Rancho 9000 Installation Problems

[CrzyFool]

When I brought my VX to my local shop to put in my Rancho's and new bushings I was told that the rear shocks fit in fine but the front ones didnt mount up . . . I was pretty sure they came in a set of four . . . did I buy the wrong ones? Am i missing something? Please help ASAP, Its the time of year when I get my baby back on the road and shes not going out until Ive finished with the suspension mods . . .

[Knigh7s]

Is the front ones the right part number?

Front - P/N: RS99214
Rear - P/N: RS99215

I installed mine myself. Didn't have any problems with fitment.

[WILLY]

Is the front ones the right part number?

Front - P/N: RS99214
Rear - P/N: RS99215

I installed mine myself. Didn't have any problems with fitment.

im with knight, i think you got the wrong part #.

[CrzyFool]

Thanks guys,

Just another reason why we'd all be lost without this site.

[911rsr2.8]

Did you all find that these softened the ride or? Thanks

[mbeach]

On the stiffest setting, the 9000s are still softer than the OEM shocks.
The Ranchos also have the benefit of leaking oil when it gets (very) cold.

Our Dragon had the OEMs, then the Bilsteins, and the Ironman had Rancho 5000s, then Rancho 9000s w/ the in-cab adjuster. So, I've had a chance to test most of the common options side-by-side.

In terms of firmness, they rank from stiffest to softest:
OEM KYBs -->Bilstein replacements -->9000 -->5000

The best ride at stock height goes to the Bilsteins (search here for p/ns).
The Billys also stood up to many weeks at -40F, where the Ranchos blew out.

When the Ironman was lifted (T-bar crank and OME 912s) and riding on 265/75R16 E rated tires, the ride was decent with the 9000s. I think that the stiff tires and torsion bar crank went a long way towards firming up the ride.