2025 Suspension Recommendations (by Snacktime)

[Brian_B]

Thanks for posting this - the difference (and how it effects geometry/CV angles) just 'clicked' for me when you put it this way.

Just to clarify, the 'snap ring groove' body shocks (such as the Bilstiens 5100/6200/8200 for Bronco) provide a way to adjust shock length extension - in other words a built in "spacer" lift depending on setting right?

Moving the clip is just like adjusting the collar on the ICON or 4WP -- you are changing the pre-load of the spring. Nothing changes on the shock though. Bilstein uses a clip, ICON/4WP use a threaded body - end result is the same.

So like @87-Z28 says, it's a spring adjustment, it won't affect your shock length or your full compress to full droop angles at all. It will affect your resting / default angles though.

Full Compression to Full Droop arc is set by the travel length of the shock.
Your lift is determined by your resting height.

CV Angles at FC/FD are set by where the shock is mounted in the UCA (the puck/spacer lifts)
Where you set in that Arc between FC/FD at rest is set by Spring Pre-load (the perch collars/clips)

For pucks/spacers - you aren't changing the spring at all, so the ride stays the same, but by moving the entire arc up or down, you also move your resting height up or down.

For perch collars/clips - you are making the spring stiffer / looser, so the body rides at a different resting height because the spring has more or less compression - but the stops at FC/FD don't move at all.

And then a lot of folks like body lifts - because they don't affect anything at all with suspension in the least. They just give you more body clearance to stuff in bigger tires, but you don't really gain a lot on ride clearance just from a body lift alone, since the diffs and axles don't really move.

Sponsored

 

[87-Z28]

What is the Ford Performance Parts suspension package? The 5100's or 6100's? I think its 6100's and its for NON-SAS?

it is a 6100 shock that comes with SAS equivalent springs. It has a fixed spring “perch” so it canNOT be adjusted to get lift from spring preload. It has no circlip to adjust. The 6112 is essentially the same shock and spring combo but has an adjustable spring perch using the circlip to gain lift via preload.

 

[Brian_B]

it is a 6100 shock that comes with SAS equivalent springs. It has a fixed spring “perch” so it canNOT be adjusted to get lift from spring preload. It has no circlip to adjust. The 6112 is essentially the same shock and spring combo but has an adjustable spring perch using the circlip to gain lift via preload.

That's a good distinction. I had always heard that the FP Lift Kit was the same thing as a 6112. Sounds like it's close, but not exactly the same, given that the FP kit lacks the adjustment capability.

 

[Brian_B]

Working on finding a pic

 

[crenca]

Excellent, I think I might be getting it!

Speaking of that "arc" geometry defined by the shock, buttressed on either end by the shock's full compression (or bumpstop), and its full extension (or limit strap, etc.), I see these specs published for example here for the 8112:

https://cart.bilsteinus.com/front-c...&SpringType=&MfrBodyCode=&BodyNumDoors=4 Door

as "collapsed length" and "extended length". I am wanting to do an apples to apples comparison to the SAS stock yellow bilsteins, but my Google search skills are not up to par - surely they are published somewhere?

I want to verify that the 8112 & the 6100 series don't change a SAS Bronco's geometry more than a trivial amount as claimed by Bilstein. That said some aftermarket that sell the 6100/8112 series claim that they offer "more travel" but perhaps they are obliquely referring to the adjustable spring load/resting ride height lift...

 

[KABQ]

The link was more specific to Jared not wanting more than 1.5" lift. That discussion should go with the other thread that I linked. Snack's thread here will spiral off into tangents otherwise.

Short answer is that the 4WP/ProComp shocks were designed for the 4-dr (Black Diamond specifically) Bronco. The VSRT stands for Vehicle Specific Ride Tuned.

So with that understanding, the shocks were designed for a heavy config. The 4-dr chassis weight, steel front/rear bumper, steel bash/skid plates, (I'm not sure what engine they had in their Race Red BD). So when trying to do the calculus of what your Bronco weighs, the biggest difference is the weight between the 2 vs 4 dr. chassis. You have the 2.7L. Throw a winch on and the weight difference shrinks.

With that said, @Oldhippie and @KABQ have them on their 2-dr. Perhaps, they can chime in on their Bronco spec regarding weight and how much lift they realized along with street and offroad performance.

@AMCheese I have the 2.7 and a lot of extra weight with bumpers, steel skids, tools, etc. Ride quality is firmer than stock sas which is nice on the road (less nose dive and body roll). It can be a little harsh over small, sharp impacts, however it feels much better than stock over larger bumps, especially at higher speeds. The lift is not extreme enough in my case for concern with my CVs, and I have the preload set relatively high.

