Photog's Lifted Suspension 2009 Roadtrek 190V

[AZ ADVenturist]

Brian; You are way more patient with this than I am. We have spent 5 months & way to much money trying to get a 2" lift under our '02. The tuff truck coils were completely unsatisfactory causing rear axle wrap & front porposing plus the problem you describe of not finding shocks long enough. We finally removed the truck coils, reinstalled the orig. OEM coils and used gas shocks with 2" coil donut/blocks.
In rear we used 2" blocks and adjustable air shocks. I've only driven about 40 miles, but handling & steering are no worse than before we started and the 265/75-16 Michelins have enough clearance.
Oh yea, part of the hassle/delay/expense was try to use air bags or heavy duty leaf springs in the rear.
I paid for some stuff we couldn't use. Does anyone want to buy a pair of Tuff Truck coil springs - barely used!!?
I am sure I'd not have taken on this exercise if I'd known then what I know now.
Expensive Lesson. OH well, live & learn.
Ric.

[booster]

I know everyone has different tastes, experience, and vans, but some of the issues brought up just don't add up, based on our experience.

Ride is, obviously, subjective, so I can't say whether the TuffTruk spirngs are too rough for anyone else, or not. I can say that they really didn't make things worse for us, and combined with the Bilstein (soft on small bumps) shocks, we felt the ride improved.

Porpoising with the stiffer springs is most likely because the springs are overpowering the shocks. They need to match. We do not have any problem with the TuffTruk spings and Bilsteins. We get 1.5 bounces and it settles immediately without porpoising. If the TuffTruk springs were put in with worn out OEM shocks (I have read that most are very tired by 25K miles) the ride would be terrible, it would porpoise, and seem very disconnected to the road.

I can't figure out any way that front springs can cause rear spring wrap up, which is almost exclusively caused by rear spring issues when under heavy acceleration or braking, causing leaf spring buckling, and is characterized by axle tramp (bouncing).

Our van rides almost exactly at GM recommended ideal ride height for a 3500 Express, and we also have nearly 2" of unused front travel on the front suspension, at extension. They do this on purpose, I have been told, because if you let the suspension go to full down, it will tuck the front wheel under (big, big positive camber), and make the van more likely to roll over as the tire rolls up on its sidewall (think Corvair and Ralph Nader). Stopping the travel with the shock is much less strain on the parts than having it bind in full extension and then get hit with the load reapplying, as the tire will have slide sideways on the pavement as the suspension compresses, if it is allowed to tuck too much.

Our rear airbags went right in without issue (both the Firestone and Riderite) and brought us to factory recommended ride height at 20-30psi on the Riderites (40-45 and the Firestones) . The ride is actually better than when it was sitting on the very stiff overload springs. They have caused no trouble at all.

The change to the 265-75-16 tires with the factory offset wheels was expected to harshen the ride, but actually made it a lot better. Most, I think, came from the Michelin MS2 tires, but some, I think, came from getting the steering geometry, and spring/shcock loading lever arms back to design specs, stressing the shocks and springs less, and reducing load momentum on bumps. The overall ride quality and handling (especially at lower speeds) got noticeably better after the change. The van does not fight itself in turns any more or make scuffing noise from the front tires.

As I said, there may be good reason for what folks have seen, but I surely can't relate it to what we have found. Our van now runs right at OEM height, is much smoother, and handles more car-like than it ever has. It is a pleasure to drive in any conditions.

I would be very interested to see how other vans handle, and to have others drive ours, for comparison purposes, to try to determine what is best, or not so good. We are in Minnesota (Twin Cities area), and anyone who wants to drop by when in the area is more than welcome to stop by. We have a fully equipped shop, and should be able to, at least, gain some knowledge.

Drive safe!!!

[booster]

AZ, what did you use for air shocks? I know yours is a previous model than ours is, but none were available for ours. Also, were the coil donuts urethane or aluminum/steel? I ask because when I was researching added lift for our van, a fellow on another board had used urethane donuts to lift his Chevy. I called the manufacturer of the donuts (and a couple of others) and was told they had removed them from the application list for anything bigger than 1/2 ton rigs because they had been failing in service due to the extra load of the bigger vans/pickups.

