DMZ

Got my oil changed yesterday and they noticed the inside edge of the right rear tire is cupping. New struts were recommended to fix the problem. Car has 115K miles on it.

My questions then are:
- Could there be any other cause that I should look into?
- If I do need to replace them, do I just do the shock portion itself or the whole ball of wax including the spring?
- I'm seeking OEM grade performance so which would be the best way to go ... Monroe OES (new), KYB, OEM, etc?
.
.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

The TL has shocks, all you would need is to buy the shocks. not the springs, since you already have them.

I would look into a different cause for the tire wear.

DMZ

And those causes could include :
A) .......
B) .......
C) .......

Thanks!
.
.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

^i'm not to versed with alignment issues, sorry.

something to do with camber..and compliance bushings.

try reading this thread to see if your problem can be the same:
https://acurazine.com/forums/3g-tl-problems-fixes-114/camber-wear-but-camber-within-specs-829498/

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

Put it on an alignment rack and check the settings before replacement of shocks. Normally if a shock is completely blown the tire will bounce on the roadway and wear at the contact point, not just on the edge.

DMZ

Compliance bushings seem to be only for the front unless they're called something else for the rear.
.

flyromeo3

115k + New York roads = should of replaced them a lllooonnnnggg time ago. lol

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

No time or mileage limit on shocks/struts, only need replacement when they go bad. They can have 200k and still be good.

I hate cars

Agreed.

You will never see a good shock at 200k. From your previous posts you seem to think shocks are an all or nothing failure but that's not the case. They start wearing from day one and get softer and softer from there. They don't have to be blown out and spewing oil everywhere to be bad.

At 115,000 miles you should replace the shocks regardless. However, the wear is most likely the alignment, particularly the toe.

Koni makes a great adjustable shock that can be as comfortable as stock and still maintain great composure or you can dial it up for a little extra stiffness or to match whatever spring rate you're using.

Monroes in my experience last about a year.

KYB is a good "budget" shock that will last a while. I don't like to put them in the budget category because they are a decent shock. They may be a little harsher than stock, it's hard to say since I haven't run them on a TL but that was my experience on a couple other cars.

Bilsteins are another great shock. Should be cheaper than the Konis but more expensive than the KYBs. Very good ride and great body and suspension control. Non adjustable. I *think* they have a lifetime warranty but not completely sure. I've never heard of them being used on a TL but they are worth looking into. These are a great long lasting comfortable shock that will give a slight performance advantage over stock.

DMZ

I always thought the way to tell if a shock is bad is by bouncing on that corner of the car. If it gyrates, the the shock is N/G. If it goes right back into position then the shock is supposedly good, right? In my case, it goes right back into position without any gyrations.
.
.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

Get it on an alignment rack!

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

Well, I gues we disagree again and you'll need some proof as usual. Our '89 RX7 TII has 201,110 miles on the original struts and shocks and handles just like the day it was new, period. Actually better as I have wider tires on the car and you still can't move any corner as that suspension was stiff from the factory. My wife's '96 Jeep Grand Cherokee that my son in law uses has the OE shocks at 257,000 miles that's right 257k. Jeep is still mint, although the 2 rear shock shields have rusted off but have caused no problems and to this day they still work fine. He also carries heavy loads, tools for rebuilding turbines. Daughter's 2000 Maxima, OE equipment at 193,000 and even our daughter's 2005 Hemi Grand has 132,000 with the OE suspension.

You also stated previously that shocks start deteriorating at 40,000 miles, but if that were the case every new car would need the suspension replaced under warranty and we all know that dosen't happen.

So no, new struts/shocks aren't needed at a specific mileage.

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

^Just wanted to add, although I advocate that there is no time nor mileage limit as to strut/shock replacement, there are units that will fail prematurely and therefore the best solution is an inspection.

Ruby

most shocks have a lifetime warrenty, so if they go bad you can get them replaced for free. When I did shocks on my RSX I had Monroes and they were great. Amazing what a fresh set of shocks will do for the handling.

DMZ

That's what I thought.

Thanks!
.
.

I hate cars

An inspection might not show anything. Shock wear is internal. The internal wear has to be very bad before you see any external signs of failure like leakage. You have valves and seals that wear from the first minute they're installed on the car. Mine were just barely getting softer around 40k. They could've gone longer but I wanted to upgrade anyway. I never once stated they start deteriorating at a certain mileage. They start deteriorating from the very beginning just like the engine, trans, etc. There is no set mileage when they're no longer good, it comes to how high or low your standards are. The push test on your Mazda might seem ok but if it has a stiff suspension anyway and you can't compress the suspension enough, the test is invalid. There is no way in the world your shocks are not softer than they should be on that car.

Going 200,000 miles on OEM shocks is irresponsible. Maybe you got used to it being loose or maybe you don't have a good feel for the car, either way 200k should never be attempted.