Hunting in the fall I put a couple hundred miles on it without touching pavement. Airing down definitely helped with small, sharp impacts and it was comfortable in all other situations. Flexed out fine without binding.

 

[87-Z28]

Excellent, I think I might be getting it!

Speaking of that "arc" geometry defined by the shock, buttressed on either end by the shock's full compression (or bumpstop), and its full extension (or limit strap, etc.), I see these specs published for example here for the 8112:

https://cart.bilsteinus.com/front-corner-module-41-314319.html?VehicleType=Car**Truck**SUV**Van&Year=2024&Make=Ford&Model=Bronco&SubModel=Badlands&DriveType=&BodyType=&Engine=&SpringType=&MfrBodyCode=&BodyNumDoors=4 Door

as "collapsed length" and "extended length". I am wanting to do an apples to apples comparison to the SAS stock yellow bilsteins, but my Google search skills are not up to par - surely they are published somewhere?

I want to verify that the 8112 & the 6100 series don't change a SAS Bronco's geometry more than a trivial amount as claimed by Bilstein. That said some aftermarket that sell the 6100/8112 series claim that they offer "more travel" but perhaps they are obliquely referring to the adjustable spring load/resting ride height lift...

here is some data on shock lengths. Shown are fully extended and fully compressed. The difference is the shock travel. Notice that most of the shock manufacturers limit extended length to around 24.3”. This is directly a result of CV binding that occurs for lengths greater than 24.3”.

Then the aftermarket game becomes increasing shock travel by decreasing shock compressed length without causing tire/fender interference at full compression for the 37s everyone wants to run.

Edit. also notice that stock length is 23.3”. That is why snacktime says adding a 1” spacer on top of stock is fine. You will still be under the accepted aftermarket shock length limit of 24.3”.

I don’t have numbers for the 8122s.

 

[AMCheese]

@AMCheese I have the 2.7 and a lot of extra weight with bumpers, steel skids, tools, etc. Ride quality is firmer than stock sas which is nice on the road (less nose dive and body roll). It can be a little harsh over small, sharp impacts, however it feels much better than stock over larger bumps, especially at higher speeds. The lift is not extreme enough in my case for concern with my CVs, and I have the preload set relatively high.

Hunting in the fall I put a couple hundred miles on it without touching pavement. Airing down definitely helped with small, sharp impacts and it was comfortable in all other situations. Flexed out fine without binding.

Thanks for info. Looking for no more than 2.5 inches over sas, seems this is possible.

 

[crenca]

here is some data on shock lengths. Shown are fully extended and fully compressed. The difference is the shock travel. Notice that most of the shock manufacturers limit extended length to around 24.3”. This is directly a result of CV binding that occurs for lengths greater than 24.3”.

Then the aftermarket game becomes increasing shock travel by decreasing shock compressed length without causing tire/fender interference at full compression for the 37s everyone wants to run.

I don’t have numbers for the 8122s.

Cool thanks! The 8112's & 6100's for 4 door Bronco can be found here:

https://cart.bilsteinus.com/catalogue?VehicleType=Car**Truck**SUV**Van&Year=2024&Make=Ford&Model=Bronco&SubModel=Badlands&DriveType=&BodyType=&Engine=&SpringType=&MfrBodyCode=&BodyNumDoors=4 Door

8112's (front)

Collapsed Length (in) :17.59

Extended Length (in) :23.40

8112's (rear)

Collapsed Length (in) :18.40

Extended Length (in) :26.60

6100's (front)

Collapsed Length (in) :16.62

Extended Length (in) :22.80

6100's (rear)

Collapsed Length (in) :17.11

Extended Length (in) :25.56

If I'm reading this data correctly, the 8112's do indeed seem to be almost the same as the yellow OEM SAS shocks, whereas the 6100 series move the arc up a bit - compressing a touch more but extending a touch less...perhaps they mount differently to the UCA, essentially coming with a spacer, so to match OEM geometry?

 

[87-Z28]

If I'm reading this data correctly, the 8112's do indeed seem to be almost the same as the yellow OEM SAS shocks, whereas the 6100 series move the arc up a bit - compressing a touch more but extending a touch less...perhaps they mount differently to the UCA, essentially coming with a spacer, so to match OEM geometry?

The LCA pivots about its frame mounting points and swings in an arc. All the shocks mount in the same location on the frame at the top and the LCA on the bottom. So the shock travel, from full compression to extension, dictates the arc the LCA will swing through. Each of the 6100, 8112, and oem SAS have slightly different lengths so the resulting LCA motion will be slightly different. But all are basically very similar to oem.

