The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network







Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.

Go Back   The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network > 47 - Current classic GM Trucks > The 1973 - 1987 Chevrolet & GMC Squarebody Pickups Message Board

Web 67-72chevytrucks.com


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-08-2018, 09:44 PM   #26
Bent77
Registered User
 
Bent77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Denver Co
Posts: 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by akart View Post
Did ORD put you up to this. I messed w/nothing. Original truck frame and springs. 1974 K20 stock.All I wanted was smoother ride,furnished all the specs asked for a 2" lift which they recommended. ORD says that they checked my spring specs 100 times (really??) and I still have a 7" lift in the back and since they checked my specs 100 times they say they would send me the same springs. I am currently asking exactly what the specs for those spring are and am waiting for a reply. They have worn me down and I will just settle w/what I have. Just want shocks. Please understand that.
So you have 2Ē lift springs with a shackle flip?

How about some pictures?
Posted via Mobile Device
Bent77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2018, 10:09 PM   #27
obijuan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: cibolo tx
Posts: 1,007
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Quote:
Originally Posted by akart View Post
Did ORD put you up to this. I messed w/nothing. Original truck frame and springs. 1974 K20 stock.All I wanted was smoother ride,furnished all the specs asked for a 2" lift which they recommended. ORD says that they checked my spring specs 100 times (really??) and I still have a 7" lift in the back and since they checked my specs 100 times they say they would send me the same springs. I am currently asking exactly what the specs for those spring are and am waiting for a reply. They have worn me down and I will just settle w/what I have. Just want shocks. Please understand that.
I wish I was swayed by them. I take donations Mr watson.

But in all seriousness I have probably built hundreds of these trucks professionally and for myself. Your information just doesn't make any sense.
__________________
1985 k5 396/nv4500/203/205 d60/d70 4.56 42 sx2
1991 V3500 350/4l80/205 60/14 4.10 35 toyos.
obijuan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2018, 10:12 PM   #28
the_ocho
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: North utah
Posts: 20
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Quote:
Originally Posted by akart View Post
Note the 2 post history. Looks like ORD is getting some fresh support. Maybe they can get more people to post.
Not so much supporting ORD, as much as opposing an arrogant and rude OP.

ORD as done a lot for the GM and offroad community, something went wrong with your situation but there is no need to be rude to the only company that will help you. Some things cant be left alone.
the_ocho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2018, 10:39 PM   #29
brans72
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Durham,NC
Posts: 637
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Again asking for pictures your not will to post up but your willing to bash ORD!!! No one is going to judge your truck!

There only trying to help you out and that takes a picture to see exactly what is going on with it!

ORD doesn't need to put people up against you as you claim! There is a Brotherhood that stands behind ORD quality and technical experience in the off road world!!!!

Be alot easier if you would just post some pictures up so you can move along with getting your truck right.
brans72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 01:39 AM   #30
akart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Manley Hot Springs Alaska
Posts: 190
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bent77 View Post
So you have 2Ē lift springs with a shackle flip?

How about some pictures?
Posted via Mobile Device
No shackle flip just the ORD super shackles.
akart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 01:45 AM   #31
akart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Manley Hot Springs Alaska
Posts: 190
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Quote:
Originally Posted by brans72 View Post
Again asking for pictures your not will to post up but your willing to bash ORD!!! No one is going to judge your truck!

There only trying to help you out and that takes a picture to see exactly what is going on with it!

ORD doesn't need to put people up against you as you claim! There is a Brotherhood that stands behind ORD quality and technical experience in the off road world!!!!

Be alot easier if you would just post some pictures up so you can move along with getting your truck right.
Okay I will take picture in a few days the next time I am at the truck so you can see where I had to drill new shock mount holes in the frame as low as possible for my shock to reach and have 1.5" down travel. Have Rancho 9000 shocks which were for stock and for up to a 2" lift. Not even close!!
akart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 02:09 AM   #32
Zoomad75
Registered User
 
Zoomad75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pueblo, CO
Posts: 1,314
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Something don't add up in your combo. 2" springs with a shackle flip would net 6" normally. The fact that you indicated you moved the shock mount down on the frame so they would reach would be a pretty clear red flag that the shocks are too short for the spring combination.

