Combine Bilstein 5100s with small spacer for softer ride at 2.5in of lift?

I've just put some new SL-rated tires on my 08 DCSB OR and holy hell it rides SOOOOOO much better than the E-rated tires I had. My god, it's like night and day and I love it, however now I need to lift it. I keep reading that Bilstein 5100s set to max height (2.5") is a stiff ride and I do NOT want to go back to that.

My technical question is whether setting the shocks at 2" or 1.75" and then using a small spacer to get a full 2.5" of lift would compress the springs any less and offer a softer ride?

 

I think you’d be better off with a new coil spring. OME or the like.
Or maybe 6112’s, they come with springs.

 

Leave 5100s at stock height for a smooth ride.

 

Do it right and get full coilovers set at 2.5".

 

Honestly your best bet for around that amount of lift you're looking for is to find 3rd gen TRD Off Road take-offs. Usually almost no miles on them and around $200 or less. Here is a thread I made on them, I got around 1" of lift in the front. The ride is vastly improved over the 2nd gen suspension, especially if your coming from the Sport suspension. If you want a little more lift, just add a small spacer.

https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/review-3rd-gen-suspension-on-2nd-gen.542843/unread

 

I currently have 2018 suspension on my 2008. As mentioned, it gave me 1" lift up front and definitely rides better although I do have some mild pop when hitting dips going downhill slowly... like it's popping into place, but it's not loud. I'm not a huge spacer fan (wondered about using a very small on in my original post), but with only wanting 1.5" of more lift it could be an option. Then put an AAL in the rear and be done until I'm ready to upgrade.

 

i would run 5100 and 0” and buy 2.5” lift springs. that will give you the best ride. i tried stock springs on 5100 lifted to about 2”. i would not put spacers anywhere in the struts. especially if 4x4. 5100 are exactly the same length as extended travel coilovers. so definitely dont put a spacer on top of the strut cap. putting it in between is just adding more preload and will make the ride rough.

 

Absolutely do not run the 5100 + a spacer. Its not about ride height its about total assembled length. The 5100's are already longer than stock fully extended which provide more droop. Adding a spacer on top will make thigs droop more and cause all sorts of issues.

 

If you're getting a popping noise I would check your ball joints. A popping noise isn't common with the strut mounts on our trucks unless they are very old or tons of miles. A clunk or thud type noise would indicate a sway bar bushing or sway bar end link bad.

To check the ball joints leave the truck on the ground, put a jack under the lower control arm as close to the tire as you can, jack up until the tire is a 4"-6" inches off the ground, put a long pry bar or other prying device under the tire, lift up/down at different paces (fast and slow) and repeat for the other side. If you feel or hear a pop then there is ball joint bad, you may need a second person so you can place your hand on upper and lower ball joints to identify which one is bad. Not trying to mansplain, just not many people know how to properly check ball joints. If you simply just check it like a wheel bearing by grabbing top and bottom of the tire and going back/forth you will usually only find extremely bad ball joints. Also it is imperative to use the jack process to keep the suspension loaded like it normally sits while driving so the ball is in it's normal resting place in the cup, if it is unloaded (ie like on a lift or suspension is at full droop) and not in its normal position you often times will not find a bad ball joint since the ball is not in the cup that it normally seats in. It took me many years as an auto technician to learn that process from a highly experienced diagnostics tech.

 

so what happens when people run the lean spacer on 5100s?

 

The 5100's are surprisingly not longer than the OEM. Granted I could not find specs for 48510-09U50 OEM specific part number, the 24-239370 is the equivalent bilstein replacement shock.
24-239370 stock bilstein is 17.1" collapsed / 22.7" extended
24-239370 5100 is 17.03 collapsed / 22.56 extended

So in theory the OEM shock allows for more droop (though minimal) than the 5100 does set at 0 with the spacers and springs being equal on each shock assembly.

But I understand what you are saying. But if the overall goal is 2.5" and it is achieved via a spacer vs springs vs clip settings can change many factors. As well as if the sway bar is still connected as that will affect maximum extension and collapsed ability as the sway bar is fighting the travel from side to side in off camber situations.

Spacer (all things equal and 5100 set to zero) - lowers the entire assembly the thickness of the spacer. But you will likely bottom out the collapsed length of the shock before hitting the bump stop since the shock has been moved down and upward travel limits of the shock have also been lowered by the thickness of the spacer. Also full droop is extended the same amount. In practice as long as you stay under 2.5" actual lift then OEM UCAs should be fine depending on how often you fully extend/droop, go over 2.5" and aftermarket UCAs should be considered.

Spring and/or clip setting W/O spacer - This only extends the shocks resting height. Will NOT add more droop/extension or affect collapsed length at all. So you have the same amount of upward and downward travel as stock. However the amount downward travel puts the shock piston closer to the extended length and depending on how much free travel from the piston resting position vs full extension you may have a rough ride since you may fully extend the shock when encountering a pot-hole or other bumps that cause the suspension to unload.

Spring or clip setting WITH spacer (lets assume 2" clip setting and 1/2" spacer to achieve 2.5" total lift since 3/4" spacers are not common) - This would shorten the collapsed stroke by about 1/2" which likely will not affect the bump stop capability by a lot compared to only a 2.5" spacer. It will only allow about a 1/2" more total droop and would keep the piston in a more central position at resting height than maxing out your clip positions. Likely you would be fine with OEM UCAs but you may have accelerated wear to the ball joint if going full extension more often.

