hooked2TL

Folks:

Got a general question with shocks. No, it's not for my Acura but for the wife's Dodge 96 minivan. :-) Brought the van in this weekend to get new tires, and i've been noticing for a while and was confirmed by shop that the rear shocks should be replaced. Front ones apparently are still ok. My question is, why does it seem like the rear shocks seem to wear out faster than the front ones? I had the same thing with a previous car where the rear shocks needed to be replaced but front ones were still ok...

Thanks for answering this general car question.

BTW, the Caravan was mine and the wife was supposed to drive the Acura TL. However, as i've explained to her 4 months ago when we got the car for her, i'm still testing the car out to ensure everything works, and i figure it takes at least 6 months testing to know this before she should start driving it......:-)

bdimc2001

What have u been doing in da back seat?

hooked2TL

"What have u been doing in da back seat? "

Uhhh...well, testing out the shocks...?

Lawaia

Not sure if it's common with these "wagon-type" vehicles but my 4Runner rear shocks went bad before the fronts. I think it's just crappy factory shocks. Get 'um changed and so far no problems both front and rear.

lilboykorea

LOL!