 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Australian Car Forums / General Car Topics (Australian group) / July 2008Steering/Suspension Disaster
Replaced the front shockers in my VH commy recently and noticed that it was sitting up a lot higher (round about 70mm!) I purchased a set of MONROE T-GAS shockers from repco and told them they were for a blue 6cyl 202. I remember when I went to fit them that the package the shocks came in had been taped up. Took it get checked and aligned at a well known nationwide chain of suspension "specialists" I suggested to them that perhaps repco had given me ones for a V8 instead. They said "Nah, shouldn't make any difference because the hight is determined by the springs alone" Is this the case? Is the ride height determined by the springs, or can the pressure in the shocks be enough to make it sit higher? They did the alignment and it was WORSE than the rough job I did. They said perhaps there is something wrong with the rack - I can't feel any play there. I need to get this sorted asap. Any suggestions greatly appreciated. Steve. > Replaced the front shockers in my VH commy recently and noticed that it > was sitting up a lot higher (round about 70mm!) [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Is this the case? Yes, even with a stiff shock the weight of a person can push it down. You must have done something wrong to get it to sit a full 7cm higher. > Is the ride height determined by the springs, or can the pressure in the > shocks be enough to make it sit higher? Technically they could make a slight different but it would be very minimal. Michael Thanks Michael, This freaks me out! - I wonder what I could have done wrong. The reason I took it to a specialist was so they could check it over because I also did the most of the major bushes as well. They said it was a good job. I have also taken it to another mob who also couldn't see anything wrong with the work I had done. (who also can't seem to align it correctly) they can't offer an explaination either. Very mysterfying - If it's not the shockers what sort of other things could cause this? and why the f*ck couldn't they see a problem? Steve. >> Replaced the front shockers in my VH commy recently and noticed that it >> was sitting up a lot higher (round about 70mm!) [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Michael > Thanks Michael, > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Very mysterfying - If it's not the shockers what sort of other things > could cause this? and why the f*ck couldn't they see a problem? I'm not really sure. When you put the springs back in did you get the end of the spring rotated to the right location at the top and the bottom? Did you put the top of the strut on the right way up (assuming it's possible to get it the wrong way around)? If this second one was the problem it could explain why the suspension places think it's ok as it would be difficult to see up there. Michael > I'm not really sure. When you put the springs back in did you get the end > of the spring rotated to the right location at the top and the bottom? Did [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Michael We had both struts out completely (lower control arm attached) in order to remove the ball joint (bugger of a job) the dampners were inserted, springs put back on all as a unit and reffited. There is a location point for the spring at the base of the strut and a rubber seat at the top. These were aligned correctly - there is a hole in the strut plate at the top which was rotated to were it was before, so I can't see what we could have done incorrectly. steve. > > I'm not really sure. When you put the springs back in did you get the end > > of the spring rotated to the right location at the top and the bottom? Did [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > the strut plate at the top which was rotated to were it was before, so I > can't see what we could have done incorrectly. One alignment adjustment can if done incorrectly, cause the vehicle's front to rise when driving straight ahead (not reverse). If the tie-rods were undone or moved on their threads so the front wheels have excessive "toe-in", the action of the front wheels trying to steer the car towards the other wheel, causes the front to rise. The maximum I seen is about 2 to 4 cms depending on how much excess toe-in is ocurring. The test for this, is to drive in reverse for about 10metres. The front will drop back down to normal if it is an excessive toe-in problem. I fitted some Monro-Wiley (sp) "GT 130"s to a Valiant once, and the ride height did increase by about 1-2 cms. If you pumped the suspension, the car would settle down to normal. It seemed to be due to the resistance of the over-sized rams in their bushes. This persisted for about 3000ks until they loosened up. Jason > Thanks Michael, > > This freaks me out! - I wonder what I could have done wrong. > The reason I took it to a specialist was so they could check it over because > I also did the most of the major bushes as well. They said it was a good > job. Did you wait until you put the car down off the stands before tightening up the bolts for the bushes or did you fit the new bushes and tighten them all up while you had the front end off the ground??? Kev > Replaced the front shockers in my VH commy recently and noticed that it > was sitting up a lot higher (round about 70mm!) [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Is this the case? Yes. > Is the ride height determined by the springs, or can the pressure in the > shocks be enough to make it sit higher? Nope. The shocks are not holding the car up, the springs are and the shockies just dampen the suspension movement. > They did the alignment and it was WORSE than the rough job I did. They > said perhaps there is something wrong with the rack - I can't feel any > play there. > > I need to get this sorted asap. > Any suggestions greatly appreciated. 