Personally, I think putting the clip setting to 1.5" and adding a 1" spacer would be a good balance so you are not placing the piston too close to the full extension length and you are adding/subtracting fairly minimal extension/collapsed lengths to affect anything too much. Again, thats my personal beliefs and it is untested. But in theory that is how everything should come out.

Something to note is the spring rate. Remember the 3rd gen springs are around 700lb springs and the 2nd gen springs are 500-550lb springs, which is why you gain a lift from 3rd gen assemblies on a 2nd gen. So that will affect your clip setting depending on the springs you are using. Chances are you will be using the 3rd gen coils and you may find that you will be at the 0 or 1 clip setting to achieve 1"-1.5" for the shock setting only if you go the route that I was referring to.

 

5100's are 100% longer than stock shocks. Bilstein 4600's ARE NOT OEM SHOCKS

https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/bilstein-5100-length-vs-stock.632346/#post-23568341






I have done measurements on 5100's at full collapse and a 1in thick spacer would be ABSOLUTLE MAX spacer you could use with being very close to bottoming shock before stock bumpstop. a 3/4in spacer would probably be best from this prospective... BUT this isnt taking into account the extra droop (which is ~ double the thickness of spacer) and how you will likely over extend CV joints and ball joints because with a spacer AND longer shocks you will be drooping significantly more than stock.

 

my 5100s were the same length as my oem suspension.

 

A 1/4in thick lean spacer is ~ 1/2in of wheel droop extra which is fine. A 2 - 3inch lift spacer (~1-1.5in thick) is a different story as thats 2-3in of extra droop at the wheel.

 

Really now

 

I stand corrected! I couldn't find OEM shock measurements with a quick search which is why I went off the 4600 shock. I'm not trying to start a pissing match. I have followed many threads you take part in and your info is always well regarded.

However, since the OP has OEM 3rd shocks they aren't that far off of where the 4600 measures (length wise) based off of the thread you pulled the 2nd picture from. In that thread one person measured the OEM TRD Off Road front shock at a length of approximately 21.25" from the center of the eyelet to the bottom of the lower washer. So in that respect it is very close to the same overall length when fully extended compared to the 5100 at 22.56. Also according to the post the collapsed length was apx 17.5". Based off his measurements of total overall extended length from top to bottom of 24.375" minus center of bushing to bottom of washer extended length of 21.25=3.125", his collapsed length is from top to bottom of 20.625" minus 3.125"=17.5". That is how I did the math.

So the OEM 3rd gen TRD Off Road is approximately 17.5" collapsed/21.25" extended. Not much difference to the 5100 or 4600 overall.

https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/bilstein-5100-length-vs-stock.632346/#post-21707051

One thing I am not certain of is if ALL 4x4 models of Tacoma (2nd and 3rd gen) use the same shock lengths. The first link you posted is from an SR and looks considerably shorter, but I doubt the OEM shock was fully extended. I can't see a stock 4x4 shock being almost 3" shorter than a standard 5100 as the 4x4 SR is not 3" shorter ride height than a stock TRD OR if they both have the same size tires. I know they are lower, but I don't think by that much. It would be interesting to see the different OEM 4x4 model shock lengths measured side by side just curb my own curiosity, not that it would very relevant since most could care less about it. lol

 

You can mitigate any issues in regards to shock length with upgraded bumpstops. I run a taco lean spacer and wheelers super bumps with no issues as the bumpstops is 2-3x ongger than oem.

My 12" rear shocks actually would be bottoming out as well if it werent for upgrades bumpstops. I currently have my truck setup for more droop

 

Reviving an old thread as a topic was brought up in this thread which I can't wrap my head around.
How does a .5" top spacer add 1" of droop to a strut?

A shock has a max length of travel, a max collapsed length and a max extended length.

For the sake of an example, let's use 8" as the total travel (roughly 4" uptravel and 4" downtravel) at stock. When lifting with coils (OME 885) and I get 2.5" lift, I've lost that amount in downtravel. Therefore I should have approx. 6.5" of uptravel and 1.5" of droop. I understand this is theoretical as the stabilizer bar and other factors come into play which affect real life numbers.

By adding a .5" top spacer, I'd end up with approx. 3.0" of lift? 885 coils = 2.5" lift + top spacer = 0.5" lift.
More importantly and the main reason for adding the top spacer; by adding the .5" top spacer I'd regain 1" of droop??
Final number should theoretically end up at 5.5 of uptravel and 2.5 of downtravel? Is this correct?

I see people talk about adding a .5" top spacer to gain 1" of droop. That sounds great. But how is that happening? I can visualize that the entire strut assembly is lengthened by .5" thereby giving the lift. But how in the world is droop "gained"?

I have a Prerunner so CV not a concern.

Thanks guys!

 

I know this is an old post but maybe you can help me out. I got the Bilstein 5100s and my plan was to put them at the second ring from bottom to give me .65” lift from the struts and add my 3” spacer to get 3.65” lift up front. I also have dirt king UCAs made for 3” lift. Could I do this and not risk anything? Thanks!

 

https://youtu.be/_68Hc8GtLko