Bilstein shocks thread

Pivot · May 9, 2019

Thanks Dan. I had read that thread and watched the video he has on youtube. I believe that is the only member that has really discussed this option. He really seemed to like it and it's puzzling that nobody else talks about Eibach. 1 or 2 additional vids availabe . I have super low miles on truck. Tough to gauge input when many people that swap shocks do so at 50k + miles. I'm at a big disadvantage with 4x4 truck shops far and few between in my area. I'd love to go in and talk to a local shop with experience. If you have a jeep , that's another matter. I'll keep watching, because Eibach seems pretty popular with stage 1. I say this because a bunch of places are backordered , at least for 2017 1500 series. I like the coils more than blocks. If my shocks were on last legs , I'd go Bilstein. Eibach gives you 2 1/2" front lift with the coils. Additional $200. I always give the edge to products made in USA.

Red_5 · May 9, 2019

19 hours ago, Pivot said:

The more I research, the more I change my mind. I'm becoming real interested in The Eibach Pro Truck Lift System (Stage 1) kit consisting of lift springs and front and rear Pro Truck Sport Shocks.

Would love to hear feedback on Eibach Lift system with Coils vs Bilstein 5100. Possibly some of you considered before going with Bilstein? I have the Z60 sport suspension thats about an inch lower up front and 2 inches lower in back, than I believe the Z71 suspension. I'm sitting at 36 3/4" up front and 39 1/4 " in the rear. Ride quality is super important to me. Live in the NE and roads are narrow and twisty. Truck is a street queen and I'm pretty happy with how it handles. Looking to change the stance and increase wheel size. Nothing crazy. Looking at 275/60/20.

Would the Bilstein 6112 be a better comparison the the Eibach kit? I looked into the Eibach kit about a month or so before the 6112s finally became available. If the 6112s hadn't become available I would look at the Eibachs more closely but I like Bilstein's record of reliability with their shocks. Eibach has a great reputation for making springs but I don't know much about their dampers.

Pivot · May 9, 2019

Thanks Red_5. I've heard about them , but wasn't aware they were available for Chevy 1500, yet.. . I know they are out for Toyota and Ford. Bilstein shows a part # now B8-6112 # 47-273702. 4WP shows them as a kit , front only $732.49. I don't see the 6112 showing availability for rear? Wondering if guys are using the Bilstein 5100 in the rear? Besides the coil, beefier tube and 7 adjustments vs 5 on 5100. They basically adjust to same height of 5100. I'll have to look around and see if anyone is running these and how they like them. The rear 5100 are $80 on Amazon , last I checked

MRTMotorsports · May 9, 2019

13 minutes ago, Pivot said:

Thanks Red_5. I've heard about them , but wasn't aware they were available for Chevy 1500, yet.. . I know they are out for Toyota and Ford. Bilstein shows a part # now B8-6112 # 47-273702. 4WP shows them as a kit , front only $732.49. I don't see the 6112 showing availability for rear? Wondering if guys are using the Bilstein 5100 in the rear? Besides the coil, beefier tube and 7 adjustments vs 5 on 5100. They basically adjust to same height of 5100. I'll have to look around and see if anyone is running these and how they like them. The rear 5100 are $80 on Amazon , last I checked

6112s are a coilover only, no rear shocks will be made. Youll need to go with either a 5100 or the 5160 w/ reservoir. The 5160 rear is a tad longer than the 5100 to accommodate a larger lift block or add a leaf.

The performance and ride quality of the shocks described above is as follows. Bilstein 5100 < Eibach Pro Kit < Bilstein 6112. Its hard to compare the 2.0" diameter of the 5100 and the Eibach kit to the massive 2.65" diameter of the 6112. The larger shock size means the 6112 has 40% more dampening force than the 2" shocks do, which means it doesnt have to work nearly as hard to absorb an impact. The Eibach kit rides slightly better than the standard 5100s as it has its own coil spring and is tuned as a package. The 5100 is a major upgrade from the stock Rancho or Tenneco shocks in terms of ride quality, as mentioned in this thread.

6112s are $610 here - http://mrtmotorsports.net/bilstein-shock-sets/bilstein-6112/47273702/i-7474057.aspx

MRTMotorsports · May 9, 2019

Bilstein and Eibach are both made in the USA.

Bilstein's factory is in Hebron, KY.
Eibach's factory is in Corona, CA

Pivot · May 10, 2019

31 minutes ago, MRTMotorsports said:

6112s are a coilover only, no rear shocks will be made. Youll need to go with either a 5100 or the 5160 w/ reservoir. The 5160 rear is a tad longer than the 5100 to accommodate a larger lift block or add a leaf.