Mixing and matching gets very challenging with this stuff. ORD's combinations are proven. Watson is known throughout the industry for his specific squarebody suspension products. He's done the R&D with his own stuff.

A picture is totally worth a thousand words here. I'm pretty sure once the pics are up the problem should be able to be figured out.
__________________
Rob Z.
1975 K5 350/465/205/D44/12b 4" lift on 35's- RIP
1991 K5 5.3L/700r4/241/D44/14b Under Construction
Zoomad75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 02:45 AM   #33
akart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Manley Hot Springs Alaska
Posts: 190
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoomad75 View Post
Something don't add up in your combo. 2" springs with a shackle flip would net 6" normally. The fact that you indicated you moved the shock mount down on the frame so they would reach would be a pretty clear red flag that the shocks are too short for the spring combination.

Mixing and matching gets very challenging with this stuff. ORD's combinations are proven. Watson is known throughout the industry for his specific squarebody suspension products. He's done the R&D with his own stuff.

A picture is totally worth a thousand words here. I'm pretty sure once the pics are up the problem should be able to be figured out.
Read my lips there is no shackle flip. Just there super shackle.Like a new heavy duty shackle to replace the original (no flip!!)
Will send pictures in a few days when I am next at my truck.
akart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 11:48 AM   #34
nvrenuf
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Mobile, Al
Posts: 63
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Where did you buy the shocks?

You're complaining about the Rancho shocks and hating on ORD but didn't buy their Bilstiens. If you didn't buy the shocks from ORD then it seems like your issue is with someone else.
__________________
John

'91 K5 bbc, 43's
nvrenuf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 11:58 AM   #35
akart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Manley Hot Springs Alaska
Posts: 190
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Quote:
Originally Posted by nvrenuf View Post
Where did you buy the shocks?

You're complaining about the Rancho shocks and hating on ORD but didn't buy their Bilstiens. If you didn't buy the shocks from ORD then it seems like your issue is with someone else.
I need new shocks as the Ranchos don't fit w/this lift. I "am" trying to buy Bilstien shocks from ORD!!!!!! That is what this post is about, DA!! ORD wants to continue to go over and over the rear height problem which we have done before and I gave up. They win!! Picture to come.
akart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 12:16 PM   #36
nvrenuf
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Mobile, Al
Posts: 63
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

But you've complained about the fitment of the Ranchos (redrilling the frame, etc) in this thread all the while complaining about ORD.

Where did you buy the Ranchos?

If they did not come from ORD I think that should be clear. Also, if they did not come from ORD why aren't you complaining about that seller or Rancho in general since you said they are supposed to fit your size lift?

Or were these used shocks you already had?

I just think that in all fairness to ORD and the readers here, you should provide all of the info and not just pieces of info and a biased opinion (because you're mad).
__________________
John

'91 K5 bbc, 43's
nvrenuf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 12:27 PM   #37
akart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Manley Hot Springs Alaska
Posts: 190
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Quote:
Originally Posted by nvrenuf View Post
But you've complained about the fitment of the Ranchos (redrilling the frame, etc) in this thread all the while complaining about ORD.

Where did you buy the Ranchos?

If they did not come from ORD I think that should be clear. Also, if they did not come from ORD why aren't you complaining about that seller or Rancho in general since you said they are supposed to fit your size lift?

Or were these used shocks you already had?

I just think that in all fairness to ORD and the readers here, you should provide all of the info and not just pieces of info and a biased opinion (because you're mad).
After the lift the Rancho shocks in the rear don't fit.They should have because they are supposed to be good for a 2" lift. See photos and tell me if that looks like a 2" lift. The front shocks fit okay but the Bilstiens should fit better w/more up/down range.I "am" trying to buy Bilstien shocks from ORD>
akart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 01:44 PM   #38
akart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Manley Hot Springs Alaska
Posts: 190
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Quote:
Originally Posted by nvrenuf View Post
But you've complained about the fitment of the Ranchos (redrilling the frame, etc) in this thread all the while complaining about ORD.

Where did you buy the Ranchos?

If they did not come from ORD I think that should be clear. Also, if they did not come from ORD why aren't you complaining about that seller or Rancho in general since you said they are supposed to fit your size lift?

Or were these used shocks you already had?