7cm is a massive amount. Are you sure the springs are in properly on both sides and you reassembled it all the same way they came apart? Does one of your strut towers sit higher then the other? Thanks Clocky, I did the work with my brother who has done shocks before and we were very careful to put things back together correctly (but perhaps we made a blunder). We had both entire struts out because we also did the all the major bushes. Both struts seem the same to me. Steve >> Replaced the front shockers in my VH commy recently and noticed that it >> was sitting up a lot higher (round about 70mm!) [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > Does one of your strut towers sit higher then the other? > Thanks Clocky, > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Both struts seem the same to me. Did you do the final tighten all the suspension bushes before or after you let the car down? You should do it with the load on - car sitting on the ground. > Replaced the front shockers in my VH commy recently and noticed that it was > sitting up a lot higher (round about 70mm!) > > I purchased a set of MONROE T-GAS shockers from repco and told them they > were for a blue 6cyl 202. I remember when I went to fit them that the > package the shocks came in had been taped up. IIRC the ones I bought for my 'lux had clamps to keep them locked down for less packing material and ease of installation. It was not a struggle to install them. > Took it get checked and aligned at a well known nationwide chain of > suspension "specialists" [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Is the ride height determined by the springs, or can the pressure in the > shocks be enough to make it sit higher? Shocks are spring rebound dampers and are in no way able to support the weight of a vehicle, you can compress them by hand. I've had a similar increase in vehicle height replacing somewhat worn leaf springs, shock replacement should not do that. >IIRC the ones I bought for my 'lux had clamps to keep them locked down >for less packing material and ease of installation. It was not a >struggle to install them. Yeah, these had similar clamps >Shocks are spring rebound dampers and are in no way able to support the >weight of a vehicle, you can compress them by hand. Yeah ok, makes sense when you think about it. > I've had a similar increase in vehicle height replacing somewhat worn leaf > springs, shock >replacement should not do that. I did replace the pivot bushes in the lower control arm with the nolothane 2 piece version instead of rubber - also the link rod bushes (rubber) and the stabiliser bar D bushes (nolothane) - Maybe the D bushes are overtightened? Everything appears to be fitted correctly according to 2 independant mechanics - yet niether of them is able to do a correct wheel alignment or offer a solution. Not sure what to do next. Steve. Could this be a possibility? The stabiliser bar D bushes are the nolothane type (very har compared to the rubber ones) I can't quite remember, but maybe I tightened them when the car was up on stands. I do remember not being sure how tight to go, they have a metal d shaped clamp around them so I tightened them up to maximum to the metal. Then the car was lowered? In other words, if when the car is up and you welded the stabiliser bar where it pivots, and then let the car down, you would think that it would raise the height of the car? any thoughts? Steve. >Could this be a possibility? > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >any thoughts? >Steve. Anything that pivots like that needs to be tightened after the suspension is loaded OzOne of the three twins I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace. >> Could this be a possibility? >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Anything that pivots like that needs to be tightened after the > suspension is loaded seconded...... > OzOne of the three twins > > I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace.  SignatureDon`t be sexist...........Broads hate that. > Anything that pivots like that needs to be tightened after the > suspension is loaded Thanks, I definatley did all the other bushes when the car was lowered - I had to slither my way under with my back and head in a puddle of water - prick of a job - but I can't be sure if I did the D bushes like that. I'll have to check it out tomorrow - simple enough job. I hope this is the cause of the ride height otherwise I don't know what's next. Steve >> Anything that pivots like that needs to be tightened after the >> suspension is loaded [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Steve You said they were gas struts? So they are pressurised right? How easy were they to push down? Fairly hard I would imagine so if you use that same amount of force to lift the front of your car up yeas you will get about 3cm of lift. So basically you have done nothing wrong except use the wrong struts for the car ;-) Put some gas shockies on the back now and even it up a bit. The second problem is very disturbing though. 