Would different UPA give more lift?

[tswannnlk]

I got some Bilstein 5100's for my 4th gen 1500 a while ago. I set them to the 2.8 setting to get the max amount of lift. However, the front end is still about an inch to an inch and a half lower than the front. If possible, I'd like to have the front and the rear completely equal. I do not tow or have much weight in the bed most of the time. I'm still running the stock upper control arms because I have not noticed that they have any form of extreme angle due to being on the 2.8 inch setting. If I were to get new upper control arms, would they provide any more amount of lift to the front end of my truck or are they solely for correcting the geometry between the upper control arm and the ball joint? It would be nice to know if there was even one that isn't exactly intended to provide more lift but it does because of the different design intended to correct the front end geometry. Thanks!

 

[Adamcr68]

I got some Bilstein 5100's for my 4th gen 1500 a while ago. I set them to the 2.8 setting to get the max amount of lift. However, the front end is still about an inch to an inch and a half lower than the front. If possible, I'd like to have the front and the rear completely equal. I do not tow or have much weight in the bed most of the time. I'm still running the stock upper control arms because I have not noticed that they have any form of extreme angle due to being on the 2.8 inch setting. If I were to get new upper control arms, would they provide any more amount of lift to the front end of my truck or are they solely for correcting the geometry between the upper control arm and the ball joint? It would be nice to know if there was even one that isn't exactly intended to provide more lift but it does because of the different design intended to correct the front end geometry. Thanks!

I don’t think you will see any lift from different UVA’s but would have better angles “geometry” that would extend the life of your front suspension.
Keep in mind that our hoods sit higher than the bed so a true level, measuring with a tape will look nose high.
Measuring mine the front is about a inch lower rear but appears level IMO.

 

[tswannnlk]

I don’t think you will see any lift from different UVA’s but would have better angles “geometry” that would extend the life of your front suspension.
Keep in mind that our hoods sit higher than the bed so a true level, measuring with a tape will look nose high.
Measuring mine the front is about an inch lower rear but appears level IMO.

Gotcha. Looks like I’ll just have to wait until I upgrade my suspension next time around to change anything. I definitely don’t want to do puck spacers because those screw everything up. It’s strange how I’ve seen multiple people with our trucks claim that the 2.8 setting on the Bilsteins apparently leaves their truck TOO high for their liking. I.E. the front is half and inch to an inch higher than the rear when measuring from the wheel wells to the ground.

 

[olyelr]

Gotcha. Looks like I’ll just have to wait until I upgrade my suspension next time around to change anything. I definitely don’t want to do puck spacers because those screw everything up. It’s strange how I’ve seen multiple people with our trucks claim that the 2.8 setting on the Bilsteins apparently leaves their truck TOO high for their liking. I.E. the front is half and inch to an inch higher than the rear when measuring from the wheel wells to the ground.

If your rear is stock, i am surprised the front seems a bit low still. The bills at the 2.8 setting with stock rear typically makes the truck look like its saggin in the back. Are you sure you are at the highest setting? Also, did your truck come with the off road package? If so, you wont gain as much added height from the bills, because the truck was already an inch higher than a non-off road truck.

And no, different upper controls arms are not going to cause the truck to gain any more lift.

 

[tswannnlk]

If your rear is stock, i am surprised the front seems a bit low still. The bills at the 2.8 setting with stock rear typically makes the truck look like its saggin in the back. Are you sure you are at the highest setting? Also, did your truck come with the off road package? If so, you wont gain as much added height from the bills, because the truck was already an inch higher than a non-off road truck.

And no, different upper controls arms are not going to cause the truck to gain any more lift.

Yeah I'm 90 percent sure I'm at the highest setting. I'll double check when I get a chance. No, my truck did not come with the off-road package either. My rear end is stock. One thing I did think of is that my truck is the Warlock edition so it has an inch of lift from the factory without the off-road package for the Warlock model. However, shouldn't this still not affect the final height of the suspension when set to the 2.8 setting?

 

[olyelr]

Yeah I'm 90 percent sure I'm at the highest setting. I'll double check when I get a chance. No, my truck did not come with the off-road package either. My rear end is stock. One thing I did think of is that my truck is the Warlock edition so it has an inch of lift from the factory without the off-road package for the Warlock model. However, shouldn't this still not affect the final height of the suspension when set to the 2.8 setting?

The 2.8” of lift would be on a regular truck without the added lift. So you wont get the 2.8” of added height if you were already an inch higher.

Makes sense why the rear still seems a but high.