I just think that in all fairness to ORD and the readers here, you should provide all of the info and not just pieces of info and a biased opinion (because you're mad).
I bought my Rancho shocks from Summit Racing using there fitment chart.They fit the original truck just fine. Had to compress 4" to install and had about 4" up/down. Fitment chart said good for stock to a 2" lift. Front shock fit but only had about 1.5" down travel. Rear not even close (see photos) I need new shocks and have decided to buy Bilstiens from ORD.Just trying to figure out rate
akart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 01:52 PM   #39
Zoomad75
Registered User
 
Zoomad75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pueblo, CO
Posts: 1,314
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Quote:
Originally Posted by akart View Post
Read my lips there is no shackle flip. Just there super shackle.Like a new heavy duty shackle to replace the original (no flip!!)
Will send pictures in a few days when I am next at my truck.
Dude, tone down on the agression a tad would you? Nobody is beating you up. We are all asking questions about the combination to try and help you sort out the problem.

Your clarification to my statement still don't make sense then. What spec did they go for the eye to eye length? Are they 52" or 56" springs? If they are 56" spings moving the rear sping hanger is the correct thing to do.

Don't forget that when installing lift springs, the amount of lift is based against stock springs without any wear/useage that will cause them to collapse or at minimum flatten out. So a 2" lift spring could net 3"-4" over an old sagged spring.

Also, you stated multiple times you've given up on figuring why the height is off and all you want is the right shocks. Am I right? Problem is getting the right shock is 100% dependant on knowing what height you are sitting on. So until that variable is locked down any shock choice is purely a guess. Don't matter who makes the suggestion either. It's why Watson is still asking questions about it. Same thing from the rest of us trying to help here.

Just trying to help. Like many have said once you post up some pics it should be easier to understand the problem.
__________________
Rob Z.
1975 K5 350/465/205/D44/12b 4" lift on 35's- RIP
1991 K5 5.3L/700r4/241/D44/14b Under Construction
Zoomad75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 02:05 PM   #40
akart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Manley Hot Springs Alaska
Posts: 190
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoomad75 View Post
Dude, tone down on the agression a tad would you? Nobody is beating you up. We are all asking questions about the combination to try and help you sort out the problem.

Your clarification to my statement still don't make sense then. What spec did they go for the eye to eye length? Are they 52" or 56" springs? If they are 56" spings moving the rear sping hanger is the correct thing to do.

Don't forget that when installing lift springs, the amount of lift is based against stock springs without any wear/useage that will cause them to collapse or at minimum flatten out. So a 2" lift spring could net 3"-4" over an old sagged spring.

Also, you stated multiple times you've given up on figuring why the height is off and all you want is the right shocks. Am I right? Problem is getting the right shock is 100% dependant on knowing what height you are sitting on. So until that variable is locked down any shock choice is purely a guess. Don't matter who makes the suggestion either. It's why Watson is still asking questions about it. Same thing from the rest of us trying to help here.

Just trying to help. Like many have said once you post up some pics it should be easier to understand the problem.
I had 52" springs and the sent me 56" springs. So they told me to move the spring hanger but they were good enough to send me bolts and nuts. They claim I have the right springs so I don't know how the height can change. They did mention something about removing leaves form the pack at one time, but that is not going to happen. The height is what it is and that is what I plan to spec the shocks by. Pictures are posted. So what do you think,does that look like a 2" lift?
akart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 02:38 PM   #41
Zoomad75
Registered User
 
Zoomad75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pueblo, CO
Posts: 1,314
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Quote:
Originally Posted by akart View Post
I had 52" springs and the sent me 56" springs. So they told me to move the spring hanger but they were good enough to send me bolts and nuts. They claim I have the right springs so I don't know how the height can change. They did mention something about removing leaves form the pack at one time, but that is not going to happen. The height is what it is and that is what I plan to spec the shocks by. Pictures are posted. So what do you think,does that look like a 2" lift?
Unless I'm missing something using my phone to look at this right now I'm not seeing pics. Where are they posted? Not seeing any pics in this thread.
__________________
Rob Z.
1975 K5 350/465/205/D44/12b 4" lift on 35's- RIP
1991 K5 5.3L/700r4/241/D44/14b Under Construction
Zoomad75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 02:40 PM   #42
brans72
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Durham,NC
Posts: 637
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Ditto
Posted via Mobile Device
brans72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 02:45 PM   #43
akart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Manley Hot Springs Alaska
Posts: 190
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Photos are on another thread. My first time posting photos and didn't get it on the original thread.
akart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 03:07 PM   #44
Zoomad75
Registered User
 
Zoomad75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pueblo, CO
Posts: 1,314
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

http://http://67-72chevytrucks.com/v...d.php?t=758850

Here you go.

