• Welcome to The Truck Stop! We see you haven't REGISTERED yet.

    Your truck knowledge is missing!
    • Registration is FREE , all we need is your birthday and email. (We don't share ANY data with ANYONE)
    • We have tons of knowledge here for your diesel truck!
    • Post your own topics and reply to existing threads to help others out!
    • NO ADS! The site is fully functional and ad free!
    CLICK HERE TO REGISTER!

    Problems registering? Click here to contact us!

    Already registered, but need a PASSWORD RESET? CLICK HERE TO RESET YOUR PASSWORD!

2" rear wheel spacers installed on a K2500 Sub.

the "centric would only be an issue if they were spacers that bolt directly behind the wheels. These spacers bolt to the hub using the same "centric" system your wheels did. Then the wheel bolts to the spacer, again using the same "centric" as before. So whether it's hub or lug centric, you're doing it the same. I've got essentialy the same thing in between my duals to move them apart.
 
I was thinking of ordering a pair. Any long term comments/concerns now that you have been using them for awhile.
 
Thanks for the reply. No bearing issues I guess. Was looking at the aluminum ones wondering if anybody had an issues with those.
 
It does look good with the rears the same as the front. I've also thought of buying spacers.
I know I've read threads in the past that have these spacers giving problems. I don't know if it was because the install or what, but I'm pretty sure I've read of guys with their wheels coming off while driving. Maybe on this site...or the Place but more info is out there regarding these things. Just sayin.
 
Dieseldad97 said:
It does look good with the rears the same as the front. I've also thought of buying spacers.
I know I've read threads in the past that have these spacers giving problems. I don't know if it was because the install or what, but I'm pretty sure I've read of guys with their wheels coming off while driving. Maybe on this site...or the Place but more info is out there regarding these things. Just sayin.
Click to expand...

I read the same things in the past. I can't find anything specific to quote or link to, but personally, I'd be looking for some type of weight rating/classification on the spacers. I looked at the link provided and it does say that the bolts are Grade 8, but doesn't mention anything else. I'm not saying those spacers are inadequate, I just didn't see an actual rating.

I'd like to move my rear wheels out too, but I have yet to find concrete evidence that the spacers are safe.

Has anyone found a weight rating for these spacers - or any other spacer?
 
If the wheel rim doesn't ride on the hub it can bust lugnuts going over potholes. The sudden shock usually travels from the rim center hole to the axle flange (hub).

The lug nuts and studs are not designed to handle this shock loading and tend to break.

So adding a spacer that messes with the rim to flange interface is risky.
 
spacing the rears out will make it suck in snow and mud, now the rears will be driving in the tracks of ice and compacted mud of the fronts instead of being slightly offset and getting more fresh material under the tires
 
I never noticed how far in the rear wheels stuck in on the Suburban's... worse than my trucks. It'll help the air flow smoother around your truck as well.

If you want the highest quality wheel spacers you can get, I have heard numerous great things about Fred's spacers. He makes them any way you want, hub-centric on FF axles, dually spacers, wheel adapters, the works. I have personally seen a set and damn were they nice, I want a set on my trucks now.
 
I've wondered what the OEM logic was behind the notably wider track width on the front. Is it exclusive to the heavier duty trucks w/ the 9.25 front diff?

Could see the possible logic of having the slightly wider track having some stability benefit that could make sense for the truck's with higher load/tow ratings.

Or maybe it's just the distances they needed to get the driveline angles necessary for acceptable CV life?
 
SmithvilleD said:
I've wondered what the OEM logic was behind the notably wider track width on the front. Is it exclusive to the heavier duty trucks w/ the 9.25 front diff?

Could see the possible logic of having the slightly wider track having some stability benefit that could make sense for the truck's with higher load/tow ratings.

Or maybe it's just the distances they needed to get the driveline angles necessary for acceptable CV life?
Click to expand...
I think the whole thing was a big blunder. No real reason for front to be wider. Then to throw the poorly designed plastic flares on was the icing on the cake. There is no reason for the rear axle to be so narrow. Try changing a brake line or even bleeding the brakes.The body should have been made to fit the wider stance,not create the best rust trap yet.
A wider axle or hub centric spacers is the best fix.
 
bk95td said:
I think the whole thing was a big blunder. No real reason for front to be wider. Then to throw the poorly designed plastic flares on was the icing on the cake. There is no reason for the rear axle to be so narrow. Try changing a brake line or even bleeding the brakes.The body should have been made to fit the wider stance,not create the best rust trap yet.
A wider axle or hub centric spacers is the best fix.
Click to expand...

Just bled the brakes a couple weekends ago. First time I found an application where there wasn't enough clearance to use my cheapy set of bleeder wrenches.
 
guybb3 said:
iirc it was simply because that is the axle they have in production, so they don't have to spend extra money making it wider.
Click to expand...
If you look on car-part.com there is about 20 different axels used. 2 and 4wd are different according to that.I'm sticking with the blunder:confused:
 
SmithvilleD said:
I've wondered what the OEM logic was behind the notably wider track width on the front. Is it exclusive to the heavier duty trucks w/ the 9.25 front diff?

Could see the possible logic of having the slightly wider track having some stability benefit that could make sense for the truck's with higher load/tow ratings.

Or maybe it's just the distances they needed to get the driveline angles necessary for acceptable CV life?
Click to expand...

just about every rear drive GM has a narrower rear track than the front, pretty sure they designed it this way for cornering stability.
 
This one got dug up from the grave?

I do like the look of them spaced out, But the only reason I would leave them stock is because GM did have a design in mind when they did that. It was only on 4x4's if you've noticed and it was so the front wheels could track in a slightly different area than the rear wheels so you "hopefully" dont bog down in your own tracks.
Even my old 1970 4x4 is the same way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top