2 different people can't align it! So what exactly is it doing that you don't like and what were the alignment specs? Also as a point because only toe-in is adjustable a lot of these guess do not bother to check castor or camber. Cheers TT >>> Anything that pivots like that needs to be tightened after the >>> suspension is loaded [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Cheers TT I'd have to agree that the gas pressure would add to the spring force and lift the car a little, but 70mm? i'm not sure about that being the main problem really. It does seem more likely that if he did tighten to the max, the stabiliser rubber, while the car was still on stands, that they may be almost frozen in place. Especially using brand new, harder nolothane rubber. It's probably the affect of the rubber and the gas doing the damage. I guess we'll know soon where he's made the blunder. Pheww, these flamin' backyarders, I dunno! But after hearing of the poor performances by the 'so called professionals' one has to wonder who the backyarders really are!! Mark > You said they were gas struts? So they are pressurised right? How easy > were they to push down? Fairly hard I would imagine so if you use that > same amount of force to lift the front of your car up yeas you will get > about 3cm of lift. So basically you have done nothing wrong except use > the wrong struts for the car ;-) Put some gas shockies on the back now > and even it up a bit. That's very interesting TT, You are the first person on this thread to mention that the shocks can raise the height. Yes they are gas struts - I can't remember how easy they were to push down. It probably was a bit higher at the front than the back to begin with, but now it looks a bit silly. It would be easier to do the back than redo the front though. > The second problem is very disturbing though. 2 different people can't > align it! So what exactly is it doing that you don't like and what were > the alignment specs? Also as a point because only toe-in is adjustable a > lot of these guess do not bother to check castor or camber. Yes it is disturbing - I don't have the specs with me but it was set to standard toe-in of 2mm. I remember the caster was 1deg different from side to side but within tolerance. Camber I'm not sure without the specs. One problem is the steering wheel doesn't return very well after turning a corner - in the wet it almost doesn't at all! The other problem is it "tramlines" and also "bump steers" - worse in the wet as well. In the dry it's not as bad. But it will seem to follow uneveness in the road surface and it will "bump" and knock the steering off just going over one of those painted white turning arrows on the road - absolutely crap!! It was much better when I had done a rough toe-in myself (although it was about 10mm!!) The camber now looks absolutely bad (positive) but different on one wheel than the other (this was after the second attempt by my local mechanic) so it's now been looked at 3 times. My front tyres have been f*cked up as a result of this sh*t - almost bald after a week and a half driving. Sqeals around corners and even sqeals going over different surfaces. I can't see how any reputable place could let a car leave the workshop in this dangerous condition without at least saying "there is something wrong but we can't fix it - I recommed so and so etc...) What next? Steve. >> You said they were gas struts? So they are pressurised right? How easy >> were they to push down? Fairly hard I would imagine so if you use that [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > What next? > Steve. I had a similar experience years ago with a ford coupe , turns out the gas shocks lifted the front about 40mm but once you replace the backs and level it out a decent wheel alignment with the caster sorted will ease the tram lining etc , the nola bushes will have altered the response as well and might have compensated for the rubber sag adding even more . > >> You said they were gas struts? So they are pressurised right? How easy > >> were they to push down? Fairly hard I would imagine so if you use that [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > response as well and might have compensated for the rubber sag adding > even more . Must be fairly light weight cars. As mentioned I've seen it with spring replacement, however a shock you can compress in your hands? Must be fairly light weight cars. As mentioned I've seen it with spring replacement, however a shock you can compress in your hands? They are *GAS* struts. That is, there is gas inside under pressure and it is acting as a spring helper. If in doubt go to your local El Cheapo car parts store and pull one off the shelf and try it. There will be considerable force needed to compress it. Cheers TT > Must be fairly light weight cars. As mentioned I've seen it with > spring [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > If in doubt go to your local El Cheapo car parts store and pull one off the > shelf and try it. There will be considerable force needed to compress it. Yep have gas ones I bolted onto my truck, I could compress them using my hands. Then again it's a leaf spring vehicle and rather heavy. Well, I just learnt something I didn't know, I guess plausible then in a car. > Must be fairly light weight cars. As mentioned I've seen it with > spring > replacement, however a shock you can compress in your hands? > > They are *GAS* struts. That is, there is gas inside under pressure and it > is acting as a spring helper. you don't know much about how a shock absorber works, gas or otherwise huh !! SignatureGod made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom? > If in doubt go to your local El Cheapo car parts store and pull one off > the shelf and try it. There will be considerable force needed to compress > it. > > Cheers TT >> Must be fairly light weight cars. As mentioned I've seen it with >> spring [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >you don't know much about how a shock absorber works, gas or otherwise huh >!! He went to the same school as Dod. OzOne of the three twins I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace. >>> You said they were gas struts? So they are pressurised right? How easy >>> were they to push down? Fairly hard I would imagine so if you use that [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > tram lining etc , the nola bushes will have altered the response as well > and