[AZ ADVenturist]

Booster; I'll find the answers re. shocks & donuts, but not sure I am fully qualified to comprehend all of this. I believe there may have been some major changes from '02 to '09 Chev. in addition to motor size
from 5.7 to 6?! It sounds as though there were frame as well as suspension changes.
Also I am convinced that the shop I took it to in Prescott was not fully qualified to meet the challange of the Chev. Van. They had lifted pickups & Jeeps but were overwhelmed by the 3500 Van.
I had directed them to Your & Photog's build threads, but not sure they understood or were further confused. I'm ready to chalk it up to a failed experiment and accept that what I got is inadequate and probably prone to failure in time. I'll drive it as long as I can & it is safe to do so. And I'll be shopping for our next "B" in the meantime - maybe a SportsMobile!
BTW - we were in Minnesota last summer, wish I had stopped to see you then.
Regards, Ric. in Ariz.

[booster]

I think you are correct on the changes to the Express. I think in 03/04 sometime they changed the engine compartment, and stopped offering the 454 CI engine. IIRC correctly, that allowed them to make a smaller doghouse and more passenger room. It probably also allowed them to move the front suspension inboard a bit and get longer a-arms and such, but I don't know if they did that. I do know the 6.0 is much narrower than a 454 big block, so they had a lot of room to play with, and there is not enough room in our engine compartment for anything bigger than the 6.0 that is in there.

[Photog]

AZ Adv: I am sorry to hear you have had difficulties with some of the products we have been trying. I do wish that R/T had considered the extra weight they add to the van, and had ordered the vans from Chevy, with a few suspension upgrades, or maybe just a van with the 10k -12k GVW options.

Re: Coil Spring spacers (donuts). The ones I purchased from Suspension Maxx are metal. I believe they are steel, but they might be aluminum. I have not handled them in a while. At over 2000 pounds resting on each coil spring, plus the dynamic loading, I didn't feel that the urethane spacers would hold up. The folks at Suspension Maxx agreed, and recommended their metal spacers. After installing the Tuff Truck springs, I did not use the spacers. I am still considering the factory coils along with the donuts; but I am concerned about the life of the spring. I suspect it will sag over time, and I will also need to check for coil-bind, at full compression.

Rear axle-wrap has a number of different causes; but none of them are related to the front suspension. We currently have 4" lift blocks under the rear, with the springs still compressed onto the overload (rebound) springs. This big-beefy spring is currently preventing axle-wrap. I'm sure it would be a problem, with the 4" blocks, if we were not riding on the big leafs. When I get new leaf packs, I do not want to run more than a 1" block, and I will have to include some type of anti-wrap control into the leaf design.

Our front suspension still needs an alignment, as it currently has a tiny bit of positive camber. But; I had the suspension hanging completely down (no restriction from the shocks), and it was not showing any large amounts of extra (+) camber. Next time I have the shocks off, I will try to get some photos with the suspension at full droop (and after a proper alignment). I don't mind the shock absorber acting like a travel-stop, I just don't want it to cut out so much of the available travel. There are metal stops, under the upper control arms, to prevent excessive down-travel. I don't want to depend on the metal stops either, as that would be harsh and noisy. The shocks that are currently on the van were designed for a lifted 1-Ton Silverado. they are 2.5" longer than stock. Even though this allows the suspension to travel all the way down, we have not noticed any harshness when driving. They do limit up-travel, and this does cause some harshness. If I can not find a better length Bilstein shock, we will probably just install the factory length Bilsteins, and continue on.

[peteco]

Originally Posted by Photog

Our front suspension still needs an alignment, as it currently has a tiny bit of positive camber. But; I had the suspension hanging completely down (no restriction from the shocks), and it was not showing any large amounts of extra (+) camber. Next time I have the shocks off, I will try to get some photos with the suspension at full droop (and after a proper alignment). I don't mind the shock absorber acting like a travel-stop, I just don't want it to cut out so much of the available travel. There are metal stops, under the upper control arms, to prevent excessive down-travel. I don't want to depend on the metal stops either, as that would be harsh and noisy. The shocks that are currently on the van were designed for a lifted 1-Ton Silverado. they are 2.5" longer than stock. Even though this allows the suspension to travel all the way down, we have not noticed any harshness when driving. They do limit up-travel, and this does cause some harshness. If I can not find a better length Bilstein shock, we will probably just install the factory length Bilsteins, and continue on.

I have the TufTruk springs with Bilsteins on my 2006 RT210P. I would like to extend the down travel on my front suspension by 1 to 2 inches. I can only get about 1/2 inch by adding washers under the upper mount before there is no stud thread to engage the nut.

Something like this would work but I haven't found any for the Bilstein's:

www.summitracing.com/parts/MRG-1290/

Have you thought about anything like this?

