3" fabtech isn't really 3" - The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network

aggiedave98 · 06-04-2004, 11:48 PM

If you look at my pics at:

http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...828#post855828

and look at the front wheel wells of the before and after, it doesn't look like a 3" lift to me. The tires are about 3" taller, so 1.5" is above the "axle". The tires seems to match up the same place the old ones did which would imply the lift is only giving about 1.5", not 3" in the front. The ball joint spacers were only about 3/4 of an inch tall and then the springs that were supposed to compress less. I'm not sure all that worked right.

The leaf springs are 2" lifted springs (not blocks). The lift in the back is much more than 2" since the old springs were compressed, however I don't understand how there can be such a big difference.

It definitely sits up a lot higher in the back than the front and really looks a little funny.

Any ideas on what happened? Has anybody else used the 3" fabtech basic lift??

This is a 2wd 1/2ton '89 burb.

mister honey · 06-05-2004, 08:41 AM

As I recall, the stock "stance" on my '76 C10 was 2" higher in the rear than in the front. This is published somewhere, LMC catalog maybe?
With the truck on a flat concrete floor, I measured from the floor to the bottom edge of the wheel well trim, directly over the front and rear axles. The rear number was about 2" larger than the front number, allowing for some sag, etc.

I installed the Fabetch 3" kit last summer, and my front height measurement increased by 2-3/4". I replaced the original heavy duty rear springs with a set from ESPO having the same number of leafs, and added Lord velvet ride shackles.

These shackles are an articulated, two-piece design with a urethane damper that flexes and improves the "unloaded ride" of the truck. The urethane compresses a bit, so today my truck actually sits 1/4" lower at the rear axle than at the front. I'm waiting for all these new components to settle in a bit, then I'll add a spacer of the proper thickness between the leaf springs & rear axle.

Anyway, that was just a lot of verbiage to tell you that my truck sits 2-3/4" higher in the front with the Fabtech 3" lift kit. I am pleased with the stance and the ride!

Mike

aggiedave98 · 06-05-2004, 11:28 AM

well that makes me feel better. thanks. I forgot to measure before-hand. So maybe the rear is just a little more than 2" lifted then.

Prerunner1982 · 06-05-2004, 06:16 PM

i see too many burbs that have a saggy butt... i think yours looks just fine and the fact it sits a bit higher in the back makes it look right to me.

06-04-2004, 11:48 PM	#1
aggiedave98 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Sugar Land, TX Posts: 1,007	3" fabtech isn't really 3" If you look at my pics at: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...828#post855828 and look at the front wheel wells of the before and after, it doesn't look like a 3" lift to me. The tires are about 3" taller, so 1.5" is above the "axle". The tires seems to match up the same place the old ones did which would imply the lift is only giving about 1.5", not 3" in the front. The ball joint spacers were only about 3/4 of an inch tall and then the springs that were supposed to compress less. I'm not sure all that worked right. The leaf springs are 2" lifted springs (not blocks). The lift in the back is much more than 2" since the old springs were compressed, however I don't understand how there can be such a big difference. It definitely sits up a lot higher in the back than the front and really looks a little funny. Any ideas on what happened? Has anybody else used the 3" fabtech basic lift?? This is a 2wd 1/2ton '89 burb.

06-05-2004, 08:41 AM	#2
mister honey Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: eastern blowville heights, ohio Posts: 57	As I recall, the stock "stance" on my '76 C10 was 2" higher in the rear than in the front. This is published somewhere, LMC catalog maybe? With the truck on a flat concrete floor, I measured from the floor to the bottom edge of the wheel well trim, directly over the front and rear axles. The rear number was about 2" larger than the front number, allowing for some sag, etc. I installed the Fabetch 3" kit last summer, and my front height measurement increased by 2-3/4". I replaced the original heavy duty rear springs with a set from ESPO having the same number of leafs, and added Lord velvet ride shackles. These shackles are an articulated, two-piece design with a urethane damper that flexes and improves the "unloaded ride" of the truck. The urethane compresses a bit, so today my truck actually sits 1/4" lower at the rear axle than at the front. I'm waiting for all these new components to settle in a bit, then I'll add a spacer of the proper thickness between the leaf springs & rear axle. Anyway, that was just a lot of verbiage to tell you that my truck sits 2-3/4" higher in the front with the Fabtech 3" lift kit. I am pleased with the stance and the ride! Mike

06-05-2004, 11:28 AM	#3
aggiedave98 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Sugar Land, TX Posts: 1,007	well that makes me feel better. thanks. I forgot to measure before-hand. So maybe the rear is just a little more than 2" lifted then.

06-05-2004, 06:16 PM	#4
Prerunner1982 Registered User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Edmond, OK Posts: 5,906	i see too many burbs that have a saggy butt... i think yours looks just fine and the fact it sits a bit higher in the back makes it look right to me.



Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.

Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.