might have compensated for the rubber sag adding even more . Atec is quite correct here - the castor is out. Solution is to drop the front or raise the back as castor is not adjust able on this Commodore. Also you need a *reputable* wheel alignment specialist to do the set up. *IF* you have scrubbed the tyres out in 2 weeks there is another issue here. Castor will not cause tyre wear BUT will do exactly what you have described. BTW go back to where you bought the struts and see if there is another set there. Take them out of the box and see how much weight you have to apply to them to get tem to compress. This is how much upward force you are now exerting on the front of your car. These things are great for rally cars but you should have refitted OE struts. Cheers TT >>>> You said they were gas struts? So they are pressurised right? How >>>> easy were they to push down? Fairly hard I would imagine so if you use [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] > > Cheers TT Ok Thanks, So it seems I was misled and got the wrong shockers - If only I'd researched properly :-(. They WERE the recommended replacements according to Repco. Why the f*ck would they recommend them? over stocked?. BTW the bushes all were tensioned under normal load - rocked the car up and down etc. The lower radius rod bush and the lower control arm pivot bushes are the 2 piece nolothane ones. These were also RECOMMENDED by Repco. I accept that these can make the ride a little bit stiffer. One other important thing I forgot to mention is that the wheels & tyres are not standard - they are semi-mags P205/65R15 95H - I imagine this wouldn't help the things with the alignment. I may end up replacing them with standard OE ones. Looks like I'll be changing the back shocks to gas as well, getting 2 new tyres for the front - then I'll be looking for a *reputable* wheel alignment specialist. Melbourne outer east - Ringwood, Ferntree Gully etc. if anyone has any recommendations. Thanks everyone for their advice. Steve. > Atec is quite correct here - the castor is out. Solution is to drop the > front or raise the back as castor is not adjust able on this Commodore. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Cheers TT Just a point with this, I understand that raising the front of the vehicle will give the car more positive caster and therefore contribute to tramlining - but wouldn't more positive caster also make the steering want to return to sraight ahead a lot quicker after going around a corner? eg. the more positive caster (taken to an extreme example) the tyres/wheels would be on the edge when going around a corner, and therefore with the weight of the car itself, would naturally pull back into line (tyre face flat to the road) quicker. My car is doing the opposite of this - it hardly returns at all! Any ideas where this theory is incorrect? Steve. >eg. the more positive caster (taken to an extreme example) the tyres/wheels >would be on the edge when going around a corner, and therefore with the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Steve. Sounds like the new VZ SV6 my wife bought. Balljoints and steering were so tight it wouldn't straighten either. If you ask a Holden dealer they'll say it's OK..just drive it a bit longer and it'll loosen up....hopefully before you hit a tree :-) OzOne of the three twins I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace. >>eg. the more positive caster (taken to an extreme example) the >>tyres/wheels [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > OzOne of the three twins > I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace. Yes - I feel your pain and fear - especially since yours is new! Instead of being tight, mine feels loose. There is no way I would drive mine in the wet over about 70kph. Even this is prolly pushing it. Steve >>>eg. the more positive caster (taken to an extreme example) the >>>tyres/wheels [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >Yes - I feel your pain and fear - especially since yours is new! Was new...sold it, too many faults. >Instead of being tight, mine feels loose. >There is no way I would drive mine in the wet over about 70kph. >Even this is prolly pushing it. Good luck with it. >Steve OzOne of the three twins I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace. > > Atec is quite correct here - the castor is out. Solution is to drop the > > front or raise the back as castor is not adjust able on this Commodore. [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Any ideas where this theory is incorrect? I think you mean camber when you mention the tyre being on its edge. There are 3 main adjustments with a 4th: steering pin included angle, which I've not tried to suss. In the Valiants Ive had you could easily adjust Camber (road wheel angle to the road) eg VWs had a fair bit of negative camber on the rear wheels when accelerating. I always adjusted for zero camber. The rule is, the car will pull towards the front wheel with the most +ve camber. Castor is how far ahead of the steering pin the road wheel centre is. eg bicycle front wheels have a lot of +ve castor courtesy of the front forks being ahead of the steering pin. The car will pull to the front wheel with the least castor. Its adjusted last to compensate for road-crown effect which makes the car run towards the gutter. It also directly effects steering wheel centreing. You need to make sure any adjustment is measured with the car on the road, for as you noted, the suspension will drop to it extremity, causing things like camber to go positive. Jason >>>> You said they were gas struts? So they are pressurised right? How >>>> easy were they to push down? Fairly hard I would imagine so if you use [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > Atec is quite correct here - the castor is out. Solution is to drop the > front or raise the back as castor is not adjust able on this Commodore. That's wrong, you can adjust castor to a degree by using castor washers. 