I will keep this short. Everyone has different uses and tastes, but here are the main differences between these entry level monotubes:


When used with 1" REAR EIBACH spring. Different heights will result in DIFFERENT conclusions!

Icon 2.0 IFP is normally 160sh but a little discount is possible.
Eibach is normally just north of 100, I paid 75 each on Thanksgiving

Dimensions:
Icon 2.0 is advertised for 1-3", has a total length of almost 24" and total exposed shaft length of just over 9". It offers 5" of downtravel on 1" rear spring (actual lifts will vary depending on spring rates and loads). It hits the IFP, I think, on the uptravel which limits shaft up travel to about 2.5" only. Clearly, this shock's sweet spot is 2" of lift, not 1".

Eibach is advertised for 0-1" lift (or was). It is shorter and its exposed shaft is 8" vs over 9" for Icon. It offers 4" of downtravel vs 5" for the Icon and can fully retract into the shock body. This shock is clearly optimal for 1" of lift.

On pavement:
Icon 2.0 IFP: superb performance, absolutely planted rear on mountain roads (CO 550), canyon roads, abrupt interstate lane changes, etc.
Comfort: no complaints from family. Goes over road bumps and imperfections extremely well at any speed, wheel always feels planted, complete control.

Eibach: good to very good but lacks that extra "punch" (rebound?) that the Icon has. Supposedly has a hole making it softer at slow speeds. While nobody at home found that to make a difference in road comfort--good not great, as with the Icon--the performance over bumps at lower speeds is not nearly as good as the Icon. Going one wheel over bump, the wheel in question loses traction momentarily. Going faster, performance improves.

Road verdict: hands down the Icon, as far as I am concerned. Wife and kids cannot tell a difference. The Eibach is good but the Icon is great.

Desert or embedded rock at some speed:
Icon 2.0 IFP: can do very well with substantial hits and seriously rough terrain in small doses, performance in turns and over kinda rough dirt roads is excellent. However, comfort wise, beats up the rear seat pax at lower speeds over rough terrain such as 10-25 mph after a few miles.

Eibach: because of the Icon experience, I have been more protective of my temporary Eibachs. They perform very well on a variety of smooth dirt roads at some speed, not well on washboard, and they do feel a little softer than the Icons in the desert at 10-20 mph.


Rock/Off-Camber:
The Icon's full extra inch of wheel travel is a big benefit. The Eibach makes me choose my lines more carefully. It would be a concern on trails that have nasty off-camber spots; sometimes big air is unavoidable (Fins and Things) but sometimes it is nice to keep both rears on the ground (Black Bear before rocky switchback).

Durability: The Icon started leaking around 10k and after the second longer and punishing desert day (the first one was early in its life). It does well for shorter periods, but not when pushed on 70-100 mile loops at a good pace. I would not bet on the Eibach lasting any better if used the same.

All in all, both are nice shocks--in fact awesome for the price--for learning or irregular or slow-speed offorad use. Both are very comfy in low range over any terrain, for example. The Icon 2.0 IFP is superb on road when it comes to performance. For offroad, it should probably be used with 2" lift, neither 1, nor 3. The Eibach is a great all-around stock replacement for on and offroad, a whole different league from stock at a low price.

For any speed, and I don't mean racing, but regular desert driving or doing 20 mph over embedded rock for miles, a reservoir would be the minimum requirement and frankly, one should just go 2.5 from the start.

So off to Bilstein 8100s for me. At 1" lift, I get a tad more down travel than the Icon, more up shaft travel than the Eibach, and the rest is not comparable, of course, given the price differential.

So apparently one shock rubbed on the rear right emergency brake line, should have been an Icon which has discoloration on the cap.

Cycling the wheel, now on 8100, I don't see any issues at all.

Thanks for sharing this review. I am more familiar with Bilstein Shocks than those two brands that you have mentioned.

I'm really curious to see how you like the 8100. I think the little bracket that holds the e-brake line to the lower control arm sometimes gets bent a little so it might cause the rub? Also probably depends on shock orientation. My fox rears are body on top, shaft bottom, where the oem are body on bottom, shaft on top.

- I saw a mention on this thread, been out of town a lot lately. Only home for 5 days out of the last 4 weeks. Haven't even sat in my 4Runner since early May.

Well, still on a single 8100 with Eibach on the other side. If I don't get the other before we leave for Ouray in July, I will have to pull it and put back the Eibach. It does not really matter for Ouray but the extra 1" of down travel would be nice.

Around town with 8100 and Eibach, I can tell the difference between fully open and fully close bypasses even though the 8100 being diagonally from my seat does not help. At fully open, my 14 yo sitting rear driver and then rear pax said he bounces a lot less on the 8100 side than on the Eibach side going over big speed bumps. Which makes sense. I don't feel that corner at all when it is fully open over said bumps.

The Eibach has an annoying loss of control over bumps at 25-30 while doing better at 40. The Icon was always planted like a sports car. Obviously, the 8100 can be set in different ways but it is hard to tell conclusively with a mixed setup for now.

In terms of adjustments. Well, it is a race shock on a family wagon. The only way to not go nuts is to use a hex into an adaptor on a 1/4 in drive flexible head ratcheting STUBBY wrench. This makes the compression adjustments like 6 moves per 1 full turn. Still have to get on the ground of course. For the rebound, it is impossible to do without lifting the vehicle from the slider. Then the movements are like half the size of those for compression because of the location of the rebound adj tread between the frame and the hose. So trying to go full open to full close would take more than 100 moves which would be "interesting" without a ratchet.

Thankfully, from what I am learning so far, one does not play that much with rebound. The Bilstein rec for corrugations and what I see from racers providing advice for trail riding, it is good to start with minimum compression and neutral rebound for trails or corrugations. Then for higher speed desert compression goes to medium as a start and rebound can go up a little but it is a small adjustment.

Only dunes or in my case cinder hills may require full compression and I am not sure what rebound would work best there but that's a minor thing for me.

It is certain that the 8000-series is more capable than the platform itself; Bilstein saw that first hand in testing. They were never able to seriously push the shocks.

I can get the performance I need from lesser shocks. I go at a nice pace but that's NOT racing. However, I wanted position sensitive shocks chiefly for the comfort over rough stuff between 10 and 30 mph. And I did not want to use de-valved Fox or Kings for that. I wanted a fully capable shock, both ways. And I also wanted something that has a good front option for me down the road. The Fox 2.5 DSC at over 2000 is completely insane for just a regular shock. The 8112 would be good for me though for now I have no reason to move on from the 6112 on 650. Sure, it is over-sprung (probably 600lb spring would be best) but it is paid for and should have another 40-50k in it.

If I can get a 600 King spring set at a good price, I would try it on the 6112 just for the sake of experimentation. Bilstein has no 600lb spring. The standard 550 (and it could be less actually) is way too soft while the 650 is a little too much.

EDIT: oh, and we still do not have a Baja 500 Trophy Truck winner! It has been like 60+ hours.