shocks again

[ram2nv]

I took the advise of all who answered my questions about shocks. I went with the RS9k's for the truck. I am having second thoughts about them. The RS9'ks were set at #3 for the front and#1 for the rear, it seems to have the same ride as it did with the factory shocks, even with changing the settings around. Am I expecting too much from them ?? I am considering installing RS 5k's. Has anyone use these?? '96 4x4 2500 ext cab, lwb, 5sp, up one on throttle plate. Plus other misc sundries. Thanks Perry .

 

[Jumbo Jet]

About a month ago I installed Rancho 9000's on my 2001 - 2500 SWB QC 4x4.



I cannot believe the difference!



Running 3 on front loaded or empty. Running 1 when MT and 3 when loaded on rears.



I live in a world of rough roads and was jolted to the teeth with the factory shocks.



Ride is fabulous. Stability is much better. No more shifts of the rear to the right or left on rough roads (maybe my right foot is not down hard enough!)



Works for me!

 

[DocStressor]

The 5000s ride like the 9000s on the "3" setting. This is too stiff for the back end when running empty. With the 9000s, "2" in the front and "1" in the rear is pretty close to the factory ride on pavement. I don't really notice the difference until I get off pavement or load the camper and change the settings to "3"F and "5"R. Then the Ranchos are far superior to the factory shocks.



There are other shocks with more sophisticated valving systems than Ranchos that might be better choices if you don't haul heavy weight. But nobody makes a shock as stiff as the 9000s at the "4" or "5" settings. They are the onlyway to go if you run at or near the GVWR of your truck.

 

[Shooter]

^^^^^what Lee said ^^^^^^

 

[Driftwood Ram]

If you are changing the setting all the way to 5 and you can not tell the difference, IMHO, there is something wrong with the shock. I set mine at 1 on the rear solo and 5 on the rear towing. Leave the front on 3 all the time because the weight on the front does not change with my 5th wheel hooked up. I have verified this on a scale. There is no way I can live with the setting on 5 and no load in the bed, but I can sure tell the difference if I hook up the 5th and do not change the setting from 1 to 5.

 

[swamp rat]

I'll be able to give you a real world analysis in a day or so. I just installed the rear ones tonight, and compared to the OEM's I took off there is no comparison. The OEM's were easily cycled by hand. The LR was almost as easy as playing an accordian if an accordian is easy to play. The R9K's even set on 1 were slow to cycle but steady. On 5 they were rather stiff to say the least, somewhat akin to compacting rocks IMHO. I can only imagine what the front OEM's will be like when I swap them out.

 

[ram2nv]

shocks UPDATE!!!!!!

The RS9's did what all of you said, I set them on 5 for the rear and 2 for the front this time. I was quite happy with the way they performed!!!! I will try a setting of 3 for the front on the next trip. "THANK YOU" to all for your help and guidance on this . Now I start with the "BRAKE SYSTEM" and the pull to either side when loaded. Perry .

 

[Wade Hogg]

I had the Ranchos on my 94 gasser and liked them alot. i have the Trailmster SSV's now and also like them. If you feel that a shock is not performnig, make sure that the o-ring is properly seated on the shock. it is inside the little knob on the shock. You remove this when you ad the air system (waste of money), but at times, we have had a couple of shocks that the o ring was pinched from the factory.

 

[Stmpplr]

Hey folks, anybody have the part number for the Rancho 9's for the rear of a '95 4x4 long bed? I tried to get them at Quadratec but they didn't have that application listed. Any suggestion on where to get them.

TIA.