I hate cars

That's one test. It should go down and come back up and stay there without any bouncing. However, it can pass this test and still have bad shocks. I guess another way of putting it is if it fails this test, the shocks are surely bad. If it passes they may or may not be bad. When you press on just the corner, you're involving the front swaybar which increases stiffness and will try to stop the movement just as the shock does.

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

Yup, stiff suspension on the Mazda, and do you know why, it’s because of the dampers. So guess they are fine.

Let's not start throwing stones about my ability to feel or know when there is a problem with a vehicle, as no one could be more anal than I am about a car.

Just consider it another lesson learned. See, you're getting a free lesson again.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

how many years has this feud been going on? lol

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

I hate cars

Of course it's the shocks. The springs and swaybars have nothing to do with stiffness. Anal or not, I question your perception or your ability to notice changes in the suspension. I don't blame you for not noticing, it happens gradually over the course of time. If you installed some new OEM shocks you would probably be amazed.

You have yet to teach me anything. I thought when you got your ass handed to you in the other thread by another member, not just myself when you were suggesting that shocks either work or they don't work and the only indicator is visible leakage you would calm down a bit but I guess not. I think we proved that one wrong in that thread but we can revisit it if you like.

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

You can revisit the thread and I still stand by my statement, I have never seen a shock/strut that was bad that didn't show any external evidence of leakage.

Better rethink your statement, nope, when pushing on the nose, the sway bar won't accomplish anything, only there to try and hold the body level as the body leans, and just a note, the RX7 convertible has heavier, longer and thicker springs than the TurboII, but still maintains a civilized ride, but the Turbo dampers are stiffer from the factory and hence the harsh ride. Take a shock off and leave just the spring and bounce the car, and you'll find it moves very easily, but install different types of dampers and you'll get a car that rides like a covered wagon or one that sways like sitting in a sofa, depending on the manufacturer and it all boils down to the damper.

Just like adjustable shocks, soft or harsh, but still with the same spring and stabilizer. How can this be if the damper has no control over the suspension? So there's another lesson and for free again. Guess I had better start charging as the market is going down I’ll need the money.

I proved my point now the ball is in your court to prove your point rather than just blatantly firing back.

Elegant TYPE S

iTrader: (2)

Getting the ruler out to measure who's got the longest e-penis....

I hate cars

It's not about that, it's about this dude spreading very bad info. I didn't realize there were people out there that did not know shocks wear out over time and there does not have to be any visual indication. It's unreal that there are people that think shocks can last 200,000 miles and be fine. I'm not arguing some super technical detail or a grey area where we both may be right or wrong. His statement is akin to saying your tires are square.

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

Matt:

You should know by now I don't spread bad info, so I'll tell you what I'll do. Get someone from Central Jersey (I live in Stockton), have them come to the house and we'll go for a ride, they can examine the suspension and let them make the call. We purchased the car new and everything original exept the engine and clutch assembly. 22 years old and still original wiper blades, original exhaust, etc.

If the Maxima with 193,000 is available we can go for a ride in that one also.

Also, the car doesn't have square tires.

Can't beat this challenge. You will then know who is correct.

I hate cars

Maybe you don't do it on purpose. I honestly thought for the longest time you said certain things to get a rise out of me.

I think there are two different items in question. The fact that shocks can be worn out without any visible signs of leakage and any shock can survive 200k and still be decent.

You know as well as I that shocks have cylinders, pistons, valves, orifices, etc. All of these wear over time. You can have internal leakage past pistons and any of those parts causing the shock to be too soft and worn out without any external signs. This is my biggest argument with you. Shocks are not like a light bulb where they either work or don't work. They usually wear gradually over time until they finally leak or the owner recognizes they're getting too soft and replaces them.

200k on a set of shocks on perfect roads, ok, maybe. 200k on NJ roads which from what I hear are not the best, no way. You don't think there's any possible way that your shocks have worn gradually over the course of 22 years and you failed to notice? More specifically, are you trying to say they're as good as new or that they're acceptable?

My comment stands on the springs and swaybars being responsible for the stiff ride. I'm fully aware of how the car reacts with no shocks. As a poor 17yr old taking the car to the track with no money for good shocks I drove the car to and from the track with the swaybar and front shocks disconnected. Not a pretty sight and it didn't work out that well. When you press on one corner of the car, you're causing the swaybar to react both front and rear. It doesn't want to go up or down so it acts as a shock in a round about way. If you weigh enough and are strong enough, pressing evenly in the middle of the front of the car is a much better test since it takes the swaybars out of the equation. The shocks won't support the car at all, they only control the rate of compression and rebound. You can take a car with the same spring rates, one with good shocks, one with no shocks and the total body roll is going to be about the same. The shocks definitely have a large effect when doing the bounce test, I would never say they don't, but the car can pass the bounce test if it has stiff springs and you're not physically able to compress the suspension.

