What's new
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

Shock Extenders

Chevy305

Chevy305

6 Lug 14bsf Status
 Premium
GMOTM Winner
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Posts
12,947
Reaction score
2,686
Location
New Hampshire
On my 2012 Silverado 1500, I just put in a 1" rear block to lift the rear end up a little and I replaced the original shocks while I was in there. I put on a Fox 2.0 and their application says stock height or 0-1" lift. I compared them to my factory shocks and they are the exact same length and travel. The factory sets them up right in the middle at 4.5" out of a 9" travel.

So with the 1" level I figured I'd put in some shock Extenders because the Fox shocks aren't any different than the factory. I figure I could get a little more droop travel from the shocks. However am I handicapping myself by messing up the geometry because the shock Extenders turn the top eye of the shock 90°?

IMG_20200512_145631.jpg IMG_20200512_145653.jpg
 
Been kinda spoiled here in AZ in some ways.. We don't usually get rust that bad - although we do get some. Here anything 'soft' suffers... Plastic/rubber/fabric is degraded in a very short time. Lost the plastic trim on my windshield, and the drivers side glass wipes on my G8 in about 3 yrs. Got a new set sitting here and dont want to replace them until I either sell the car or move outta state.
 
JoshHefnerX said:
Dude, that road salt is putting your frame through a serious diet... May want to give it some love.
Click to expand...

sweetk30 said:
bye the time they look like this here its almost a lost cause . . . even that nasty gm black wax coating they use dont last . .
Click to expand...

I'd like to punch the bean counters at GM who keep putting that damn wax coating on the frames for 4 generations of trucks. My truck isn't even 10 years old but the frame looks like it's been to the bottom of the ocean, the body looks great though :doah:
 
The steel they used after 1980 or so seems to flake apart that way rather than just "rust"...
I see older square body frames for sale on FB or craigslist with hardly any flaky spots,they just surface rust..some '67-72 frames I've seen look like new in comparison still too!..

I bet they started using recycled crap steel in the 80's..and forget the 1988 up GMT trucks ,here nearly every one has a frame that looks like it sat at the bottom of the ocean ,and is either rotted beyond repair,or full of cracks ..the steering boxes rip off the frames too,just like the older trucks..
Just about every 1999 or newer Chevy truck for sale is a "parts truck only" around here,the boxed frames suck,they were a bad idea..many of the trucks with the most rotted frames have body panels still in great shape though..:screwy:..junkyards are so full of later GM pickups they now just crush most of them without saving anything,there is such a glut of them now..
 
diesel4me said:
The steel they used after 1980 or so seems to flake apart that way rather than just "rust"...
I see older square body frames for sale on FB or craigslist with hardly any flaky spots,they just surface rust..some '67-72 frames I've seen look like new in comparison still too!..

I bet they started using recycled crap steel in the 80's..and forget the 1988 up GMT trucks ,here nearly every one has a frame that looks like it sat at the bottom of the ocean ,and is either rotted beyond repair,or full of cracks ..the steering boxes rip off the frames too,just like the older trucks..
Just about every 1999 or newer Chevy truck for sale is a "parts truck only" around here,the boxed frames suck,they were a bad idea..many of the trucks with the most rotted frames have body panels still in great shape though..:screwy:..junkyards are so full of later GM pickups they now just crush most of them without saving anything,there is such a glut of them now..
Click to expand...
Flaking rust is pretty normal rust.

If anything the metallurgy in the newer frames is probably better then The old stuff.
 
Not so much on old "virgin" steel frames here at least..
Most steel frames after 1980 or so turn to corn flakes and come apart like de-laminated plywood,or crumbles into bits..
The older frames often get deeply pitted,but are still solid and can be welded or patched..not so with the recycled crap steel..

Different climates probably make steel rot vs rust in different ways..
Here it is often damp and cool,add in road salt and the steel just about dissolves..in other parts of the country where it stays drier and warmer the steel holds up a lot better,and longer..
 
I'm telling you that it's not recycling.
That has no bearing on how steel corrodes. recycled steel is just as good as any other steel. You have more time then me. You can Google how recycled steel has the same QC requirements as "new" steel.
I'm not sure how many times in how many threads I have to tell you this.

The "flakeing" of steel is delamination and all steel does it due to The rolling process that steel is put through when it's made into shapes.

I am a level 2 NACE inspector. It's literally my job to understand these things.

All of those "old" frames will flake out over time. It's just a fact of the process.
 
Last edited:
OK,I'm not going to argue about this...all I know is I see older frames in junkyards on cars & trucks from the 50's to 70's that are in nice condition compared to anything newer..something must be different--more nickel or chrome in the steel,I don't know..rock salt used to be the most often used road treatment here since the 50's too--maybe the newer formula's eat steel better..:dunno:
 
diesel4me said:
OK,I'm not going to argue about this...all I know is I see older frames in junkyards on cars & trucks from the 50's to 70's that are in nice condition compared to anything newer..something must be different--more nickel or chrome in the steel,I don't know..rock salt used to be the most often used road treatment here since the 50's too--maybe the newer formula's eat steel better..:dunno:
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to lecture you or argue.
Just trying to educate. You ever think that possibly it has nothing to do with what type of chlorides they put on the road, or what kind of steel alloy the vehicle manufacturer use, but everything to due with mileage?
How many of them rusted out gmt400 trucks you dislike so much are pushing 200k, 300k in mileage?
Now think about that 1950/60 car or truck that you say is solid. It's sitting in the junkyard at 60k?

To extrapolate that idea even further. think about how society has changed in the last 30- 40 years. Especially with the availability and common ownership of four-wheel drive vehicles. How many of them rust hulk's are 4wd? It's a pretty well known fact that your more likely to drive a 4wd in bad weather.
So in likely hood that gmt400 has seen more mileage exposed to road chlorides then your 1960 whatever saw in it's entire lifespan.

Now let's look at society it's much faster paced these days. And the reality of it is people used to stay home a lot more in the winter than do now. So that 1960s whatever saw a 60/40 split in summer winter driving and today's society we see a 50/50 split. With no decline in travel during the winter months.

Just food for thought. It's not necessarily that old is good and new is bad.
It's just different. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
The bolts should be the same facing orientation on top and bottom. It binds I believe #causeracecar




I would run it the way it is lol
 
Chevy305 said:
On my 2012 Silverado 1500, I just put in a 1" rear block to lift the rear end up a little and I replaced the original shocks while I was in there. I put on a Fox 2.0 and their application says stock height or 0-1" lift. I compared them to my factory shocks and they are the exact same length and travel. The factory sets them up right in the middle at 4.5" out of a 9" travel.

So with the 1" level I figured I'd put in some shock Extenders because the Fox shocks aren't any different than the factory. I figure I could get a little more droop travel from the shocks. However am I handicapping myself by messing up the geometry because the shock Extenders turn the top eye of the shock 90°?

View attachment 339544 View attachment 339545
Click to expand...

How do you like those shocks? I've got Bilstein's on my 06, and have never regretted that purchase, though occasionally they're borderline too harsh.
 
79rustyk10 said:
How do you like those shocks? I've got Bilstein's on my 06, and have never regretted that purchase, though occasionally they're borderline too harsh.
Click to expand...
Dude, you want it to ride like a Cadillac then you just need to buy a Cadillac.
 
I'd love to pull the bed off and clean and paint the frame but you know time...

The shock Extenders don't really rotate on the top bushing. The top isn't even a bushing, it's a steel hole. If I loosen the top shock mounting bolt it will rotate but it clunks. If I pinch it down and tighten it, no more clunk but no more rotation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom