Bilstein 5100 vs 6112

[shyuperman]

Can anyone with 6112s in the front and 5100s in the rear post some pictures?

I was thinking about doing the 6112/5160/T13 spring combo, but might change to 6112s and 5100s with stock rear springs.

Thanks in advance

 

[Matters]

Can anyone with 6112s in the front and 5100s in the rear post some pictures?

I was thinking about doing the 6112/5160/T13 spring combo, but might change to 6112s and 5100s with stock rear springs.

Thanks in advance

I've posted several pictures in various threads with a 6112/5100 setup. Just look through some of my recent posts.

 

[IFiddle]

What to get for my 2011 4Runner Trail w/ KDSS...

I have a 2011 4Runner Trail with KDSS...and a mushy suspension (85k) miles. I want to firm up the ride to make it drive like a truck and not a boat...what to do, what to do?

 

[cheeser]

Can anyone with 6112s in the front and 5100s in the rear post some pictures?

I was thinking about doing the 6112/5160/T13 spring combo, but might change to 6112s and 5100s with stock rear springs.

Thanks in advance

Did mine a few weeks ago with this setup.

http://www.toyota-4runner.org/5th-g...-t13-springs-suggested-setup.html#post2779391

 

[Bumbo]

not enough benefit to justify the additional cost over the 5100s.... they both are great daily driver/mild off road shocks.

Ive been using the 5100 series on my trucks for many many years. On more than just my 4Runner too, still have them on my Silverado as well.

I saw a pretty noticeable difference going from a 5100 to a 6112.

I think its one of the best value in shocks even at the increased price tag. You all the benefits of a large body diameter shock without the traditional large body price tag.

No replacement for displacement... ur still moving significantly more oil for the same stroke which really smooths out the dampening and reduces noise on higher speed compression items like speed bumps.

If you can afford the 6112, there is no reason to go with a 5100.

Once you start messing with a large diameter shock body its easy to start justifying the cost difference.

5100 is a solid shock, one of the best in its class, lots and lots of value there, but I feel the same about the 6112 when your alternate options are to spend more than twice as much.

 

[sport2004]

Ive been using the 5100 series on my trucks for many many years. On more than just my 4Runner too, still have them on my Silverado as well.

I saw a pretty noticeable difference going from a 5100 to a 6112.

I think its one of the best value in shocks even at the increased price tag. You all the benefits of a large body diameter shock without the traditional large body price tag.

No replacement for displacement... ur still moving significantly more oil for the same stroke which really smooths out the dampening and reduces noise on higher speed compression items like speed bumps.

If you can afford the 6112, there is no reason to go with a 5100.

Once you start messing with a large diameter shock body its easy to start justifying the cost difference.

5100 is a solid shock, one of the best in its class, lots and lots of value there, but I feel the same about the 6112 when your alternate options are to spend more than twice as much.

I can appreciate your 5100/6112 observations, but then what is a good match with 6112 for the rear?

 

[Bumbo]

I can appreciate your 5100/6112 observations, but then what is a good match with 6112 for the rear?

Unfortunately Bilstein doesn't make a large body (60mm) replacement for the rear.

They do offer the 5160, but its basically a 5100 with a rez. Its a popular option for pairing, along with the 5100 for the budget minded.

If you want a large body rear, you pretty much have to get a King/ICON/Fox.

I never really looked into brands like rad flow, but I think you can order a large body without a rez. Might be worth looking into that.

That said, if I am driving the truck hard enough to worry about the rears, then my fronts have it even worse. Ur going to end up backing off the sauce because those 6112s are probably riding the bump stops or bottoming out pretty hard.

I got Wheelers super bumps front and rear and still feel like its not enough on a hard hit...

 

[honda250xtitan]

I can appreciate your 5100/6112 observations, but then what is a good match with 6112 for the rear?

i was very impressed with the rear Fox 2.0's on my titan, matched with 2.5 coilovers up front. For the price they were incredible. Might be worth looking into.

IMHO a 2.5 on the rear is overkill. not to mention 900$ for a king 2.5 rear shock setup:Cry::Cry:

 

[sport2004]

i was very impressed with the rear Fox 2.0's on my titan, matched with 2.5 coilovers up front. For the price they were incredible. Might be worth looking into.

IMHO a 2.5 on the rear is overkill. not to mention 900$ for a king 2.5 rear shock setup:Cry::Cry:

Thanks...

 

[sport2004]

Unfortunately Bilstein doesn't make a large body (60mm) replacement for the rear.

They do offer the 5160, but its basically a 5100 with a rez. Its a popular option for pairing, along with the 5100 for the budget minded.

If you want a large body rear, you pretty much have to get a King/ICON/Fox.

I never really looked into brands like rad flow, but I think you can order a large body without a rez. Might be worth looking into that.

That said, if I am driving the truck hard enough to worry about the rears, then my fronts have it even worse. Ur going to end up backing off the sauce because those 6112s are probably riding the bump stops or bottoming out pretty hard.

I got Wheelers super bumps front and rear and still feel like its not enough on a hard hit...

Thanks...

 

[jditts1975]

2018 SR5 4x4

I've been reading this thread and I've been searching for replacements for my front struts. I've heard the 5100s are good because I would also like to level it and they are adjustable (trying to dampen some of that nose dive too). Some of you are saying the 6112's are better.
Are there different models of adjustable "5100's" or are they all the same?
Is the 6112 adjustable?

I'm having a hard time finding any info on what actually fits a 2018. They dont look any different than a 2017 but I didnt want to assume.

 

[Bumbo]

I've been reading this thread and I've been searching for replacements for my front struts. I've heard the 5100s are good because I would also like to level it and they are adjustable (trying to dampen some of that nose dive too). Some of you are saying the 6112's are better.
Are there different models of adjustable "5100's" or are they all the same?
Is the 6112 adjustable?

I'm having a hard time finding any info on what actually fits a 2018. They dont look any different than a 2017 but I didnt want to assume.

5100 and 6100 are both adjustable

5100 is more in line with a traditional regular shock, a high quality OE replacement.

6100 is a large body (60mm) performance shock, that is basically a simplified version of a 2.5" performance coilover.

Both are good choices, both offer a lot of value for the money. 6112 even with the increased price is cost is very well worth it.

Chances are its the exact same part, Bilstein website doesn't have updated info for 2018. I would use the 2017 selections.

 

[PCRIDE4RUNNERORG]

Great thread and I liked to hear everyone's opinion and feedback on the differences between the 5100's and 5160/6112. My overall concern would be the 6112's are too rugged/stiff, but it doesn't appear to be that. Would be good for the resale value down the road I would imagine.

I am planning to install the 6112/5160 set up, using 1.75" on the front and I suppose the default setting on the rear (no lift) with 1.5" coil spacer using the stock OEM rear spring.

Do you think this would give me a nice leveled look and increasing the height overall just a little? My objective is to stay below 2" lift as I didn't want it huge.

Also lifting it like this, should I increase the tire size by one? I think that would be 270 vs the 265 ?

Any advice would be appreciated.

 

[SNORunner01]

Great thread and I liked to hear everyone's opinion and feedback on the differences between the 5100's and 5160/6112. My overall concern would be the 6112's are too rugged/stiff, but it doesn't appear to be that. Would be good for the resale value down the road I would imagine.



I am planning to install the 6112/5160 set up, using 1.75" on the front and I suppose the default setting on the rear (no lift) with 1.5" coil spacer using the stock OEM rear spring.



Do you think this would give me a nice leveled look and increasing the height overall just a little? My objective is to stay below 2" lift as I didn't want it huge.



Also lifting it like this, should I increase the tire size by one? I think that would be 270 vs the 265 ?



Any advice would be appreciated.

I ran the 5100’s on my last 5th gen. I had it at 2.5” front and 1.5” rear spacer lift. My suspension guy told me that the 5100’s are not optimized to be extended to 2.5” with the stock coils. He said that they are best if used on the 1.75” setting or below.