Pete
2006 RT210P

[booster]

I have been looking around for any good information on front wheel downtravel optimization and modifications. What I have found so far is that there isn't a lot of information out there for anything other than rock crawlers and desert racers.

While I could not find any specific info, some things folks mentioned may be of interest. All unconfirmed, so treat it as you wish!

Quite a few mentioned that bump steer due to toe change happen faster, and are larger, with travel increases in the droop direction than in the compression direction. Testing by measuring toe at ride height and full droop is pretty easy (full compression is hard). The recommendations were in the line of limiting droop if the toe changes too much, and in particular, if it changes from toe in to toe out within the travel.

Almost everyone said that on GM stuff to make absolutely sure you stay off of the metal downtravel stops on the upper control arm. "nearly certain damage" seemed to be mentioned a lot. Didn't see anything on vans, but the pickup folks talked about having a minimum of 3/4" of clearance at the stop, at ride height, if your shock has enough travel to let it hit. Some went as far as saying to use straps if hitting was possible. Rough road types didn't like the idea of stopping on the shocks, as they felt it would destroy the shocks, but they do get hard, full, extensions way, way more than a Roadtrek, I would think. I would guess GM feels it is much cheaper to replace pounded out shocks than to have bent suspension parts, so they stop on the shock.

There was some chatter about sway bars and how they affect things. In particular, vehicles with huge sway bars effectively have less droop available in the real world because in a one wheel bump the bar will hold that wheel up. With bars big enough to stop sway on a 9K# van, holding up a couple hundred pounds of wheel and such is pretty easy, especially when the springs are getting mostly unloaded pretty quickly, and the large shocks slow it down even more. The extreme example were folks that limited droop far enough to lift the inside wheel in corners (non driven axle) to get all the weight to be sprung. I would think the 100+ pounds of weight that gets lifted would somewhat reduce lean, but it does seem to be a bit of an extreme method =).

There are apparently not a lot of big consequences for low amounts of droop. Noise due to hitting shock travel limits, or suspension stops showed up the most. Dipping of the vehicle at the wheel that can't travel down far enough was also mentioned, but was said to be minimal if swaybars were used. There were lots more issues mentioned as problems in the compression direction, from noise, to damage, to handling disruptions (pitching) when things went solid on you, like bottoming the shock, or bouncing hard off the rubber bump stop, or the tire loosing contact with the road. This is exactly what our Roadtrek did with the stock suspension. A one wheel bump would bottom hard on the bump stop and pitch the front end around.

All of this goes totally out the window if you are mostly concerned about what will happen at low speeds on very rough terrain (not a priority for us). I would then think you would want a lot downtravel on all the individual wheels, so that they would comply with terrain without the body dropping and potentially hanging up. Uptravel limitations in those circumstances would probably not be as much of an issue. Downside would be you would need to have no, or smaller, swaybars to get the compliance.

I have found this all very interesting to this point. I think this winter, I will probably set up the strings and measure the toe pattern at ride and droop just to see what it is. I don't expect it to be very bad, as we don't seem to have enough bump steer to even feel. I will also be able to get a more accurate droop measurement on ours. At the same time, I will try to disconnect the shock to get full droop and see if the toe pattern goes crazy, or not. The perception that I have seen in the past is that it looks to toe out as the wheels drop when I jack it up.

We have not had any noise on potholes out of our setup, but that is probably related to the Bilsteins damping enough to make for a soft landing, even if they do have time to fully extend. As time goes on, and we see a wider variety of roads, we will now certainly be aware to watch for it.

For those looking for more droop in the front. Did some event or driving characteristic show up to indicate you needed more downtravel?

[Photog]

Booster,
Your info is laid out very well. For those that understand their suspensions, you have provided some good info.

Offroad sport vehicles do like to have more down travel in the suspension. Their ride height is typically set lower than the mid-way point in the suspension travel (more down travel available, than up travel).

Since our vans have a limited amount of travel available, I would like to make use of what is available, without causing damage or wacky steering characteristics (I have done that once already). With our improved ground clearance, we expect to get out on more uneven roads (not at high speeds). If we can get our suspension to be fairly compliant, we should have a much more comfortable ride. There will be some compromising with sway bars and stability. The weight of our van should force the suspension through most of its available travel, even with the heavier springs.

Before installing the Tuff Truck springs, we noticed the "pitching" caused by resting on the jounce bumpers. This is gone now. All that is left is the harsh rear suspension, due to the overload (rebound) springs being fully engaged. I know this will improve, as your experience has shown, when we install proper leaf springs and get off the overload leaf.

