole new element into the picture ) and if lets say the suspension has sagged down on the front or instead been cranked right up by someone.

UWSkier Enthusiast

UWSkier

Posted
  • Author
Posted

ride height is stock, truck was new off the lot when I got it.  The ride isn't atrociously bad, I'm just surprised how well that Ford rode compared to my truck.

  • 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...