Bilstein 6112 suspension review / experience on Badlands Sasquatch Bronco

[telenerd]

Howdy, wanted to share my experience with the 6112s for my Badlands Sasquatch 2 door.

I wanted lift but not too much lift. My local off-road shop said everyone typically almost maxes out there 6112s on the Bronco. After searching countless threads it was anyone guess on what clip setting to run due to all the different accessories people have. Based on what my vehicle weighed the shop also calculated out my accessories (belly pan skids, sliders, soon to be bumpers) and came out to clip 6 front and clip 5 in the back. My vehicle was way too stiff and alignment shop couldn’t get the Bronco alignment done on my stock arms. So I added JBAs. Made a big difference. Had shop lower the front and ran clip 5 f/r for one summer. I felt every pebble on the road and every rock on the trail. High speed off-road the Bronco felt skittish and stiff. Hated the shocks.

Off came the shocks and changed to clip 4. I learned how to do this on my own and was actually easy! Ride improved was a little softer but still wanted something softer. Just felt like I wanted something different. Looked at different companies etc.

On a whim I decide to try clip 3 front and back. Wow what a difference, the Bronco now feels similar to stock. Only difference was a slight decrease in ground clearance. I am already about 1 inch over stock Sasquatch, 40 inches from ground to fender and the rear is 40.5 or so. Going over rocks I don’t hate my suspension anymore. In the past the shocks would deflect over everything. I also noticed the Bronco is able to stay more balanced on the rocks and flexes easier with the lower clip preload settings. High speeds off-road I was having a blast and the Bronco had tons of traction and never felt floaty or skittish.

So with all that said I like the Bilsteins. I am still looking for other options? Yes of course but gonna try these for a bit while I save up for a bit. I will add I got these shocks for free from Ford recall reimbursement!

If you are buying these shocks on your own, I would probably steer clear if you’re not mechanically inclined or have the tools to make clip adjustments due to labor costs. Much easier to turn a knob for ride feel and move a collar for preload adjustment. It’s a lottery ticket and you will be going through my same experience depending on what accessories you add. Start with the lower clip settings then go up. Don’t do what I did and start with the higher settings!

Clip 3 front and back. Rear is slightly squated due to parking on slight hill. It looks level on pavement. I would not want to go any lower after running this setting. Still feels planted on highway and bit more brake dive then clip 4 or 5.

Clip 4 front and back

Clip 5 front and back

Sponsored

 

[23OBX2.7]

Great review!

 

[ChrisWMT]

Thanks for the insight, great feedback.

 

[userdude]

Very cool! You have the Bronco I was supposed to get (well, minus the mod bumper), which I got but it's CGM.

Will probably be looking at new shocks in the next 5k miles. When you say JBAs, you mean UCAs? I too only want 1", I don't want to go tall, so clip 3 is a decent place to start if I went with them?

And if you went with a different adjustable shock with the knob turners, what would you be looking at?

 

[telenerd]

I went with JBA upper control arms because the ball joint can be changed while on the vehicle and they offer the highest articulating balljoint on the market along with greaseable on all points. You will be able to get away with the stock upper arms if you run the lower settings on the Bilsteins, but I wanted more caster. I did notice quite a bit of difference with the JBAs on the trail, wheel returns to center quickly on the rocks and the steering feels stiffer like my Ranger Raptor. JBAs are very popular in the Toyota world.

For the rear I went with Synergy Control arms since they are maintenance free bushings and offer more flex. Completely not need for the lower settings. But I did notice a difference on road and off-road. The rear feels stiffer but soft on hits and the rear seems to flex a bit more. Hard to describe. Not game changer by any means, but if I get different coils I can extend the arms since they are adjustable.

For shocks, I’m looking at BRBN and ADS. The resi will clear the stock Sasquatch wheels and not need wheel spacers or different wheels.

Clip 3 is good for me even with my 200 lb steel belly pan skids. It may be a bit too stiff for you if you don’t have a ton of accessories. You could try clip 2. I found keeping the clip setting even on all sides nets me a little rake and level look. If the front end is too high it will ride weird on corners and squat in back.

 

[RoseLane4]

Great write-up!

I don’t understand the huge difference interpreting performance, ride quality & height with these 6112 assemblies…

Clip settings = height difference
Or am I wrong?

My ‘24 BL’s 7MT is a “world of difference” smoother (for a digressive dampener) & responsive - a definite upgrade over stock (Non SAS) setup. I run 35’s @ 36psi.

OEM skids & bumpers… yeah, I have gear, but far less then most folks carry..

I’m running clip 6 (rear) & 4 (front) - maximum “height” with aluminum UCA’s & a RC rear trac arm. (This setup is best for 37’s, but I like the height advantage.)

I’m very happy! Impressed! Have no desire to replace or change.. I only have 4,500 miles (not a daily)..

IMO, an ideal setup for these portly rigs.

