F150 Ecoboost Forum banner
21 - 40 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,259 Posts
Interesting thread. I need to do shocks on mine, as I am pretty sure the factory shocks are still on it. While it still rides okay, it has some issues that scream shock replacement.

While it is true on this forum the 5100's are widely praised, I have used the Rancho adjustable models on several builds as well as the Fox setups on tube builds, both of which I really liked.

I am not a "band wagon" kind of guy, but I do respect the opinions of those in the know. I am not going to jump in just yet, but I am going to continue doing research and building a profile on what I want out of my truck.

Your mileage may vary.
I see more people running the Rancho lift struts on the other f150 forum. I think those are a great alternative and an easier/cheaper installation over the bilsteins. From what I’ve read, they have a smoother ride when compared to the bilsteins at max height and give more lift.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

·
Premium Member
2015 Lariat 4WD
Joined
·
771 Posts
Rancho has a great product, I have used them on a lot of "unorthodox" applications (mainly custom builds) and have respect for the results.

Fox on the other hand is in another league. That company makes a solid piece. I may very well end up running Fox on this build.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,422 Posts
The bilstein 6112 and 5180 are an option. I think that's the correct model number. Essentially a larger diameter body.
I don't remember anyone ever commenting having both and how they compare to one another

Sent from my SM-G973W using Tapatalk
I was under the impression the 5160’s are just a 5100 with remote resi. I dont know if the tuning is different or not
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
I was under the impression the 5160’s are just a 5100 with remote resi. I dont know if the tuning is different or not
They have a larger diameter shock body as well as the remote resivor but I have no idea if that changes the ride or if they are spec'd to ride the same

Sent from my SM-G973W using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
751 Posts
They have a larger diameter shock body as well as the remote resivor but I have no idea if that changes the ride or if they are spec'd to ride the same

Sent from my SM-G973W using Tapatalk
5100 and 5160 are both 46mm. 5160 just adds reservoir.
 

·
Registered
2020 F-150 STX 4x4 Supercab
Joined
·
147 Posts
I'm glad to know others feel the same. Zogg, how would you compare the Rancho on setting #2 to stock feel?
Everyone has their own ideas when making comparisons. For me, the Rancho shocks on #2 setting ride about the same as oem but the rear end is more stable….less bouncing and smoother on the hiway at 70 mph. Upping the setting to a #4 or #5 does add a little more stability but increases the stiffness….no as bad as the Bilstein 5100s, but stiffer. I’d probably use these or higher settings for heavy loads. I’ve not even tried settings higher than #5.

I’ve read somewhere that the various Settings don’t make a tremendous difference but I feel that they do make a real difference in ride quality and stability.

Having said all of this, each person has to make their own determination. For me, the Rancho 9000 XL shocks are the best alternative. Good luck
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
5100 and 5160 are both 46mm. 5160 just adds reservoir.
Just looked it up, you are correct. Just the 6112 gets a larger diameter shock body

Sent from my SM-G973W using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
751 Posts
I have 6112s and 5160s. 6112s are on the 1.5" setting which gave me 2" of lift up front. Initially had them at the 2" setting which gave me 2.75" and a nose high truck. I find the ride to be very composed, albeit slightly firmer than stock on the oem tires. It is rougher with load range e tires.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Everyone has their own ideas when making comparisons. For me, the Rancho shocks on #2 setting ride about the same as oem but the rear end is more stable….less bouncing and smoother on the hiway at 70 mph. Upping the setting to a #4 or #5 does add a little more stability but increases the stiffness….no as bad as the Bilstein 5100s, but stiffer. I’d probably use these or higher settings for heavy loads. I’ve not even tried settings higher than #5.

I’ve read somewhere that the various Settings don’t make a tremendous difference but I feel that they do make a real difference in ride quality and stability.

Having said all of this, each person has to make their own determination. For me, the Rancho 9000 XL shocks are the best alternative. Good luck
Thanks for the feedback, I may look into those before going stock on my next round
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
I find the ride to be very composed, albeit slightly firmer than stock on the oem tires. It is rougher with load range e tires.
I feel like that is half my problem. I have the oem LT wranglers and I don't like them at all. My truck is a commuter vehicle so always unloaded and I have the hdpp which makes things worse

Sent from my SM-G973W using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,422 Posts
LT C range tires ride nicely. I am Running KO2 LT C-range in a 285/70R17 on my GX and a 315/70R17 on my F150 and both ride really well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Discussion Starter · #35 ·
I have the 6112s and 5160s but not the control arms. They rode well until I added 10ply tires. Got 2" of level on the 1.5" setting. Initially had them set at 2" setting and got 2.75" which was too high.
I have Falken Wildpeaks, Not really sure how they would be with this setup.
 

·
Registered
'18 SCREW Lariat, Bilstein 5100's on all corners
Joined
·
1 Posts
Both myself and my girlfriend (who, like Mikey, hates everything) feel it rides so much better with the 5100's. I wish I'd done it before.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
774 Posts
I use Icon instead of Bilstien but both have similar valving, "digressive" instead of linear or progressive. The difference is in quick suspension compression, small bumps and large bumps at speed, the digressive is slower to react and causes the truck to follow the bump contours a bit harshly. The middle range is where digressive shines offering more control and better handling and towing control (or so I've heard, I do not tow). That may explain some disappointment in perceived ride quality. KM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,422 Posts
I use Icon instead of Bilstien but both have similar valving, "digressive" instead of linear or progressive. The difference is in quick suspension compression, small bumps and large bumps at speed, the digressive is slower to react and causes the truck to follow the bump contours a bit harshly. The middle range is where digressive shines offering more control and better handling and towing control (or so I've heard, I do not tow). That may explain some disappointment in perceived ride quality. KM
173045


This is a pretty good article on the subject: Digressive vs Linear vs Progressive Pistons & Shock Valving | AccuTune Off-Road

Summary from the article: Digressive shocks are bad at small bumps and large bumps, but good at handling and g-outs. Progressive shocks are good at small bumps and big hits, but bad at handling and g-outs. Linear shocks provide the best all around performance. At AccuTune Off-Road we design the shape of the shock curve to provide the performance you want on the type of terrain you will encounter. The result is curves that are slightly digressive, linear, or slightly progressive to deliver the some of the benefits without all the drawbacks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: butthead
21 - 40 of 40 Posts
Top