Snacktime's 5100 Bilstein Shocks review & takeaways

[NORCALGXP]

Most excellent work see you Saturday. Rock on.

Sponsored

 

[chtucker]

6100's are same length as 5100's and going to have the same limitations. I just don't see the value in a bigger shock that doesn't capitalize on providing more travel (Bilstein left at least 1.4" off the length of the shock). Your right on about losing range of motion, which is why spacers seem to have a place on these rigs vs circlip/collar spacers.

OME are longer and a better option than 5100's when it comes to going off road. The issue with OME is broncos have such a wide range of curb weights that it becomes hard to figure out lift vs spring options. I spent a while trying to figure out a combination that would worked for me. I just ended up not wanting to spend $1500 and then have change out springs if I didn't guess right. I keep waiting for more people to buy OME and post different combinations. I have a spread sheet I built but I'm missing to much information to get ride heights calculated. Then you have to factor in how stiff springs effect your articulation (one of the many reasons I felt more comfortable buy 5100's).

I have OME 3200 springs... I don't know why OME says they must be used with OME shocks. I am thinking about taking off my SAS springs and comparing them. I have thought about trying to put the 3200 springs on my SAS shocks (Which are the same length as the 5100/6100s)

I did get the spring rates from Bilstein of the 6112s, They are somewhere between the OME medium and heavy spring rates. Guestimating that the OME lights are close to stock, the 6112s might be an OK option for me... But I have also considered the 3200 OME springs on the 6100s if I could make that work.

Just painful to take it all apart in the name of science.

 

[Snacktime]

I have OME 3200 springs... I don't know why OME says they must be used with OME shocks. I am thinking about taking off my SAS springs and comparing them. I have thought about trying to put the 3200 springs on my SAS shocks (Which are the same length as the 5100/6100s)

I did get the spring rates from Bilstein of the 6112s, They are somewhere between the OME medium and heavy spring rates. Guestimating that the OME lights are close to stock, the 6112s might be an OK option for me... But I have also considered the 3200 OME springs on the 6100s if I could make that work.

Just painful to take it all apart in the name of science.

Someone already tried OME springs on factory Sas shocks and they didn't work(don't remember the details). I am not holding my breath for the 6112's being a longer shock. Bilstein 6100's should be longer than 5100's just because they are a larger more aggressive option. I think you might be a candidate for the Eibach 2.0, you can get different springs and adjust height. Only issue is no one has posted lengths or specs for Eibach and they are 46mm which is the same as 5100's ($550 vs $1700 is a steep buy in).

I am trying to limiting myself as a Guinee Pig for all these new products. In the name of science I will let you experiment, I bought enough OME/Ironman/TJM springs for my Landcruiser and never was 100% happy.

 

[chtucker]

Someone already tried OME springs on factory Sas shocks and they didn't work(don't remember the details). I am not holding my breath for the 6112's being a longer shock. Bilstein 6100's should be longer than 5100's just because they are a larger more aggressive option. I think you might be a candidate for the Eibach 2.0, you can get different springs and adjust height. Only issue is no one has posted lengths or specs for Eibach and they are 46mm which is the same as 5100's ($550 vs $1700 is a steep buy in).

I am trying to limiting myself as a Guinee Pig for all these new products. In the name of science I will let you experiment, I bought enough OME/Ironman/TJM springs for my Landcruiser and never was 100% happy.

Very familiar with the "no go thread" it was more about not having the professional spring compressor than the springs themselves. They never did try to get the ARB springs on the SAS shocks because they only had a spring compressor of death available. I am speculating that a wall mounted spring compressor would get the job done.

I have been talking to Panda/Eibach about custom springs... but the underlying damper size is of concern...

 

[Snacktime]

Very familiar with the "no go thread" it was more about not having the professional spring compressor than the springs themselves. They never did try to get the ARB springs on the SAS shocks because they only had a spring compressor of death available. I am speculating that a wall mounted spring compressor would get the job done.

