Alright guys.. BILSTEINS post your pics!!!

freefallin said:

Just finished her up. 2.8" with 1" rear spacer.

Click to expand...

Looks great Sir !

I just put 1.5" spacers on mine after about 25k with bilsteins @ +2.8" with no spacers at all . I really like the look and now I'm not so ass low and nose high with my boat hooked up .

R.L.K. said:

Looks great Sir !

I just put 1.5" spacers on mine after about 25k with bilsteins @ +2.8" with no spacers at all . I really like the look and now I'm not so ass low and nose high with my boat hooked up .

Click to expand...

Thanks and like wise. I was hesitant on the 1" vs. 1.5". I really like the look and functionality of the 1.5" rake. Figured if I want/need the rake later on I will order the 1.5".

Only bilstein 5100's up front set at 2.1. 275/60/20 hankook dynapro atm's

Went full "budget boost" as they say in the jeep world with my truck... all in, right around $1000cdn (Excluding the wheels and tires)

2016 Ram 1500 Bilstein 5100's Set to 2.8" with a 3" PA Body Lift and 1.5" PA Rear spacers. 35" Falkens on BlackRhino Sidewinders





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Awesome looking truck! And a great picture as well !
You should enter this photo in the photo challenge.

I'm going to change out my 17's for 20's and going to add the bilsteins to level. I don't mind a little rake I'm not going to lift the backend. I have a jeep for that with a three inch lift. I like the idea of the bilsteins because shouldn't cause any wear


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Atkpilot1 said:

I'm going to change out my 17's for 20's and going to add the bilsteins to level. I don't mind a little rake I'm not going to lift the backend. I have a jeep for that with a three inch lift. I like the idea of the bilsteins because shouldn't cause any wear


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

What's your plan for the 17s

Front bilsteins set at 2.1. Hankook dynapro atm 275/60/20.

This is the "before" pic. Stock Good Year Wranglers, OEM Struts/Shocks, no running boards. 3.25" rake.

]

This is the "after" shot. Bilsteins 5100 on all 4 corners, set at 2.1 with stock size Michelin LTX MS2 275/60/20 and running boards. No spacers. 1.25" rake.



Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Bils @ 2.1



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sportznut said:

This is the "before" pic. Stock Good Year Wranglers, OEM Struts/Shocks, no running boards. 3.25" rake.

]

This is the "after" shot. Bilsteins 5100 on all 4 corners, set at 2.1 with stock size Michelin LTX MS2 275/60/20 and running boards. No spacers. 1.25" rake.



Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

If I read this right, the stock shocks allow a rake of 2" versus the Bils? So the Bils basically bring the front up some to eliminate the 2" disparity?

I may have missed it through the 48 pages here....but are UCA's required for the 2.8 setting or just a good idea?

mhb1638 said:

I may have missed it through the 48 pages here....but are UCA's required for the 2.8 setting or just a good idea?

Click to expand...

Not required , and not a bad idea for 13 + as they redesigned the uca

mhb1638 said:

If I read this right, the stock shocks allow a rake of 2" versus the Bils? So the Bils basically bring the front up some to eliminate the 2" disparity?

Click to expand...

Mostly correct. On my truck the bils set at 2.1 eliminated 2" of the 3.25" of rake my truck had. Leaving it with 1.25" of rake after the Bilsteins were installed.

Pretty much what I expected before I had them installed. I am very happy with the improved look/stance.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

mhb1638 said:

I may have missed it through the 48 pages here....but are UCA's required for the 2.8 setting or just a good idea?

Click to expand...

Not to beat a dead horse ,but I should say this : The amount of people that have installed the bils at +2.8" and kept their stock UCA'S far outweigh the ones who installed an aftermarket uca with the bils @ + 2.8" .
From what I've read the vast majority imo.95+ % have never had a uca ball joint issue .
Imo with the bils set @ any height is not detrimental to the ball joints at all , a completely diff story goes for those who have installed spacers up front to achieve a level as the bils raise the front end completely different.
Also imo , those with bils installed at any height that have had the uca ball joint separation likely would have had a ball joint issue if they stayed with a stock install from the factory due to their driving style and them offroading roughly or simply a defected ball joint from the factory.

Sir , I suggest you reading this thread I'm linking below , START WITH POST #1 !

This thread is packed with fantastic information, and explains how the bilsteins 5100s actually lift / level as opposed to spacers .
Make your own informed decision after reading this .
Hope this helps !


https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?ur...hare_fid=17770&share_type=t&share_pid=1087055

Guide to Leveling & Wheel and Tire Sizing for 06+ 4wd Ram 1500's

Here my bilsteins set at 2.8. Wheels will be coming later this month!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not the most badass setup just yet, but I got my 5100s installed at 2.8" today. I told myself I'd hold off on buying 35s and new wheels until these tires are shot, but I don't think I'll be able to wait since I need to complete the full look!

The first pic is before and the other 2 are after.

FINALLY got the Bils on at 2.8, after 2 months of waiting & bad luck w/ some seized bolts, my life is complete!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For everyone that went the 2.8 up front and some sort of 1" lift in the rear, did you address the panhard and rear link arms or was the geometry difference too small to worry about?

4" Zone with 35s and Bilsteins set at 1.4 and 3" coils in the back.