Jump to content

Fox 2.5 HTO installed.

Epsilon Plus
 Share

Recommended Posts

Epsilon Plus Enthusiast

Epsilon Plus

Posted
Posted

Fox 2.5 HTO that replaced Bilstein 5100 (1.8"). Big difference at speed. Even low speed the bumps are still there, but all the jolts are gone. Cruise right over speed bumps. Not quite my buddies Ram HD on coils & King remotes, but for my sled I'm happy. Should get even better as they break in.

 

Yes, per Fox, they are installed body up, shaft down.

 

Bilstein 5100 can bite my rear. Pure stiff trash like the stock Ranchos. Should have known from the price but the Internet sure does love them for some reason.

 

@GMCnewbie turned me on to these. I think they came out this year and are marketed primarily for HD trucks and heavy Wrangler/Glads with heavy tires. 

 

I saw a Shock Surplus video where the tech said the GM twins with the very quick reacting torsion bars torture 2.0" and under shocks, even with reservoirs. Looking forward to bombing around on these a bit.

 

 

20250823_144816-COLLAGE.thumb.jpg.96fe3cd140a56d43d59634dab393e686.jpg

20250823_123218.thumb.jpg.2d65d8dba179bd898929da4a2ce35595.jpg

  • Like 3
  • 2 weeks later...
OS RR Enthusiast

OS RR

Posted
Posted

Wonder how these would compare to the stock Non-Z71 shocks.

 

Everyone praises bilsteins (and my lizzard brain likes shiny silver) but I do see the occasional resentment towards them and it stays in the back of my mind.

Epsilon Plus Enthusiast

Epsilon Plus

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Likely more firm than GM black shocks. These are for big tire trucks that like to bound off of speed bumps and fire road dips.

 

No matter what the T1 HD is going to ride like crap. Especially a gas truck with less weight over the nose. 3,500+ lb payload leafs in the back and torsion bar front suspension is a recipe for feeling everything on the road good shocks or not.

UWSkier Enthusiast

UWSkier

Posted
Posted

Would like to try them but it's a bit more than I want to spend on an experiment.  Hoping to see some more reviews of them first.

 

Biggest issue I have with the Ranchos is the rebound damping.  They have all the rebound control of a pogo stick.

  • Haha 1
kylant Enthusiast

kylant

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, UWSkier said:

Would like to try them but it's a bit more than I want to spend on an experiment.  Hoping to see some more reviews of them first.

 

Biggest issue I have with the Ranchos is the rebound damping.  They have all the rebound control of a pogo stick.

I have a set for sale, less than 2k miles on them. Will make a very good deal on them. 

PBNB Enthusiast

PBNB

Posted
Posted

I have been looking at the Bilsteins after a bouncy road trip. I like the idea of the Fox setup but not too sure about the height options. We bought our 3500 second hand so not too sure what it has for a lift but it seems to sit level and has the Ranchos sso I am thinking that it is a stock Z71 configuration. 

 

Sounds like the Fox shock is the way to go.

 

How do they handle the rebound?

Chuck FB Enthusiast

Chuck FB

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, PBNB said:

I have been looking at the Bilsteins after a bouncy road trip. I like the idea of the Fox setup but not too sure about the height options. We bought our 3500 second hand so not too sure what it has for a lift but it seems to sit level and has the Ranchos sso I am thinking that it is a stock Z71 configuration. 

 

Sounds like the Fox shock is the way to go.

 

How do they handle the rebound?

I wonder if your torsion bars have been cranked up ( and possibly too much ) and perhaps nothing was done on the rear. The rear should be relatively easy to see if a spacer was installed between the axle pad and the spring pack and that it has the factory leaf springs. With the front the easiest way to tell would be to park the truck on a level cement surface ( tires the same size and pressure the same on the axle being measured ! ) and measure from the center of the hub to the underside of the fender plastic trim as that way it takes tire diameter and inflation pressure out of the equation as errors in comparing to another persons measurement. From what I found on my truck when it was brand new and realized it had not been adjusted evenly from the factory which is no surprise, but it averaged out to about 24 1/2 inches. From what I have read 25 inches is considered to be about the maximum distance to raise it to as that is still keeping the angles of the tie rods, upper ball joint, cv joint shafts all at a good operating angle for lasting and to retain the ride as well as still allowing a 3 inch droop to the suspension. Cranking it way up above that causes a stiffer ride and the suspension to top out as there isn't enough droop anymore and is very hard on the steering components but its the cheap way to raising the truck. It would be interesting to see where your truck is sitting at first before doing anything else. 

PBNB Enthusiast

PBNB

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, kylant said:

I have a set for sale, less than 2k miles on them. Will make a very good deal on them. 