I have been talking to Panda/Eibach about custom springs... but the underlying damper size is of concern...

The middle ground products are a compromise at this point. I think your on the right path with OME springs as ARB publishes the spring specs and you can at least figure out what option works after the fact. Not many people mixing and matching combinations to fit their need.

 

[chtucker]

Excuse my nerdiness-

Here are the specs comparing the Bilsteins/OME. The Bilstein 6112 fronts sit between the OME medium and heavy, and the rears match the medium OME springs.

I can get the Bilstein 6112 kit for $1540 https://www.suspensionlifts.com/sho...t-coilovers-shocks-for-2021-2022-ford-bronco/

 

[Mainerunr]

Interesting thoughts about the droop on the 5100s- I don't want to lose range of motion after using a higher circlip location... and they all seem to do that.

6100's are same length as 5100's and going to have the same limitations. I just don't see the value in a bigger shock that doesn't capitalize on providing more travel (Bilstein left at least 1.4" off the length of the shock). Your right on about losing range of motion, which is why spacers seem to have a place on these rigs vs circlip/collar spacers.

This is one of the things I tend to point out when people who spent the money try justifying their purchase by putting down spacer lifts.

Not that there aren't downsides to the spacer lifts but unless there is contact limiting droop, you don't lose downward travel (my Frontier had a 2" spacer lift and ultimately lost about half an inch of droop due to the UCA hitting the coil bucket...only happened off road and not too frequently). Of course, the down side to lifting with a spacer and NOT losing droop is that it allows the angles on everything to exceed stock.

 

[Snacktime]

Excuse my nerdiness-

Here are the specs comparing the Bilsteins/OME. The Bilstein 6112 fronts sit between the OME medium and heavy, and the rears match the medium OME springs.

I can get the Bilstein 6112 kit for $1540 https://www.suspensionlifts.com/sho...t-coilovers-shocks-for-2021-2022-ford-bronco/

The issues with knowing the spring rate is needing to know the length of the spring. So guessing the 6112 are most likely near SAS bronco length which will make them shorter than OME. Went and dug up this old thread and you can see the OME springs are longer than SAS.

Issue is you take two springs of the same stiffness, if one is longer it feels softer. Age old cutting springs to drop cars makes them feel stiffer. So without knowing the length they could ride very different.

Hypothetical and based on assumptions:
6112 are using the released 6100 shock for SAS only so they are designed for SAS length springs which are 3-4" shorter than OME(assumption). The provided springs with the 6112 should feel closer to heavey OME and actual act like a higher spring rate due to being a shorter length.

I would say your looking at a springs designed for bumpers and added weight? I need to go find the factory SAS spring rates and take a look.

 

[chtucker]

The issues with knowing the spring rate is needing to know the length of the spring. So guessing the 6112 are most likely near SAS bronco length which will make them shorter than OME. Went and dug up this old thread and you can see the OME springs are longer than SAS.

Issue is you take two springs of the same stiffness, if one is longer it feels softer. Age old cutting springs to drop cars makes them feel stiffer. So without knowing the length they could ride very different.

Hypothetical and based on assumptions:
6112 are using the released 6100 shock for SAS only so they are designed for SAS length springs which are 3-4" shorter than OME(assumption). The provided springs with the 6112 should feel closer to heavey OME and actual act like a higher spring rate due to being a shorter length.

I would say your looking at a springs designed for bumpers and added weight? I need to go find the factory SAS spring rates and take a look.

The compressed and extended lengths of the OME shocks are very similar to the 5100s/6100s. My question is how much of difference there is between SAS and OME springs when they are off the shock? I don't know.. and I am assuming I am wrong that they might be the same length?

Specs on front OME shocks are

• Open Length: 22.64 inches
• Closed Length: 14.96 inches

Bilsteins are 22.80 extended, 16.6 compressed..