 

[telenerd]

Im sure I could run 37s when I was near max height. I saw Bilstein now offers a 37s spacer kit to prevent smashing the inner fender liners offroad. I dont have any plans to go 37s yet, 35s plenty for what I do offroad and been all over Moab, Colorado, and Wyoming.

 

[RoseLane4]

I agree OP (as a former Roaring Fork Valley resident) - 35’s work well! And here I am now living outside Philadelphia wishing I was still out there..

When reading your feedback you had valid complaints & made changes! Great.

I originally had 5(r) & 3(f) and was under 2” lift, which my goal was 2.5” lift +/-, so I ended-up with 6 & 4.

Why do I “love” them and see them as “ideal” for these rigs? (Unless you’re into extreme crawlin or hi-speed dessert running.)

Appreciate you & again, great feedback

 

[userdude]

(Unless you’re into extreme crawlin or hi-speed dessert running.)

I would love to see me some extreme crawling and high speed dessert running. Would that be like a sprint, 5k, marathon, followed by an eclair eating contest? Totally.

 

[Bronco Toad]

Thanks and nice color too!!

 

[Steve_In_29]

Great write-up!

I don’t understand the huge difference interpreting performance, ride quality & height with these 6112 assemblies…

Clip settings = height difference
Or am I wrong?

My ‘24 BL’s 7MT is a “world of difference” smoother (for a digressive dampener) & responsive - a definite upgrade over stock (Non SAS) setup. I run 35’s @ 36psi.

OEM skids & bumpers… yeah, I have gear, but far less then most folks carry..

I’m running clip 6 (rear) & 4 (front) - maximum “height” with aluminum UCA’s & a RC rear trac arm. (This setup is best for 37’s, but I like the height advantage.)

I’m very happy! Impressed! Have no desire to replace or change.. I only have 4,500 miles (not a daily)..

IMO, an ideal setup for these portly rigs.

Clip setting does adjust ride height but does so by adjusting the preload on the coils. So it also affects ride quality.

 

[crenca]

I don’t understand the huge difference interpreting performance, ride quality & height with these 6112 assemblies…

Clip setting does adjust ride height but does so by adjusting the preload on the coils. So it also affects ride quality.

^ This ^

At least this points to a basic aspect of suspension design - the whole system behaves differently at different points in its travel. a "lift" is (usually) a modification of where in that travel the suspension "sits" as it were. In addition, aftermarket spring/shock combinations (i.e "coil over", often called "struts" though that's not what they are technically in the Bronco) are almost always one-size-fits all products, even though they go on vehicles of differing weights, use cases etc. This is true even if they have some adjustment capability.

Combine the above with the fact that people have very different expectations as what "ride quality" means - it is a subjective set of criteria for each individual - leads to the situation where reports are like folks discussing music or art - one person likes this or that, another person completely disagrees.

To make any sense of these reports, you have to figure out details like the persons particular vehicle weight, their typical load, and what their particular preferences and expectations are in this or that use case...then you have to triangulate that to your particular vehicle conditions and preferences and goals.

If you don't know objectively your conditions and preferences, you only know you want something vaguely "better", or maybe you want something "softer" (i.e. "I don't want to feel every bump in the road") but have no idea how that relates to spring rates, damper design (e.g. "digressive" vs. "linear"), suspension design (travel, sway bars, etc.) - and how all that interacts to form something called "ride quality" on and off road......well, your sort of shooting blind so to speak, or maybe going with general marketing and reputational descriptions.

I say all this just to try to provide some context

 

[Steve_In_29]

^ This ^

At least this points to a basic aspect of suspension design - the whole system behaves differently at different points in its travel. a "lift" is (usually) a modification of where in that travel the suspension "sits" as it were. In addition, aftermarket spring/shock combinations (i.e "coil over", often called "struts" though that's not what they are technically in the Bronco) are almost always one-size-fits all products, even though they go on vehicles of differing weights, use cases etc. This is true even if they have some adjustment capability.

Combine the above with the fact that people have very different expectations as what "ride quality" means - it is a subjective set of criteria for each individual - leads to the situation where reports are like folks discussing music or art - one person likes this or that, another person completely disagrees.

To make any sense of these reports, you have to figure out details like the persons particular vehicle weight, their typical load, and what their particular preferences and expectations are in this or that use case...then you have to triangulate that to your particular vehicle conditions and preferences and goals.

If you don't know objectively your conditions and preferences, you only know you want something vaguely "better", or maybe you want something "softer" (i.e. "I don't want to feel every bump in the road") but have no idea how that relates to spring rates, damper design (e.g. "digressive" vs. "linear"), suspension design (travel, sway bars, etc.) - and how all that interacts to form something called "ride quality" on and off road......well, your sort of shooting blind so to speak, or maybe going with general marketing and reputational descriptions.

I say all this just to try to provide some context

AND all that also interacts with wheel and tire weight as well as air pressure in tires

 

[RoseLane4]

Thank you Steve & Crenca…
Appreciate the huge context!!
Importantly, I now understand why OP experienced such a better (subjective) ride quality at the lower clip settings…

Thank you all!

Sponsored