The heavy duty shackle is longer than stock, but in tension would actually lower the height. What I'm not sure of is the shackle angle, seems dead verticle. Some of the guys more knowledgeable than me on suspension geometry that have posted up should be able to get a better idea.
__________________
Rob Z.
1975 K5 350/465/205/D44/12b 4" lift on 35's- RIP
1991 K5 5.3L/700r4/241/D44/14b Under Construction
Zoomad75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 03:59 PM   #45
RADustin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 293
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

are the springs supposed to be spring under and you have it setup spring over? netting 7" of lift??

You need 4-5 inches of travel in bump and droop. If you don't have this it will ride like crap and no matter the shock valving it will be terrible.

Take the shocks off and see if it rides softer. It'll be bouncy but should ride softer.
__________________
1949 Chevy 3100 P/U
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=302780

1976 GMC Sierra Classic C35 CCSB
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...25#post8188825
RADustin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 04:55 PM   #46
akart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Manley Hot Springs Alaska
Posts: 190
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Quote:
Originally Posted by RADustin View Post
are the springs supposed to be spring under and you have it setup spring over? netting 7" of lift??

You need 4-5 inches of travel in bump and droop. If you don't have this it will ride like crap and no matter the shock valving it will be terrible.

Take the shocks off and see if it rides softer. It'll be bouncy but should ride softer.
Springs go over the axle.
akart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 05:00 PM   #47
RADustin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 293
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

that was my stab in the dark.

I know most deaver long travel springs are spring under.

good luck sir.
__________________
1949 Chevy 3100 P/U
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=302780

1976 GMC Sierra Classic C35 CCSB
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...25#post8188825
RADustin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2018, 10:30 AM   #48
CUCV2
Registered User
 
CUCV2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Central, VT
Posts: 34
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Double posting in this thread and the pic thread so you will see this.

You may want to check the thread stick out on the top bolt of the shackle. I have a 87 K30 with the stock shackle hanger and a ORD shackle similar to what you have. Initially, I mounted the top shackle bolt the same way but the stickout hit the shackle hanger in rotation. I flipped the bolt around so it would clear and all was fine. May have even used a stock one vs. a greasable unit for clearance.
Attached Images
 
__________________
-59 GMC Garage Ornament
CUCV2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2018, 01:11 PM   #49
akart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Manley Hot Springs Alaska
Posts: 190
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoomad75 View Post
http://http://67-72chevytrucks.com/v...d.php?t=758850

Here you go.

The heavy duty shackle is longer than stock, but in tension would actually lower the height. What I'm not sure of is the shackle angle, seems dead verticle. Some of the guys more knowledgeable than me on suspension geometry that have posted up should be able to get a better idea.
Don't know if it is longer than stock but that is what ORD sent me. Sure I would like to hear more about shackle angle. Looked at quite a few to figure it out. ORD had me move the mount back 4" as the springs they sent were 56" and I had 52". Kind of a moot point because I am not going to move that spring mount again,no way,that was a bear. Thank you!
akart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2018, 01:48 PM   #50
Chulisohombre
Registered User
 
Chulisohombre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Bangor pa
Posts: 1,172
Re: Bilstien shock experiment $$

Pics definitely help but having a 7!inch lift thatís supposed to be 2 in its place isnít going to work well. If you got the wrong spring length, why did you not exchange them instead of doing all that extra work? That would have been the easiest solution. Everything I have bought from ord has been spot on what was advertised. They will Make it correct or get you a fix hopefully. Their customer service has a great record from anything Iíve read. But like I said Iíve bought stuff and didnít need them to fix anything. It was good to go. Good luck. Pics will definitely help to see what went wrong. When you get the chance.
Posted via Mobile Device

Last edited by Chulisohombre; 03-10-2018 at 05:44 PM.
Chulisohombre is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1997-2013 67-72chevytrucks.com