 

[geargeek]

Shown below is some info on the circlip adjustments and related ride heights for the 6100 (uses the stock SAS springs), and the 6112 (comes with a new spring). This came from Bilstein's installation guides for the 6100s. As mentioned in a previous post, changing the circlip changes the spring pre-load. Increasing spring pre-load makes you ride higher but also changes ride quality - not necessarily better or worse ride quality, just different depending on your overall weight, tires, etc.

 

[geargeek]

For those of us Sasquatch owners that are part of the rear shock recall, it would be nice if Ford offered an 'upgrade' option. Since Ford will have to pay for 2 new shocks and installation labor, wouldn't it be great if they offered to upgrade all 4 shocks at a discounted price? Would seem like a win-win.

The SAS OEM Shock lists for $538 on parts.ford.com, so $1,076 for the pair. Assuming those are marked up 350%, let's say Ford's cost is $300 for the 2 replacement shocks, plus ~$300 in dealer labor, so ~$600 total cost to Ford.

$600 should cover the labor required to install 4 shocks, so I would be willing to pay Bilstein's MSRP for a full set of upgraded shocks if Ford would install them for free. Ford would come out ahead on the deal, as they would get the upgraded shocks at wholesale. We would get a free install of shocks we want.

BTW per Bilstein's website, MSRP's for 2 front and 2 rear (4 total shocks) are as follows:
5100: $895
6100: $1,300
6112: $1,838
8112 (ZoneControl CR DSA+): $6,735 (!)
Ford sells the SAS OEM shock at more than the cost of the 6112!

 

[Snacktime]

I just want to clarify, is it necessary to get a lift to tackle some tough trails? There has been stock SAS Broncos that have completed the Rubican which is far from mild such Chase Gentry who has done every trail imaginable in a stock Wildtrak. I am currently running the Eibach Pro-Truck Coilover with 35s and done fine on all the trails I have tested which is mainly rock crawling and considering the Rubican over the summer. Please share your thoughts.

Rubicon is a meat grinder to the underside, just go look at Ford original pictures of the bronco they took through the Rubicon. They junked the bumpers, rockers and wheels. Once you hit hard trails you are picking certain items that work better for that trail. Rubicon is way more fun on 37s and 4" of lift. Not easy but takes the beating the crap out of you down a few notches.

Excuse the possibly dumb question. In your post you say "best option for NON-SAS Broncos/SAS Broncos." Are you saying there is an issue for people who do not have a SAS Bronco upgrading to 6112? I ask because I currently have a Outer Banks Non-SAS and about to pull the trigger on a set of 6112.

Again sorry if this is a dumb question.

They are essentially a 6100 with unknown lift springs. For how many different springs come from the factory I question the offering only one spring option. Mostly I don't recommend them because of the likelihood you will have to take them apart again and adjust them to get the right stance. Thinking about it now I, I should have put them on the list.

I read somewhere that the spicer heavy duty half shafts have more range/angle on the cv joints? not cheap but maybe the correct way to get more range

Yes they do have more travel! They also move the failure point to inside the front differential. Also doesn't help with the CV axles seals and putting stress on the internals.

Anyone with experience with Dobinsons?

They never really became popular, kind of similar to OME shocks and springs. I wish we had some more information on their lineup.

 

[Sitruc_btb]

here is some data on shock lengths. Shown are fully extended and fully compressed. The difference is the shock travel. Notice that most of the shock manufacturers limit extended length to around 24.3”. This is directly a result of CV binding that occurs for lengths greater than 24.3”.

Then the aftermarket game becomes increasing shock travel by decreasing shock compressed length without causing tire/fender interference at full compression for the 37s everyone wants to run.

Edit. also notice that stock length is 23.3”. That is why snacktime says adding a 1” spacer on top of stock is fine. You will still be under the accepted aftermarket shock length limit of 24.3”.

I don’t have numbers for the 8122s.

The Kings exceed the factory limits. Are owners with King shocks stressing the cv's? Or is 0.3" negligible?

 

[87-Z28]

The Kings exceed the factory limits. Are owners with King shocks stressing the cv's? Or is 0.3" negligible?

0.3” is probably negligible and it greatly depends on your use case. If you never cycle the front suspension much then not a concern really. If you do aggressively cycle the front I would imagine that there would be more severe wear on the CV internals.

AccuTune sells the king shocks with an internal limiter that reduces the extended length to 24.3” just to be safe. It is described in detail on their website if you are interested. Easy to find if you hunt around.

Sponsored