Longer springs would imply longer extended shocks? The OME shocks having a shorter closed length does make sense with a longer spring...

Tell me to leave your thread if I am going to far down a rabbit hole. I just appreciate the discussion.

 

[Bronco Don]

I think it looks fantastic!! I really need to make a decision on leveling/lifting my Black Diamond because this look is just too good.

Off topic question… how do you like the MetalCloak skids? Any complaints?

Here’s my Black Diamond with same 5100 at max lift

 

[Snacktime]

This is one of the things I tend to point out when people who spent the money try justifying their purchase by putting down spacer lifts.

Not that there aren't downsides to the spacer lifts but unless there is contact limiting droop, you don't lose downward travel (my Frontier had a 2" spacer lift and ultimately lost about half an inch of droop due to the UCA hitting the coil bucket...only happened off road and not too frequently). Of course, the down side to lifting with a spacer and NOT losing droop is that it allows the angles on everything to exceed stock.

Its about playing inside the box, currently I think people have a phobias of spacers and body lifts. Both are starting to be an integral part fitting bigger tires. Ohh I have had 2 2005 frontiers, 1 had nitrous...

The compressed and extended lengths of the OME shocks are very similar to the 5100s/6100s. My question is how much of difference there is between SAS and OME springs when they are off the shock? I don't know.. and I am assuming I am wrong that they might be the same length?

Specs on front OME shocks are

• Open Length: 22.64 inches
• Closed Length: 14.96 inches

Bilsteins are 22.80 extended, 16.6 compressed..

Longer springs would imply longer extended shocks? The OME shocks having a shorter closed length does make sense with a longer spring...

Tell me to leave your thread if I am going to far down a rabbit hole. I just appreciate the discussion.

I like these discussions I have spent a lot of time looking at OME and when I saw 5100's for sale I said that is what I need(for what I wanted to do).

Bellow you can see I marked the strut with a Red arrow for max height with SAS Springs and Green arrow for hitachi max height setting. Hitachi spring are longer and lower spring rate and feel softer. The SAS springs are shorter and stiffer. Both work on the 5100's and provide the same travel. The difference is how the spring is designed to work. As you load a spring with weight it compress and becomes stiffer(depends on spring design). So shorter stiff spring doesn't need to travel as far to support as much weight.

You want a stiffer spring with heavy tires paired with a large shock to slow down the movement. Long soft springs feel like a vehicle is floating around as energy is dissipated from the springs moving side to side (when over loaded). The shorter springs will have less lateral movement as they compress and unload(feel stable). On the SAS bronco the shorter coils are to allow the lower reservoir to be shock mounted and a design constraint. Its a giant mess trying to figure everything out. Feels like a huge contradiction.

Simple way to explain is short and stiff to go fast, long and soft to go slow.

OME is just closer to the Hitachi design with a longer spring. OME has always been more geared towards running a heavy rig with bigger tires. Longer springs allows more compression before binding so fully loaded your suspension can still travel. I would say be careful running to stiff of a spring, you will ride high and like a stiff old 1 ton truck.

 

[Snacktime]

@coffeetwitch I used a zone lift for sasquatch package. All the zone Sasquatch lifts use the same front lift spacer/puck and rear spacer puck. The differences in addition height come from the collar included in the zone kits. I am set at position 4 in the front and position 3 in the rear with zone Sasquatch spacers.

I used the spacers to gain lift without maxing the preload on the Bilstein. The more preload/higher the settings on the Bilsteins the more you limit your flex.

To be 100% honest I am looking at lowering down but I want to hit a few harder trails before I commit. My travel took a hit with the Bilsteins being set so high and I am struggling to get full compression.

 

[coffeetwitch]

@Snacktime

been a while with this lift, have you made any changes or planing to make any?

changes in ride height? any other insights to share?

thanks

 

[Snacktime]

@Snacktime

been a while with this lift, have you made any changes or planing to make any?

changes in ride height? any other insights to share?

thanks

Haven't changed anything other than bigger tires. I went from a 67lb 35" tire to a 68lb 37" tire. I still want to drop the ride height for daily driving but for wheeling high as possible is still the best answer for the trails I like. Working on adding bumpers so that should lower me down.