This time around with my new 5th gen I have the 6112/5160. I will be putting it at 2.5” front and 2” rear. I have icon rear springs giving me 2” of lift. I would have gone with the superflex but the added weight of the 3rd row and my gear in back, it was suggested the 2” icons would be better.

I would say that if you plan on maxing out the ride height of your 5100’s in order to fit your 285/70/17’s I would personally go with 6112/5160 combo. I can say the 5100’s I was running at max height had trouble with roll and nose diving. If you don’t need max height and are only leveling then 5100’s would work fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[EEEliminator]

There isn't a lot of info on them yet but if you're looking to maintain stock like ride quality (comfort) the Eibach Pro Truck Lift System I believe is marketed at this. It is quite affordable too, one downside is that it is a minimum 2.5" lift on the front on the lowest setting. Not many reviews but it you're looking for a daily driver that sees more on-road and light off road it might be worth considering.

 

[Teephud]

Great thread and I liked to hear everyone's opinion and feedback on the differences between the 5100's and 5160/6112. My overall concern would be the 6112's are too rugged/stiff, but it doesn't appear to be that. Would be good for the resale value down the road I would imagine.



I am planning to install the 6112/5160 set up, using 1.75" on the front and I suppose the default setting on the rear (no lift) with 1.5" coil spacer using the stock OEM rear spring.



Do you think this would give me a nice leveled look and increasing the height overall just a little? My objective is to stay below 2" lift as I didn't want it huge.



Also lifting it like this, should I increase the tire size by one? I think that would be 270 vs the 265 ?



Any advice would be appreciated.

I don’t think there is a 270 size. You have two options for next size up: most people do 275/70/17. Some, including myself, went “tall-skinny”, with 255/75/17. Either of these options give you a 32” tire. One major consideration is that the KO2 only comes in an E rating that n the 275/70 size. Personally, I think C rated tires are a better option for the 4Runner, but that’s probably a debate for another thread...

Like you, I am also considering a smaller lift, on the order of 1-1/2 to 2”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mother_B]

I have the 6112/5160 combo with Eibach 1” rear coils. Fronts set to 1.7” on the third perch.

There’s still a slight rake but nowhere near as pronounced as stock. I’m getting inch to inch and a quarter over stock in the rear, even carrying the extra couple of hundred pounds of rack, sliders, and gear.

Nose dive is limited under braking. I wouldn’t call the ride stiff, but the time for the suspension to reset is very short. You trade the stock floaty rebound for a smoother trip over multiple bumps, especially at speed.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PCRIDE4RUNNERORG]

the 6112's have 1.85 setting, using this in the front and 1" cornFed in the rear, this will give .5" rake in the back, which is perfect once you get a couple of people in the back and some gear, it will be level.

Too many times' I see 4Runner sagging in the back, I think that is because they are leveled unloaded.

The cordFed guy told me just now on the phone, that OEM in the rear is 1.5" rake, over the stock front struts, and using a cornFed will bring it to .5" in the rear with 1.75/1.85 in the front.

6112's have 1.85
5100's have the 1.75 equivalent

 

[honda250xtitan]

the 6112's have 1.85 setting, using this in the front and 1" cornFed in the rear, this will give .5" rake in the back, which is perfect once you get a couple of people in the back and some gear, it will be level.

Too many times' I see 4Runner sagging in the back, I think that is because they are leveled unloaded.

The cordFed guy told me just now on the phone, that OEM in the rear is 1.5" rake, over the stock front struts, and using a cornFed will bring it to .5" in the rear with 1.75/1.85 in the front.

6112's have 1.85
5100's have the 1.75 equivalent

its personal preference. :shrug: leveled/cali lean looks good, no matter how un practical is really is...IMO

 

[KuhDunkADunk]

its personal preference. :shrug: leveled/cali lean looks good, no matter how un practical is really is...IMO

It is a personal preference, I prefer the rake look vs leveled.