View Full Version : Bilstein 7100 Valving - What's best


g-money
03/17/06, 01:01 PM
I need to have my Bilstein 7100 Shocks revalved. My front end is WAY too soft.

Currently I have the 255/70 valving and the front end is all over the place. When I make a turn the front end bounces all over.

What the general consensus on the valving: 360/80, 345/135, 360/160

Thanks

toddz69
03/17/06, 01:05 PM
I need to have my Bilstein 7100 Shocks revalved. My front end is WAY too soft.

Currently I have the 255/70 valving and the front end is all over the place. When I make a turn the front end bounces all over.

What the general consensus on the valving: 360/80, 345/135, 360/160

Thanks

360/80 is what you want.

Todd Z.

Godwick
01/23/12, 09:11 PM
This is me reviving a long-dead thread - Hey, that rhymed! I threw some Bilstein 7100s with 360/80 on my ride and it was definitely too stiff. Currently getting them re-valved by Lee (a great guy, incidentally) for much softer. Not sure if they switched up the stacks over the years, but my experience has been shared by at least one other on these boards. Just a head's for anyone searching the shock archives and looking for advice. Digressive valving, soft compression, decent rebound, hoping it's gonna be as nice as the dollars I paid for it.

garberz
01/23/12, 09:52 PM
Interesting, you say that's too stiff. I have the same valving, it seems good for my application. What are you changing it to?

73stallion
01/23/12, 10:45 PM
i've got the 360/80 valving up front too, it's perfect if not a touch soft for mine too. it'd be too stiff for the REAR if that's what you're talking about.

Godwick
01/24/12, 02:24 AM
Negative. Too stiff for the front. I run deaver coils 1" over stock and WH 10pack rears. Without any shocks it's understandably soft, but not at all safe. With the 360/80 up front and 255/70 in the back, it was still uncomfortable. Everybody at the time recommended the 360/80 in the front, but the ride was unsatisfactory enough to make me pull them and send them off to get revalved.
Without a shock dyno I can't be sure what they're being revalved too. Softer compressin shims, same digressive piston and same rebound. Spoke to Wes at bilstein and Herman at Denuncio racing. Seemed to think that 360/80 was a bit stiff as well. We'll see what comes of the work. Fingers crossed.

ntsqd
01/24/12, 09:56 AM
First for me, all I've ever heard of is 360/80 being too soft for higher speed use. Never heard of too soft. 360/80 is Bilstein's default valving for any coil spring, be it EB, D90, JK, TJ, etc.

Where do you have them mounted?

spap
01/24/12, 10:38 AM
Don't they still make KYB s that are adjustable by pushing down and turning the top of the rod. I had those on my first bronco 15 years ago and you could dial it in pretty nicely. I am looking for the second set of front shocks also

Godwick
01/24/12, 10:51 AM
Had them mounted on f250 shock towers. 12" short body remote reservoirs.

DirtyDave
01/26/12, 08:21 PM
I have 14" short body / reservoirs up front using the 255/70 vaving with 4.5" Deavers and after charging the shocks with nitrogen today it is still way too soft for me. Under acceleration the front left corner will lift and it also wants to dive under hard braking. Is anyone using the 275/78 or is this not enough change to notice the difference?

toddz69
01/26/12, 08:54 PM
I have 14" short body / reservoirs up front using the 255/70 vaving with 4.5" Deavers and after charging the shocks with nitrogen today it is still way too soft for me. Under acceleration the front left corner will lift and it also wants to dive under hard braking. Is anyone using the 275/78 or is this not enough change to notice the difference?

Too soft for the front for sure and 275/78's won't be enough of a difference for the front. I'd use 275/78's on the rear though.

Todd Z.

Godwick
01/26/12, 11:12 PM
Dirty D: What's you lift look like? I've got some 5150s that are valved to 255/70 that you can slap on and test ride if you like, but they're only 8" travel I believe. PM me if you want to give 'er a spin.

Godwick
02/01/12, 01:52 PM
I find it interesting that so many have had good results with the 7100s and 360/80 valving. Maybe something to do with lift? Shouldn't be, though, bc I had my Deaver coils sprung at the rate of their 2.5" lift. I also know that extended radius arms softens the ride and I'm guessing significantly.
Wonder if the wah does the same.

Greg_B
02/01/12, 02:28 PM
I added new front and rear plate bumpers along with a full roll cage and my shocks seems to soft... they were about perfect before... Then I remembered my 12 year old Rancho 9000s were adjustable... one click of that little wheel and they feel right once again. I know some people dont like them but they have serviced my Bronco great.

Greg

Daddy4zack
02/22/12, 06:05 PM
Just spoke with Joel at Bilstein. Great guy lots of info. He is recomending 255/70 valving for the rear and 255/100 valving for the front. (front has more weight and he seems to like Less rebound) That will have to be a custom order. It will be a few weeks to get them...