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

Good as new.
Get somebody to come over to the house and they will see that there is no bounce test for the RX7 as the suspension will not compress, front or rear, the dampers are that stiff. I have a '91 TII in the pole shed with aftermarkets and the suspension isn't nearly as stiff as my OE.

Really, plenty of people from the Central Jersey, NE Philadelphia area, so maybe one will speak up as most anytime is good and they can inspect the RX7 and the Maxima. The Maxima is a DD for the daughter but if it's avaiable we can test that one also.

I kid you not, the cars are in mint condition.

I've had OE shocks go in a little as 62,000 miles and replaced many struts/shocks for people that had nowhere near the mileage I have seen on the cars listed. In fact, I'm going to replace all 4 dampers for a friend of mine, original owner 2000 Buick Park Avenue, rear air shocks are shot at 91,000 miles.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

Matt, do I spread out incorrect information?

Elegant TYPE S

iTrader: (2)

I thought sway bars increase spring rates? A thicker bar will actually stiffen up the spring.... No?

cjTL

iTrader: (2)

I hate cars

There's a difference in saying "I think" or qualifying a statement or posting an opinion. I say that all the time when I'm not sure of something. I know some of what's said is opinion, some is fact, nothing wrong with that. I've been corrected plenty times but it's usually when I'm not sure and I state that I'm not sure from the beginning so no one takes it as fact. My biggest issue was the statement that shocks are either blown out or perfect and that they have to show signs of external leakage or they're perfect. I don't even feel like Googling it because it's a waste of my time. I'm sure someone else could do it.

Whether or not Turbonut's shocks are perfect will never be known. It's his car, I'm across the country and a 3rd party may or may not be familiar with that particular Mazda and how it should feel brand new. In other words, it's my word against his. I've never ever ever seen a shock that even resembled new at that kind of mileage. Usually they're just along for the ride. 22 years and 200k is VERY hard to believe. I don't believe he's lying but it's a pretty good assumption that after 22 years they could soften up without being detected. I barely remember what the TL rode like when brand new 5 years ago.

I hate cars

The swaybar is a spring, a torsional spring. It's does nothing when you push down on the entire front end or when you hit a bump with both wheels at the same time such as a speed bump. It acts as a spring when you push down (or up if you were able) on just one side. Or when only one tire hits a bump or when you're cornering hard the the car tries to lean down on one side and lift up on the other. Doing this twists the bar and it acts as a spring wanting to return back to it's non twisted state.

That's why it's harder to judge the shocks on a car with a larger swaybar unless you can push right in the middle of the front (or rear) of the car. The swaybar does not want to let only one side of the car go up or down unless the other side goes to. You can see why this would simulate a good shock in a push test, because not only does it try to stop you from pushing down, it tries to stop the car from coming up higher than it's resting state.

The Rx7s were some of the best handling cars out there especially for their time. I have no idea what the swaybar sizes or rates are for them but I would guess they're fairly stiff.

TheChamp531

iTrader: (3)

Why can't we be friends, why can't we be friends... !!

I hate cars

We're all friends. I don't enjoy fighting with anyone and especially with my elders. I don't mean that in a negative way at all toward Turbonut. We'll just have to agree to disagree. People can form their own opinions or use Google to find out about shocks.

TheChamp531

iTrader: (3)

You're getting to soft now IHC.

Shall we reopen the Racing ATF thread?

Ruby

A thing you have to remember too. If the car passes the bounce test, if its not making crazy noises, your tires aren't cupped, if the ride doesn't bounce or sway when you hit a bump in the road chances are your shocks are fine. Just because they have xxx,xxx miles on them if they pass all these test they're good. But on the other hand, if you were to replace them with brand new ones you may see a bit of a difference and I'm sure the handling would improve also. But with this economy right now the average A to B driver isn't going to shell out 1,000 dollars in parts and labor for something that isn't going to cause their car to break down.

DMZ

.................................................. .....................

I hate cars

I usually don't even click on ATF threads anymore. I'm too tired to fight anymore. I started getting my ass kicked at the gym twice a day now, trying to keep up with the 'roiders which is requiring 4hrs in the gym and 10hrs of sleep. A-zine is my way of winding down now.

I agree too. If the shocks are worn, replace them, if they're not worn, don't replace them, that goes without saying. The key here and the debate is determining whether or not they're worn and which test is valid. I keep the car in tip top shape with the best of everything especially tires in case I'm even in a situation where a wreck can be avoided which has happened before. If a few inches shorter stopping distance or swerving distance would have been the difference between a wreck and a close call I would be pissed that I was driving around on old worn out shocks.

Majofo

No Justin, you only spread STD/I's.

cjTL

iTrader: (2)

And all those poor guys never even know about them until its too late.