Tell us more about this good deal?

PBNB Enthusiast

PBNB

Posted
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Chuck FB said:

I wonder if your torsion bars have been cranked up ( and possibly too much ) and perhaps nothing was done on the rear. The rear should be relatively easy to see if a spacer was installed between the axle pad and the spring pack and that it has the factory leaf springs. With the front the easiest way to tell would be to park the truck on a level cement surface ( tires the same size and pressure the same on the axle being measured ! ) and measure from the center of the hub to the underside of the fender plastic trim as that way it takes tire diameter and inflation pressure out of the equation as errors in comparing to another persons measurement. From what I found on my truck when it was brand new and realized it had not been adjusted evenly from the factory which is no surprise, but it averaged out to about 24 1/2 inches. From what I have read 25 inches is considered to be about the maximum distance to raise it to as that is still keeping the angles of the tie rods, upper ball joint, cv joint shafts all at a good operating angle for lasting and to retain the ride as well as still allowing a 3 inch droop to the suspension. Cranking it way up above that causes a stiffer ride and the suspension to top out as there isn't enough droop anymore and is very hard on the steering components but its the cheap way to raising the truck. It would be interesting to see where your truck is sitting at first before doing anything else. 

Checked out the measurements and it looks like:

 

Front averages 24 1/4" and rear 24 1/2" So I suspect that this is totally stock height. I didn't see any blocks under the leaf pack in the rear.

Edited by PBNB
  • Like 1
Chuck FB Enthusiast

Chuck FB

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, PBNB said:

Checked out the measurements and it looks like:

 

Front averages 24 1/4" and rear 24 1/2" So I suspect that this is totally stock height. I didn't see any blocks under the leaf pack in the rear.

Yes that sounds right on for stock height on both ends so no concern there. How many km on the truck as that may be somewhat of an indicator as to shock wear and I do keep hearing that the factory Rancho's don't last very long before things become bouncy on the rebound. I know that I will be faced with a decision on what shocks to go with at some point and haven't figured out what is the right choice. if the Bilstein 4600 would be an ok more economical choice for example and ride a little better than the 5100's . 

PBNB Enthusiast

PBNB

Posted
Posted

The truck has just gone past 50k (30k miles). I had Ranchos on my little 4x4 a long time ago and seem to recall that they didn't last very long then.

 

I am liking what I am hearing about the Fox 2.5's but a bit on the spendy side!

  • Like 1
Chuck FB Enthusiast

Chuck FB

Posted
Posted

You hit the nail on the head with why some of the choices have a negative side, they are beyond stupid expensive in Canada !. Bad enough south of the border but when I look up suppliers in Canada and see what they are asking its insane, we can thank Trudeau and friends for that as that was when our dollar went from on par to flushed down the toilet. 

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

    • PunchT37
      Parking Brake - Automatic Engagement Questions

      By PunchT37 · Posted

      I have a `25, 1500 that auto sets on incline. Never knew that at first. I have the electronic shifter. Just think if it didn`t do that? Unlike a mechanical shift that you can muscle out of park, how would you get this thing out? That would be a problem.   What I found out later is, I don`t have to push the button to release. Just put it in gear.   Setting parameters? Don`t know if it`s possible.
    • SoCal Angler
      Parking Brake - Automatic Engagement Questions

      By SoCal Angler · Posted

      2023 GMC 3500 HD, SLE, 6.6L Gas, 4x4, 6 Spd Options:  SLE Convenience Package; Driver Alert Package 1; Spray on Bedliner; X31 Off Road Package; TRAILERING MIRRORS, HEATED POWER -ADJUSTABLE, AUTO DIMMING, WITH TURN INDICATORS WHEELHOUSE LINERS, REAR INC. REAR AXLE - 3.73 RATIO INC. GVWR, 11,350 LBS. (5148 KG) INC. FRONT AND REAR PARK ASSIST, INC. ULTRASONIC     I have been launching my new boat and noticed some things related to the parking brake.. I usually set the parking brake (habit) when on flat ground for typical driving.    When backed down on the launch ramp to launch the boat and I place gear selector into Park, the parking brake activates automatically. My second nature is to set parking brake manually and noticed I was turing the parking brake off.  The parking brake appears to be setting itself automatically.   I looked all over my owner's manual and only found references to being on an incline and manually setting parking brake, or at times parking brake will be auto engaged, but nothing specific to my situation.    When is the parking brake automatically engaged?  Under what specific circumstances?  Can the auto set parameters be changed?     I like the auto set feature.  It would be nice if always engaged when shifted into Park and released when shifted out of Park (like my wifes 2025 RAV4).   Thanks!    
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...