After that, we will more inside, to cabinet improvements, and sound deadening (these things are very noisy).

[peteco]

Originally Posted by booster

For those looking for more droop in the front. Did some event or driving characteristic show up to indicate you needed more downtravel?

I seem to have more harshness when one wheel hits a hole, which could be due to the shock extending to its stop. It would be nice if someone made a shock extension to try out. I may try adding the washers to get a little more travel, but doubt that is enough to tell a difference.

Pete
2006 RT210P

[booster]

Originally Posted by peteco

I seem to have more harshness when one wheel hits a hole, which could be due to the shock extending to its stop. It would be nice if someone made a shock extension to try out. I may try adding the washers to get a little more travel, but doubt that is enough to tell a difference.

Pete
2006 RT210P

I am sure this has come up before, but if you have the Bilstein upper mounts on the shocks, they won't hold up, and will get very noisy as the rubber bushings pound out. The OEM GM mounts work very well with Bilsteins and really quite them down.

[peteco]

Originally Posted by booster

I am sure this has come up before, but if you have the Bilstein upper mounts on the shocks, they won't hold up, and will get very noisy as the rubber bushings pound out. The OEM GM mounts work very well with Bilsteins and really quite them down.

When I installed the Bilsteins I saw that the GM mounting hardware was much better so I reused them instead of installing the new (inferior) Bilstein bushing and washer.

Pete
2006 RT210P

[peteco]

Originally Posted by Photog

I took it in for an alignment today. They were able to get the settings close to spec.; but had trouble getting the camber to come into spec, and maintain decent caster. It looks like this is mostly due to the factory suspension being so compressed, as Booster pointed out with their R/T.

I put a new set of tires on my 2006 RT210 last year, 9000 miles ago, just after I had done the TufTruk front spring and rear airbag mod. The tire place did an alignment check and told me the alignment was in spec, but they did not provide a printout (they said the printer wasn't working).

I had the tires rotated for the 2nd time today. They did another alignment check. The toe was off (0.75 degrees left, 1.95 degrees right). They reset it to 0 degrees both sides. No charge.

The camber was off as well. -1.5 degrees left and -2.2 degrees right. They said to adjust would be a big job (1.6 hours, $160) requiring removing a cam insert. Caster was within spec.

The tires have not worn unevenly as far as I and the tech could tell. I can see getting 50,000 miles out of the tires based on the present wear. The tech suggested keeping an eye on the tires, and if they do not wear badly then to leave it as it is. I had replaced the previous tires at 35,000 miles due to extreme sidewall cracks. I think the previous owner ran the tires underinflated. I bought the van at 32,000 miles. The tires had worn on the inside some, but still had plenty of tread on them.

The vehicle handles and steers fine.

Anyone have any suggestions or experience with alignment on these Chevy Roadtreks?

Thanks,

Pete

[booster]

Originally Posted by peteco

I put a new set of tires on my 2006 RT210 last year, 9000 miles ago, just after I had done the TufTruk front spring and rear airbag mod. The tire place did an alignment check and told me the alignment was in spec, but they did not provide a printout (they said the printer wasn't working).

I had the tires rotated for the 2nd time today. They did another alignment check. The toe was off (0.75 degrees left, 1.95 degrees right). They reset it to 0 degrees both sides. No charge.

The camber was off as well. -1.5 degrees left and -2.2 degrees right. They said to adjust would be a big job (1.6 hours, $160) requiring removing a cam insert. Caster was within spec.

The tires have not worn unevenly as far as I and the tech could tell. I can see getting 50,000 miles out of the tires based on the present wear. The tech suggested keeping an eye on the tires, and if they do not wear badly then to leave it as it is. I had replaced the previous tires at 35,000 miles due to extreme sidewall cracks. I think the previous owner ran the tires underinflated. I bought the van at 32,000 miles. The tires had worn on the inside some, but still had plenty of tread on them.

The vehicle handles and steers fine.

Anyone have any suggestions or experience with alignment on these Chevy Roadtreks?

Thanks,

Pete

Here are the GM specs from our 07 factory service manual, and some comments that are mine.

Toe should be +.1 degree +/- .2 degree. That is total toe, so +.05 degree each side. I don't particularly like they let the toe go negative (toed out), as that can make the handling twitchy and wandery, especially in wind or grooved roads. It is best to have very low toe in when the vehicle is new and the front end tight, and gradually increase the toe in as the front end loosens up, IMO.