What do you guys think? Ordering soon..

toddz69
02/22/12, 07:41 PM
Just spoke with Joel at Bilstein. Great guy lots of info. He is recomending 255/70 valving for the rear and 255/100 valving for the front. (front has more weight and he seems to like Less rebound) That will have to be a custom order. It will be a few weeks to get them...

What do you guys think? Ordering soon..

I think you should go for it and let us know how you like it. Joel knows his stuff.

Todd Z.

garberz
02/22/12, 07:43 PM
I think that valving will be too stiff and not enough rebound. 255 is generally a good rebound # for leafs, but not nearly enough for coil springs. Why don't you start with the 360/80, then have them custom valved if they're not to your liking. You may be surprised. I've only run these shocks on mine, (14" SBR 360/80 valving) I wouldn't want them any stiffer and I think less rebound would make it pogo. Coil springs store a lot of energy. I know toddz69 and ntsqd have a lot of valving experience, I went with their recommendation.
Mark

Daddy4zack
02/23/12, 09:03 AM
I think you should go for it and let us know how you like it. Joel knows his stuff.

Todd Z.

Thanks.. I think i will go with recommendations and try the 360/80. As I can always re-valve if not happy. Joel Ward knows his stuff. But every bronco is different.... I am thinking of 255/70 in rear. Or 275/78???

I will call Shane&Lee and get a second opinion also. Or that will just confuse me more. But ill get a place to start and revalve if needed.

Godwick
02/23/12, 12:34 PM
Like you said, you can always get them revalved, but it is more money and a pita. I think you're confusing the numbers too. If I remember correctly the top number is the compression rate and the bottom the rebound. Might want to double check there.
Good luck.

garberz
02/23/12, 04:00 PM
Like you said, you can always get them revalved, but it is more money and a pita. I think you're confusing the numbers too. If I remember correctly the top number is the compression rate and the bottom the rebound. Might want to double check there.
Good luck.

The first number is rebound, the second is compression.

DirtyDave
02/24/12, 08:29 PM
I just finished revalving mine to 360/80 in the front and I'll hopefully get them charged with nitrogen this weekend. The valve packs are cheap and it only takes about 15 minutes a shock top swap out. Pay attention to the direction of the pack when you install them. Does anyone know if extended radius arms make the front coils feel softer compared to stock?

lars
02/24/12, 08:57 PM
I just finished revalving mine to 360/80 in the front and I'll hopefully get them charged with nitrogen this weekend. The valve packs are cheap and it only takes about 15 minutes a shock top swap out. Pay attention to the direction of the pack when you install them. Does anyone know if extended radius arms make the front coils feel softer compared to stock?

The nice thing about the 7100 shocks. If you don't like the valving, change it.

To answer your question, that depends... yes, for sure, but longer means more leverage. I extended mine 6 inches and I could tell the difference, but it wasn't bothersome. That's on a daily driver rig with 4-1/2" of lift, 35" tires, etc. Oh yeah, coils make a difference too. Mine are straight rate. Progressives could behave differently.

Does S.B. = Santa Barbara?

DirtyDave
02/24/12, 09:12 PM
I am a Santa Barbarian. I'm also running 4.5" straight coils with Duff radius arms. I didn't get the valving right on the first try so I'm looking forward to seeing the new results.

lars
02/24/12, 09:30 PM
I am a Santa Barbarian. I'm also running 4.5" straight coils with Duff radius arms. I didn't get the valving right on the first try so I'm looking forward to seeing the new results.

Cool! I was born in Cottage Hospital longer ago than I care to think about- let's just say if you saw the photos of what it looked like then, you wouldn't recognize it. Graduated SBHS, etc. Lived there until a job in NorCal beckoned 14 years ago.

DirtyDave
02/24/12, 09:42 PM
Small world, great to meet you. I too was born at Cottage Hospital and am a Don. I was born and raised here and I have been working hard to stay.

nvrstuk
02/24/12, 11:06 PM
Been running 360/80 up front on Todd's recommendation over a dozen years now and I'd prefer them maybe up to 360/125 or so-but can't do it. When Lee built mine with digressive valving back then he did warn me why you can't get much more out of the 7100's...the shaft will bend-that's the weak point on that long of a shock with high rebound/compr rates... he has them come back bent...

I now run a bit stiffer custom wound coil that Jim made for me (Cage days) with his long arms (to get my turning radius back). Too soft still. I like the ride till I turn the strg wheel !! Looks cool when the door handles almost rub on the pavement when taking at corner at 35mph but it's not what I'm looking for. Great ride when going straight tho.

Looking at figuring out an anti sway bar setup next with disconnects to help out.

I've run two different rear spring packs since to help rule out issues in back...

