Rancho 9000's might have been an oops

[noteven]

I installed Rancho 9000's on our Dodge 3500 about 12,000 miles ago. 4000 miles hauling our single slide 9ft camper / towing, 3000 other miles towing cargo/flatbeds, and about 800 miles towing our Carriage toy hauler. The rest has been empty buckboard.

They appear to be failing at about 10,000 miles.

- I wrote an email to Rancho Tech Support through their website a week/10 days ago asking why these shocks might be doing this and received this answer:

[roamermatt]

Thanks for the followup ticki2, and sorry I didn't respond sooner. Good to hear the Bilsteins are working for you!

[ticki2]

roamermatt wrote:
ticki2 - Wondering how your truck rides with the Bilstein 4600. I've heard they are stiffer than stock and produce a hard ride. Any difference when the truck is loaded vs. unloaded?

On the 2500HD I replaced the OEM shocks at 17k , the back end unloaded was bouncing around like a yoyo , the Bilstein's cured it without being harsh . They seem to work equally well both loaded and unloaded . There are several GM forum sites that I've read where folks were giving away OEM shocks if that tells you anything .

[roamermatt]

ticki2 - Wondering how your truck rides with the Bilstein 4600. I've heard they are stiffer than stock and produce a hard ride. Any difference when the truck is loaded vs. unloaded?

[ticki2]

Bill

I am running Bilstien 4600 series ( yellow and blue)on both my 2500 and 3500 GM's . The 3500 DRW gets to carry the camper . Very satisfied with both , whether loaded or not . If you have always used OEM I think you will see a big improvement with Bilstien , Rancho 9000 , or KYB ( especially during frost heave season ) .

[scottz]

billtex wrote:
Thought I would drag up this old Rancho thread instead of starting new...and yes I have "searched" also but could not find much on this specific question;

Will upgrade shocks soon, I know a lot of Folks like the R9000's as they are adjustable.
Problem is...here in New England...anything you our under your truck will be rusted over real soon.
So what would be the point in adjustable shocks if you can no longer adjust them?
Or is this a non-issue (are the adjusters made of non-rusting pixie dust?)

What would be a good alternative in a fixed (non-adjustable) shock and why?
R5000's?
KYB's?
Other brands?

Tx, Bill

Bill,
Our Minnesota roads are unfortunately heavily salted as well. In June 2006 I purchased front and rear Rancho 9000 shocks from Sams off road May of 2008 I noticed I could no longer adjust the rear shocks. I contacted Sam's off road and they sent me Rancho 9000XLs to replace the failed 9000s. The 9000XL model replaced the 9000 model and are a larger and seemingly better built shock. Today I am still running the original 9000s up front and the 9000XLs in the rear.

[BradW]

billtex wrote:

Bedlam wrote:
Increasing the shock damping up front will reduce fore to aft porpoising even if the front loses some weight.

yes...I got to thinking about this yesterday after I posted the question of why put the R9000 on front (versus the non-adjusting R5000)...I think this makes sense. Firm up all 4 corners.

Looks like R9000 will be on our to-do list.

Thanks all, Bill

Yes, to get full benefit, they need to be on all 4 corners. When the truck rocks from side to side, both the front and rear rock. Having stiffer dampening on both ends both contribute to controlling the side to side rocking.

I will say that the 9000's help is much more noticeable on SRW trucks than DRW truck. I assume that is mainly due to most SRW trucks being over their GVWR and most DRW trucks being significantly under. My testing was with the same camper on both the SRW and DRW.

[billtex]

Bedlam wrote:
Increasing the shock damping up front will reduce fore to aft porpoising even if the front loses some weight.

yes...I got to thinking about this yesterday after I posted the question of why put the R9000 on front (versus the non-adjusting R5000)...I think this makes sense. Firm up all 4 corners.

Looks like R9000 will be on our to-do list.

Thanks all, Bill

[Bedlam]

Increasing the shock damping up front will reduce fore to aft porpoising even if the front loses some weight.

[AnEv942]

I had to replace our Rancho 9000s under warranty-they were a little over 12 years old. I cant complain. Keep those receipts. Yes lower bushings on the Fords due to the U shaped mounts wont allow to snug the poly bushing, so it (too)freely moves and wallows out. But I get about 5 years on a set of bushings. Shocks should be able to pivot but not slide in mount-

While the weight doesn't change that much if I dont turn up the front shocks its noticeable as far as handling?

[Boatycall]

I love mine, hope they don't die on me but if they do I recently got them at my local 4-Wheel-Wrong-Parts, so I should be fine.

[saltamontes]

i had some 9000's years ago.. the first thing to fail was the bushings... lot of "clunking" from the rear when the "eye" bushings either were worn 50+% or completely gone.

contacted rancho for some replacement bushings, but they are factory pressed so they just sent me a new pair of shocks (kudos).

my issue is that all these 2" shocks are not "right sized" for our trucks. esp. with a heavy TC.

so i upgraded to:
king 2.5" diameter remote reservoir (adjustable) shocks.

they are nice (expensive) but the % flow change w/ the adjustment knob is barely discernible. i have meant to get them revalved as they are stiff in stock configuration for an unloaded truck.. but the loaded, off-road (washboard, whoops) are much better handled w/ these shocks

sway-a-way, walker-evans, icon, fox, also make adjustable remote reservoir 2.5" shocks and some of those have greater flow differences between settings than the kings

"if you have the means, i highly recommend picking one up"
- Ferris Bueller

[Super_Dave]

I stuck with OEM's in the front and have no complaints.

[billtex]

Super_Dave wrote:
Bill,
I would never drive my truck unloaded if I couldn't turn down the shocks from the "9" setting when not loaded.

Does that mean the "9" setting is above/beyond what one could expect from a non-adjustable shock?

How do the settings relate to an OE shock...i.e. is "5" about same damping you would get from OE shocks?
Edit; never mind...they have an example on their website!

I have also heard of Folks running 9000 in rear and 5000 in the front, as for most of us the front loads do not change much loaded vs unloaded.
Anyone running like this?

Tx, B

[Super_Dave]

Bill,
I think Brad's thread on servicing the piston will eliminate the ill effects of the salt. It may have to be done annually but should certainly keep it from rusting up. I would also take all the other failure reports with a grain of salt, no pun intended, as so many here knowingly or unknowingly overload their rig so badly. I would never drive my truck unloaded if I couldn't turn down the shocks from the "9" setting when not loaded.