Replacing Front Struts on 2007 Acura TSX

[The Critic]

Originally Posted By: artbuc
Fantastic video...I never thought about searching for Honda, duh. I am surprised he could zip the hold-down nut without restraining the rod to keep it from turning.


On the last set of shocks I did, I used my foot to hold down the shock mount and then I used the impact to give the nut about a 90-deg turn after it was already “ran down.” This should work on a strut as well, though its probably a bit dangerous.

In the past, my impact has been able to fully tighten the nut without any problem.

Regardless, I am glad that you were able to get the shop to provide you with an inspection result that was in accordance with the state guidelines. Still, the struts are probably a candidate for replacement given their mileage, but obviously not at the same urgency.

 

[artbuc]

Originally Posted By: Vikas
I suspect he was not aware that she was your niece. Have you done business with them in the past? It is very sad that when it comes to auto repair business you have to have "Trust but Verify" attitude even if the mechanic appears to be honest to you.


Yes, they have been doing inspections on both of my vehicles for the last 3-4 years plus they did my niece's car last year which worked in my favor since the struts were fine last year. They tried an up-charge on me the last time on my 99 Avalon. Said I needed new front brakes before they would give me a sticker. Went home and measured all four pads with my calipers. The leading edge of one in-board pad was very close to minimum but still good. Since I knew I needed new brakes sometime before the next inspection, I didn't argue with them. I installed the brakes myself and took it back and got the sticker. I also listened to all of the [censored] they laid on their customers while I waited for my cars. I would say 99.5% of the people do not have a clue and do not ask any questions. They say "do whatever it needs" and seem to be happy to pull out their checkbooks.

 

[Tegger]

Originally Posted By: artbuc
Thanks to all for the many great responses, especially to Tegger for the Acura Service News article. I looked up the PA state inspection code and it says exactly what the Acura article says. "Slight" oil dampness is ok. You can only fail a PA inspection if your strut has a "severe" leak and free rocks 3 or more times. When confronted with this info, the service station backed away from their previous adamant position.

This is why annual inspections are a ripoff: expensive, inconvenient, and ineffective. My province of Ontario, thankfully, has never had an annual inspection (we do have one that is performed when the car's ownership changes hands).

Many governments keep statistics on the percentage of vehicles that, when inspected after a collision, were found to have one or more mechanical defects. The statistic does NOT say how many of those mechanical defects were actually directly linked to the collision. Obviously, if you were to count ONLY those collisions where a mechanical defect was directly implicated as a significant contributing factor, the percentage would be much lower.

According to the Ontario government's 1985 Road Safety Report, that number was 2.2%.
The 2005 Report puts that same number at 1.2%. One point two percent.

Just imagine: a 45% improvement in 20-years with no annual inspection at all. In the Rust Belt. States that have annual inspections report similarly-low numbers in the face of their annual inspections. But they then speciously claim that the numbers are low on account of the inspections.

Originally Posted By: artbuc
BTW, the reason they said I had to have a 4 wheel alignment after new struts was because they had to unbolt both upper and lower ball joints in order to replace the struts. As you all know, this is a total load of [censored]. You do not have to touch the ball joints.

That is 100% correct. Because, as I have said at least once now, YOU DO NOT HAVE "STRUTS". You guys should stop calling Honda's non-strut system "struts".

 

[Vikas]

Somebody gave a good definition of struts vs dampers. If you take out the struts, you can not steer the car. Steering system is hooked up to the struts. The dampers on the other hand could be removed without affecting steering.

 

[KrisZ]

Who cares what Honda calls their parts. Struts, coil overs, dampers, we all know which part is being discussed.
Brits have spanners, gearboxes, cogs, tyres, bonnets and widgets.

It doesn't matter in the end.

 

[Tegger]

Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Who cares what Honda calls their parts. Struts, coil overs, dampers, we all know which part is being discussed.

I disagree. Honda's "dampers" are totally different from Macpherson struts. The word"strut" automatically means "Macpherson strut" to most people. Calling non-struts "struts" can cause confusion. See the the very second post in this thread for an example of such confusion.

The spanner/wrench thing is a matter of local idiom, and nothing more; both words mean the same thing. That is NOT the case with the non-strut Honda system and the Macpherson strut system.

Proper terminology is important for clarity.

 

[Tegger]

Originally Posted By: Vikas
Somebody gave a good definition of struts vs dampers. If you take out the struts, you can not steer the car. Steering system is hooked up to the struts. The dampers on the other hand could be removed without affecting steering.

So what about the REAR of the car? It doesn't steer, but there is still an extremely important difference between a rear strut and a rear non-strut system.

The difference is this:
A Macpherson (or Chapman) strut damper/spring assembly IS used for suspension location.
Honda's non-strut damper/spring assembly IS NOT used for suspension location.

 

[Vikas]

Your definition is perfect! I should have said strut locates the wheel but the shock does not which is what you already said

 

[artificialist]

This is why the name "Coil-over" is often used in some circles.

I work with many guys that call Honda and Acura suspensions strut suspensions. They do that because the labor rate for replacing a regular MacPherson strut or a Honda style suspension is always higher than replacing regular shocks. Basically it helps the estimator charge the fair labor rate. Many estimators I have worked with have almost no car experience, but their ability to use a computer and listen to a mechanic is enough.

 

[Tegger]

Originally Posted By: artificialist
This is why the name "Coil-over" is often used in some circles.

I work with many guys that call Honda and Acura suspensions strut suspensions.

Which further confuses the matter. Civic-based vehicles from 2001 and up use MacPherson struts. Pre-'01 Civics and all Accord-based cars retain the non-strut setup.

Originally Posted By: artificialist
They do that because the labor rate for replacing a regular MacPherson strut or a Honda style suspension is always higher than replacing regular shocks. Basically it helps the estimator charge the fair labor rate.

Except that an '00 Civic won't require an alignment after shock replacement, while an '01 will. The difference? One is strut, one is not. Makes a big difference in labor cost!