The performance and ride quality of the shocks described above is as follows. Bilstein 5100 < Eibach Pro Kit < Bilstein 6112. Its hard to compare the 2.0" diameter of the 5100 and the Eibach kit to the massive 2.65" diameter of the 6112. The larger shock size means the 6112 has 40% more dampening force than the 2" shocks do, which means it doesnt have to work nearly as hard to absorb an impact. The Eibach kit rides slightly better than the standard 5100s as it has its own coil spring and is tuned as a package. The 5100 is a major upgrade from the stock Rancho or Tenneco shocks in terms of ride quality, as mentioned in this thread.

6112s are $610 here - http://mrtmotorsports.net/bilstein-shock-sets/bilstein-6112/47273702/i-7474057.aspx

M thanks for the info and link. Thats a great price. I see you are in Vegas. I lived there 10 years before moving back east. Awesome place. I'll look into that info and check those rear shocks. Sounds like that's your shop? Some of the coilover kits like Fox, King seem like overkill for street. I was leaning Eibach because you get 2 1/2" up front + the sport shock in the rear would easily allow me to pull the stock rear block and place a 2" block in there, bumping me up roughly 3/4 inch.

You seem to imply that the Eibach might ride better for street? I understand the bigger tube on the 6112 would be superior in dirt and recover much quicker. Curious what you would select if you needed a level to allow larger wheels and didn't want to sacrifice ride quality? I would never take my truck off road. I have dirt bikes and ATV for that. My truck rides very smooth now and I'd really hate to see handling suffer just to stuff some bigger rubber underneath. I'm getting ready for Hockey playoffs , but will look at your site later. Lots of options. Thanks again.

manderson7015 · May 15, 2019

Bought a new '18 LT Z71 crew cab in December. Its my second of this platform. What a crap ride. Way sloppy with those Ranchos. Lots of leaf spring chatter. Cant wait to pull those crap Ranchos off and put Billstein on. Just wondering if the shock swap is enough to correct the sloppy bouncy ride.

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

papageoff · May 16, 2019

I called a 4wheel drive parts shop the other day to get 5100s put on at full lift and told the guy I wanted to keep the smaller (3/8" ish) bottom spacer from my leveling kit to avoid dropping the nose too much from it's current +2.25" level.

They told me they can't/won't do it because the truck won't align right. He said because the Bilsteins preload the springs, it'll throw off the geometry and I'd need new UCAs. Now, it seems to me that since the net lift the same or a bit less it should be fine.

What do all y'all think?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

PhunOne · May 16, 2019

17 hours ago, manderson7015 said:

Bought a new '18 LT Z71 crew cab in December. Its my second of this platform. What a crap ride. Way sloppy with those Ranchos. Lots of leaf spring chatter. Cant wait to pull those crap Ranchos off and put Billstein on. Just wondering if the shock swap is enough to correct the sloppy bouncy ride.

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

Have had Bilstein's on many vehicle's for over 25 years and have never been disappointed. Just put a set of 5160's on the rear of my 2018 Sierra 1500 with NHT and what a huge difference. Eliminated most all of the pogoing/bouncy ride without any harshness. Was very surprised that the rears alone made such a huge difference. Will be installing 6112's on the front shortly Yes, they are very big shocks, looks like front driveshaft clearance will be tighter.

dubwise · May 16, 2019

11 hours ago, papageoff said:

I called a 4wheel drive parts shop the other day to get 5100s put on at full lift and told the guy I wanted to keep the smaller (3/8" ish) bottom spacer from my leveling kit to avoid dropping the nose too much from it's current +2.25" level.

They told me they can't/won't do it because the truck won't align right. He said because the Bilsteins preload the springs, it'll throw off the geometry and I'd need new UCAs. Now, it seems to me that since the net lift the same or a bit less it should be fine.

What do all y'all think?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

I think you should find a new shop!

diyer2 · May 16, 2019

Question about the bilstein shock.

I don't want to change the height of my truck.

Just improve the ride.

What shock would work?

PhunOne · May 16, 2019

11 hours ago, papageoff said:

I called a 4wheel drive parts shop the other day to get 5100s put on at full lift and told the guy I wanted to keep the smaller (3/8" ish) bottom spacer from my leveling kit to avoid dropping the nose too much from it's current +2.25" level.

They told me they can't/won't do it because the truck won't align right. He said because the Bilsteins preload the springs, it'll throw off the geometry and I'd need new UCAs. Now, it seems to me that since the net lift the same or a bit less it should be fine.