I have no issues keeping up with SAS shocked Broncos. With coilovers equipped broncos they run away from me, plus I tend to lift a rear tire when they keep all 4 planted(I don't unhook my sway bar). I would like a softer riding shock but damn the 5100 do an awesome job with stability on crap roads. Hitting off center joints on the freeway use to be wild with Hitachi shocks and 35s, very happy not to have that issue.

I wouldn't run spacers if you want to stay in safer tie rod angles. The spacers definitely take you out to the danger zone of needing to be more careful.

 

[Jeffola]

Well I finally have enough mileage on my 5100 shocks to say I like them and post my collection of info. 5100's feel stiffer than Hitachi's due to the digressive valving. If you feel your Hitachi shocks are to bouncy the 5100s would be a good purchase for you. If you are sensitive to small bumps in the road and don't want to feel them don't buy 5100's. The biggest change for me is the local speed bumps that are a 20mph bump. These 20mph bumps with the Hitachi suspension was a hard bottom out for me. I can now respectfully drive 40mph over the same bump and no bottoming out. Front 5100's can definitely handle more speed on these bumps but the rear at its limit (losing tire contact with the ground). For $550 they are absolutely a no brainer upgrade since 5100 tend to last 2-3 times longer than factory shock. If your paying someone to install a front lift and want to keep your bronco for a long time your money ahead putting 5100s on.

I would not put 5100's on a SAS bronco, they are the same diameter but missing some of the improvements that SAS shock offers (rebound and reservoirs). If you are looking at replacing SAS shocks after they have worn out I would say these are going to be a good option for similar performance (not an improvement). I couldn't find SAS take offs for fair money so for me the 5100's are a nice upgrade.

Snacktime's bad idea's start here and below...

Hard Numbers for all Bilstein shocks are pretty much the same. Front are almost Identical to factory SAS Shocks, below are 5100's and SAS specs. I believe the shorter collapsed length on the 5100 is the bump stop strike plate design(eats about 5mm or 1/2 cm of travel).

Rear has slightly less travel again I think the strike plate for the bump stops is the reason. The overall shock length is 5.7mm shorter or 1/2cm, which I consider a mute point (if it was more I would have passed on the 5100 and bought take off SAS Shocks).

My ruff math and my issue with Bilstein not being long enough. Below you will see my excel sheet I used to figure out if it was worth buying 5100s and what kind of suspension travel I would get. Below in the blue is stock Front SAS travel and 5100 at 1in (really 5100's are a 1/4 inch less up travel but your not fighting up travel). Same with the rear in yellow. Biggest issue with lifting stock suspension on the road and day to day is running out of droop and lifting a tire. 5100 are being sold as a lift 1" to 3", same as sticking a 2" collar lift on stock SAS shocks. I don't like the idea of running 5100's at 3" ride height with 1.74" of available droop. Since I was looking for as much lift as I can (3.5" to 4" is what is considered safe at this time) and keeping as much down travel as possible. You will see I stuck a spacer lift in with the shocks, this was to keep my down travel. I ended up putting the collars at the green highlighted number. With the added weight of my skids and when I stick my winch on(hiding in the garage) I will most likely lose a 1/2" on the front taking me from 3.8" of lift down to 3.3" (guessing). With the height reduction I should have 2" of down travel. I also have the ability to adjust and add more height to the front if needed. Spacers allow me more droop and hopefully provide a better on road experience over just maxing out the 5100's.

Side shot

Crappy shot of cv angles

Bad ideas

Alignment on stock A-Arms

The End-Please feel free to comment on my bad ideas... as this is a forum.

What clip location did you use on the shocks. I read through but didn't see.

Sponsored