Part or whole strut?

[daves87rs]

Ok, the facts: 2003 Cavalier, 55k. Replacing the struts.


Question being: should I replace everything (quick strut) or just replace the struts themselves? Car has NO bounce (you can just feel all the bumps). Car does not bounce at all when the bumper is pushed down.


I was just going to do quick struts, butthe wife brought up a good point: I might be wasting money if everything else is still in good shape. I still plan on replacing the struts again at around 105, and thenI could do quick struts then.Advice?







A

 

[Quest]

If you have the tools to do a strut unit itself then yeah, why not?

If your car starts to bottom out and/or spring sags, strut tower top bearing plate squeaking/worn or similar then might as well go with quick strut.

Either way: get a 4-wheel alignment done to protect your investment afterwards.

Q.

 

[tomcat27]

granted, the roads are rough in Michigan - but are you sure you need struts? are they leaking? you say the car does not bounce. if you think the struts are worn because you feel bumps, the struts may not be the problem or change anything.

certainly I don't know your driving style, roads, usage - but many struts last 100k miles. the shocks I pulled off my Grand Cherokee at 100k miles had more damping than the replacments!

Have you changed the aspect ratio of the tires? lower profile tires can make you feel the bumps more. all that being said, your springs are probably not worn - so why replace them? and be carefull using a spring compressor.

GM's aren't hard to do - just be carefull. also, in my experience - Monroe and KYB products seem to provide more damping than Gabriel products. (IMHO)

 

[daves87rs]

Nope, replaced the old OEM GY tires with the same type s rated Kelly Nav golds....And if I remember correctly, a strut doesn't have to bounce to be going. It's hit so many MI pot holes in 7 years I have almost no doubt.

 

[JHZR2]

The difference really is the replacement of a spring, right?

A full strut has the spring and shock absorber in one, versus just replacing the shock absorber... If that is not accurate, tell me.

I would not be concerned replacing the whole thing unless there is corrosion, spring sag, or similar. Otherwise, save the money.

 

[strongt]

With only 55K on the car, I'd say the the springs and hardware should all still be good. I'd just get the strut only. Quick struts though are the easy way to go if you can't get or don't what to mess with the spring.

 

[Michael_P]

Quote:
The difference really is the replacement of a spring, right?


And the strut bearing too, as well as new rubber isolators if so equipped.

 

[The Critic]

The only way to accurately test a shock absorber's performance is with a Hunter SA400:

http://hunterengineering.com/pub/undercar/4187T/index.htm

At 55k, the other hardware is probably still OK, so I would not bother with a quick strut. Replacing the strut assembly and the strut mount should be adequate.

 

[gtx510]

critic, just an fyi...
http://www.google.com/search?q=shock+dyno

quick strut would be easier to install if you don't have a spring compressor
but i wouldn't bother unless the rubber on your strut mounts is cracked

 

[bdcardinal]

Originally Posted By: The Critic
The only way to accurately test a shock absorber's performance is with a Hunter SA400:

http://hunterengineering.com/pub/undercar/4187T/index.htm


trust me there are better ways, just like a dampener dyno stated above. pick up a copy of Race Tech or Racecar Engineering and there are tons of them.

 

[Texan4Life]

no bounce, no bottoming out. I'd wait.

I did front struts,springs, and bearing on my cr*pillac. It was a PITA but im glad it did it. though you would too if you had your engine cradle slammed against the street. Wow, what a bad sound and feeling that is!!

 

[mechtech2]

If the springs re OK, then save yourself a lot of $ and just change the struts.
Parts stores loan or rent the tools for cheap.

I would paint the springs where/if they are rusty. Use a few coats of Spray Rustoleum.

 

[eljefino]

I did struts at 170k replacing my originals. Kept the springs. Made all the difference I was looking for, still good at 210k.

You might want to now, as a benchmark, measure frame-to-ground distance so you'll know if your car is sagging later. Just be sure you also record tire brand, inflation, tread depth, and while we're at it sidewall height from bottom of rim to ground.

If you DO do quick struts on all four corners, consider ones for a sport model, they'll have stiffer springs.

 

[The Critic]

Originally Posted By: eljefino
I did struts at 170k replacing my originals. Kept the springs. Made all the difference I was looking for, still good at 210k.


I replaced my original struts at 130k and although the springs were not showing any visible saggage, the springs are clearly worn as the car still does not ride well with new struts.

 

[mechtech2]

Critic - Why blame the springs? They hold the car up. It the struts that do the dampening.

 

[daves87rs]

Ok, the struts sound like a better idea. Should I replace the mounts too, or wait?

 

[IndyIan]

I wonder if you should try replacing the mounts first before getting new struts? On a really worn strut the tire will bounce like a basketball on broken pavement right?
Does this happen?
Do the mounts have a rubber cushion? Maybe they have hardened up and now transmit everything to an older/looser/noiseier interior?
I guess it depends how much work you want to do, taking out the struts more than once sounds painful to me...

 

[labman]

The mounts are a known problem. When I got my 02 apart, I found the top coil broken of the spring on one side. Just buy the whole works and replace everything while you have it apart. Anything you save on parts now will be lost if you have to replace something else later and pay for another alignment.

 

[daves87rs]

Originally Posted By: labman
The mounts are a known problem. When I got my 02 apart, I found the top coil broken of the spring on one side. Just buy the whole works and replace everything while you have it apart. Anything you save on parts now will be lost if you have to replace something else later and pay for another alignment.



Yeah, that does make sense. I got a good chance to look at her, and the coils look okay. After thinking about it, replacing the mounts make sense...

 

[The Critic]

Originally Posted By: mechtech2
Critic - Why blame the springs? They hold the car up. It the struts that do the dampening.


Quote:
Springs isolate the driver from road imperfections by allowing the tire to move over a bump without drastically disturbing the chassis. If the chassis remains fairly steady then the tires are better able to follow road contours.

While springs do an excellent job of smoothing over bumps, they will keep bouncing once started. In other words, the chassis continues swaying and the tires keep hopping long after the vehicle strikes a bump. Left uncontrolled, springs give an uncomfortable ride with very poor tire to road contact. To control this undesirable behavior, a shock absorber keeps the spring from overreacting to every bump or dip and prevent excess movement of the tire and chassis.

Springs are durable items and are easily inspected. If the ride height of a vehicle has decreased excessively or a coil/leaf has broken it is advisable to replace the springs in axle sets. Consumers also often change springs to alter their vehicle's ride and handling characteristics. Spring problems are generally easy to identify


From Hunter:

http://www.hunter.com/pub/undercar/4187T/

In that case, if springs are old and worn wouldn't they be unable to adequately isolated the driver from the bumps?