Camber should be +.25 degrees +/- .6 degrees. Negative will make the van corner better, but be more twitchy and wandery, just like the toe. the +.25 is a good place to be IMO. I am surprised that it was negative with new springs, as that should move it more positive. You probably should check the ride height against spec to see if you are high enough.

Caster should be +4.6 degrees left, +5.0 degrees right, +/- 1.0 degrees on both, with the cross caster at -.4 degrees (left lower than right) +/- .75 degrees. I like as much positive caster as I can get and still hold the other specs, with the cross caster as stated, so it will not lead down a right side road crown as much.

I don't understand their statement amount removing a cam insert, as they are semi-permanent and are what allow adjustments. There are some covers on them that need to be removed the first time, but it is a very easy task. If you are unable to get the van within all the specs, and even better to the preferred settings, you need to get it to a good front end shop for evaluation of ride height, front end wear, and bent parts. Judging from the specs you quoted, I think your van could handle even better than it does, I know ours changed for the better when we got the alignment right, and our originals were close to yours, but with less caster than you.

[peteco]

Originally Posted by booster

I don't understand their statement amount removing a cam insert, as they are semi-permanent and are what allow adjustments. There are some covers on them that need to be removed the first time, but it is a very easy task. If you are unable to get the van within all the specs, and even better to the preferred settings, you need to get it to a good front end shop for evaluation of ride height, front end wear, and bent parts. Judging from the specs you quoted, I think your van could handle even better than it does, I know ours changed for the better when we got the alignment right, and our originals were close to yours, but with less caster than you.

I probably should take it the alignment specialist across town. One thing the tire shop did that did not seem right was after they rotated the tires, they lowered the van down and then drove the van forward about 1-foot onto the front tire alignment turntable. I would have thought the van should be driven a bit to get the suspension to settle to its ride position before checking alignment.

Thanks,
Pete
2006 RT210P

[booster]

Originally Posted by peteco

I probably should take it the alignment specialist across town. One thing the tire shop did that did not seem right was after they rotated the tires, they lowered the van down and then drove the van forward about 1-foot onto the front tire alignment turntable. I would have thought the van should be driven a bit to get the suspension to settle to its ride position before checking alignment.

Thanks,
Pete
2006 RT210P

You are right that the wheel turntables are critical. especially the side to side slide, which are often sticky and mess up readings like camber and ride height. A designated alignment and suspension shop is a definite plus. Our two wheel alignment was about $95, IIRC.

[peteco]

I went to the alignment specialist and his alignment ramp can't handle my 9000 lb Roadtrek 210. I described my situation with the camber and he thought that would affect tire wear. Not sure where to go now but may need to go back to the tire place. Their rack can handle 14,000 lb vehicle.

[booster]

Originally Posted by peteco

I went to the alignment specialist and his alignment ramp can't handle my 9000 lb Roadtrek 210. I described my situation with the camber and he thought that would affect tire wear. Not sure where to go now but may need to go back to the tire place. Their rack can handle 14,000 lb vehicle.

I had ours done at a local truck service shop. Not the latest high tech rack, but it was digital and seemed to give consistent readings.

[Photog]

I get our alignment done at a truck alignment shop also. They do large RV's, heavy trucks, etc. They will set the alignment to almost any setting i want. $80.

Once I removed the first set of lift spindles (the ones for the Silverado truck), and installed the Tuff Truck springs, the alignment easily came into spec.

Booster, what are the alignment settings you prefer?

From your post.
Toe: +.10 Total
Cross Toe: zero
Camber: +.25
Cross Camber: Zero
Caster: +6.0
Cross Caster: -.4 (lower on left)

[booster]

Originally Posted by Photog

I get our alignment done at a truck alignment shop also. They do large RV's, heavy trucks, etc. They will set the alignment to almost any setting i want. $80.

Once I removed the first set of lift spindles (the ones for the Silverado truck), and installed the Tuff Truck springs, the alignment easily came into spec.

Booster, what are the alignment settings you prefer?

From your post.
Toe: +.10 Total
Cross Toe: zero
Camber: +.25
Cross Camber: Zero
Caster: +6.0
Cross Caster: -.4 (lower on left)

Yep, I like those numbers, especially if the ride height is correct so the geometry is where those numbers work the best. We have found it to be essentially bump steer free at those settings, with no squeeling or scuffing heard. This is with the new factory offset wheels, however, so optimum may be different for other folks.