I currently run 5165's in the rear that I talked extensively about needs/desires/wants with to Joel. GREAT guy, can't say enough about him at Bilstein. Had to buy them thru Lee since I couldn't buy direct from Joel. Joel did some stuff to them before sending them over to raceshock.com for me. Great combo...rears are great... maybe I'll be happy with it all when the front sway bar goes on.


Sorry, wrote a book here...

ntsqd
02/25/12, 02:13 PM
If you're running GM 63's on the rear then I can vouch for the 275/78 valving being a better choice than the 255/75. Anything else they're probably too much unless you taken similar friction reducing steps or have an unusual spring set-up.

Leaf springs have inherent internal friction. That friction shows itself in the harsher ride quality (vs. coils) and the lower damping rates needed. Coils, lacking that internal friction form of self-damping, need more valve in the dampers.

OsideDave
02/27/12, 06:27 PM
What is a good valving to run up front for sand duning with Bilstein 7100's and 3.5 BCB lift. This thing works well in the rocks and other terrain but seems to get wheel hop when climbing sand hills.

HoosierDaddy
05/06/12, 11:35 AM
How much tire pressure are you running in the sand ?
Dumping pressure has always cured my wheel hop when playing in the sand box.

motoman
05/06/12, 07:51 PM
This thread is very interesting to me.... I have to wait till after the wedding to invest in my front shocks.. the rear Bilstein 5165s 255/70 are blissful compared to the RS9000 that were back there......

Now the front... I went to Desert Rat and warrantied the RS9000 to RS9000X. No matter where I set them they are not enough.... pogo stick.... so I am watching this thread carefully to see what is working.

Joel at Bilstein says to go with the Bilstein 9100RCS and we didn't talk valving yet. Are the internals the same as the 7100s??? Can not find any literature explaining the difference. Joel says $250 a piece from him for the 9100s. If they are worth the difference i would spend the extra $50 a shock.....

Why no discussion here of the 9100?

NYLES
05/07/12, 08:59 AM
360/80 is what you want.

Todd Z.

I just put these on the front, I dont see where you could get any better!

1970mule
05/07/12, 10:03 AM
I have 14" short body / reservoirs up front using the 255/70 vaving with 4.5" Deavers and after charging the shocks with nitrogen today it is still way too soft for me. Under acceleration the front left corner will lift and it also wants to dive under hard braking. Is anyone using the 275/78 or is this not enough change to notice the difference?

I had the 278/78 was still to soft for mine.

1970mule
05/07/12, 10:15 AM
This thread is very interesting to me.... I have to wait till after the wedding to invest in my front shocks.. the rear Bilstein 5165s 255/70 are blissful compared to the RS9000 that were back there......

Now the front... I went to Desert Rat and warrantied the RS9000 to RS9000X. No matter where I set them they are not enough.... pogo stick.... so I am watching this thread carefully to see what is working.

Joel at Bilstein says to go with the Bilstein 9100RCS and we didn't talk valving yet. Are the internals the same as the 7100s??? Can not find any literature explaining the difference. Joel says $250 a piece from him for the 9100s. If they are worth the difference i would spend the extra $50 a shock.....

Why no discussion here of the 9100?

I guess cause i would think that the 9100 are a lil bit of an overkill on anything other than a strict rock crawler. 7100 serve a dual purpose and are a all around great choice, the 9100 more specfic great shock tho.

motoman
05/07/12, 10:39 AM
I guess cause i would think that the 9100 are a lil bit of an overkill on anything other than a strict rock crawler. 7100 serve a dual purpose and are a all around great choice, the 9100 more specfic great shock tho.

When talking with Joel my request in a shock was to be able to do high speed desert and rock crawl.... like KOH type stuff....

From what I am seeing the 7100 does the same thing only cheaper..... just wish there was better literature on the expectations for each.

1970mule
05/07/12, 12:21 PM
When talking with Joel my request in a shock was to be able to do high speed desert and rock crawl.... like KOH type stuff....

From what I am seeing the 7100 does the same thing only cheaper..... just wish there was better literature on the expectations for each.

The 7100s and 9100s both comein 2" body. the differnce comes in the shaft diameter. the 9100s are 22mm i believe and the 7100 are smaller not sure how much tho. so for hard desert running and crawling both the 9100s extra mills will do you well. Also i know that some newer 9100s have better cavatation oil supression so less fade as the shock heats up.

broncojon68
05/12/12, 10:49 PM
I hope this thread goes on and on as I am not thrilled with my 9000's. They are fine slow speed in rocks and talerable at freeway speed bet SUCK at 20-30 m.p.h. ruff pothole roads and 15-25 m.p.h. dirt road/trails. medeoker at best, wondering the cheap part store crap is any better. Always Looking for that bigger heavier car ride. Jon