What do all y'all think?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

It's simple geometry. When you add a spacer to the bottom or top of the shock/strut mounting points to raise the vehicle, you have increase the overall length of the shock/spring strut assembly by having added those blocks to either end. This increases the suspension travel drop allowed, along with changing the strut travel geometry, in which the stock upper control arm is effected by the most, along with your available wheel alignment. The 5100/6112's front shocks raise the ride height by increasing the compression on the spring by preloading the spring to gain the increased ride height. The overall length of the shock/spring strut assembly stays the same, therefore the designed suspension components geometry ratio has not changed and wheel alignment can be adjusted to compensate for the limited height increase allowed by the shock/spring preload. Available shock travel and overall suspension travel has not been changed by the Bilstein setup, but there will be a very slight increase in ride harshness because you are in effect putting in a stiffer spring as you increase that spring compression height adjustment. This is so small that it probably will go unnoticed by most truck owners.

I hope this helps with everyone's understanding on this debated question.

PhunOne · May 16, 2019

10 minutes ago, diyer2 said:

Question about the bilstein shock.

I don't want to change the height of my truck.

Just improve the ride.

What shock would work?

Bilstein 4600's are great for town/highway and light offroad.

For stock ride heights.

Have had them on two different trucks, always very happy with them.

Bilstein 5100's, slight improvement over the 4600's and shock length availability

Front shock allows height adjustment from stock to 1.85 inches.

Rear shocks available in different lengths from stock to raised trucks.

Bilstein 5160's adds remote reservoir to 5100's rear shocks

Bilstein 6112's, much heavier duty front stocks that come with their own springs cause of increased shock body size.

Allows height adjustment from stock to 1.85 inches.

papageoff · May 16, 2019

24 minutes ago, PhunOne said:

It's simple geometry. When you add a spacer to the bottom or top of the shock/strut mounting points to raise the vehicle, you have increase the overall length of the shock/spring strut assembly by having added those blocks to either end. This increases the suspension travel drop allowed, along with changing the strut travel geometry, in which the stock upper control arm is effected by the most, along with your available wheel alignment. The 5100/6112's front shocks raise the ride height by increasing the compression on the spring by preloading the spring to gain the increased ride height. The overall length of the shock/spring strut assembly stays the same, therefore the designed suspension components geometry ratio has not changed and wheel alignment can be adjusted to compensate for the limited height increase allowed by the shock/spring preload. Available shock travel and overall suspension travel has not been changed by the Bilstein setup, but there will be a very slight increase in ride harshness because you are in effect putting in a stiffer spring as you increase that spring compression height adjustment. This is so small that it probably will go unnoticed by most truck owners.

I hope this helps with everyone's understanding on this debated question.

That is a very nice explanation of how the two leveling methods differ. What I was getting at was how the guy was saying spring preload, vs spacers would affect the alignment capabilities differently. I just don't see why.

Let's say the current spacer kit which lifts the front end 2.25" lowers the resting position of the UCA's upper ball joint by say 5deg (made up number) relative to the UCA mounts (a fixed position). This downward deflection created the lift on the front end. The 5100s can provide about 1.85" of lift (iirc) and I'm talking about adding 0.375" under the shock. This would net 2.225" which is nearly the same as my 2.25" spacer combination.

Now, I realize that the spacer on the top of the shock vs the spring pre-load are different ways to achieve the same thing, but in the end the UCA droops about the same amount. So where would an alignment issue come from? The truck has been aligned twice since adding the spacer kit and it's never been a problem.

PhunOne · May 16, 2019

1 hour ago, papageoff said:

That is a very nice explanation of how the two leveling methods differ. What I was getting at was how the guy was saying spring preload, vs spacers would affect the alignment capabilities differently. I just don't see why.

Let's say the current spacer kit which lifts the front end 2.25" lowers the resting position of the UCA's upper ball joint by say 5deg (made up number) relative to the UCA mounts (a fixed position). This downward deflection created the lift on the front end. The 5100s can provide about 1.85" of lift (iirc) and I'm talking about adding 0.375" under the shock. This would net 2.225" which is nearly the same as my 2.25" spacer combination.

Now, I realize that the spacer on the top of the shock vs the spring pre-load are different ways to achieve the same thing, but in the end the UCA droops about the same amount. So where would an alignment issue come from? The truck has been aligned twice since adding the spacer kit and it's never been a problem.

Adding so little to the length of the strut would have minimal effect on the issues described. As additional length is added to the strut, thus increasing the length of travel, alignment geometry and UCA issues occur. With just the spring pre-load, length of travel and overall suspension design geometry stay the same, your just reducing the distance to the lower travel limit.