7cm height difference isn't more then a castor adjustment. > Also you need a *reputable* wheel alignment specialist to do the set up. > *IF* you have scrubbed the tyres out in 2 weeks there is another issue > here. Castor will not cause tyre wear BUT will do exactly what you have > described. That is true, but there other things that can cause it and it usually revolves around incorrect assembly or bent steering components. > BTW go back to where you bought the struts and see if there is another set > there. Take them out of the box and see how much weight you have to apply > to them to get tem to compress. This is how much upward force you are now > exerting on the front of your car. These things are great for rally cars > but you should have refitted OE struts. Oil struts are the way to go, agreed. > Atec is quite correct here - the castor is out. Solution is to drop the > front or raise the back as castor is not adjust able on this Commodore. Fit a pair of aftermarket top bearings and then adjust the caster. :-) SignatureAthol <http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000 I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss. >> Atec is quite correct here - the castor is out. Solution is to drop the >> front or raise the back as castor is not adjust able on this Commodore. > >Fit a pair of aftermarket top bearings and then adjust the caster. :-) Maybe if he gets the ride height fixed first???? OzOne of the three twins I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace. >> Atec is quite correct here - the castor is out. Solution is to drop the >> front or raise the back as castor is not adjust able on this Commodore. > > Fit a pair of aftermarket top bearings and then adjust the caster. :-) solves the problem sort of , but not the right way imho. >>> Atec is quite correct here - the castor is out. Solution is to drop the >>> front or raise the back as castor is not adjust able on this Commodore. >> Fit a pair of aftermarket top bearings and then adjust the caster. :-) > solves the problem sort of , but not the right way imho. Of course not. Working out what has been assembled wrong is obviously the most important thing to do. SignatureAthol <http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000 I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss. >>>> Atec is quite correct here - the castor is out. Solution is to drop >>>> the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Of course not. Working out what has been assembled wrong is obviously > the most important thing to do. Thanks Athol, Agreed - I wish I knew what or even if something has been assembled incorrectly. We were very careful in marking positions of components with whiteout and the whole strut was removed with stub axel and control arm/wishbone intact to allow easier removal of the ball joint. Bushes were removed using a heavy duty press and a solid aluminium jig to ensure no distortion of the control arm. Funny though, my mechanic said that the drivers side spring seat was out 180deg. (I reckon it was already that way) I had them "fix" it - made no difference whatsoever! - In fact probably worse. Can't see what I could have done wrong - but that doesn't mean to say I can see! Steve. > Fit a pair of aftermarket top bearings and then adjust the caster. :-) Yes - that's what my mechanic eventually suggested. Unfortunately that would cost me almost as much as I bought the car for! Might be better off fitting the correct shocks, and then the ride height would be correct. Looks ridiculous like it is. Just wondering if this would affect it - Should the shocks have been primed before installation? Steve. >> Fit a pair of aftermarket top bearings and then adjust the caster. :-) > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Just wondering if this would affect it - Should the shocks have been primed > before installation? All shocks should be primed when being fitted. How long ago did you do this work? Lots of cars will gain a bit of ride height (not 70mm, maybe 20mm) when you fit new shocks especially if the old ones were rooted but they usually settle down again within a short time. Daryl >>> Fit a pair of aftermarket top bearings and then adjust the caster. :-) >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Daryl Thanks Daryl, I fitted them on ANZAC Day - so that's about 3 months ago - so longer than I originally thought! Wasn't too bad until 3 weeks ago when I got pedders to do a safety check & wheel alignment. And then my local mechanic had a go twice - made things worse. Did a bounce check tonight because I noticed it looked even higher!! Bounced ok then got harder (which is normal I think) but then got very hard indeed. No wonder I can feel every bump. It's almost like they're heavy duty ones. It wasn't until tonight after doing some reading on Monroes website that I realised that perhaps they should have been primed (I thought priming only related to oil filled strut types) The t-gas ones I got had no info in the pack so I assumed, take of the retainers & fit. What would be the effects be not priming them? Steve >>>> Fit a pair of aftermarket top bearings and then adjust the caster. :-) >>>> [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > pack so I assumed, take of the retainers & fit. > What would be the effects be not priming them? With oil type shocks its to make sure there is no air in the hydraulics which can cause a knocking sound. There is still fluid in gas shocks and the gas is there to stop air getting into the oil so I don't think its as important to prime gas shocks as it is with oil but IMO its still a good idea to cycle the shocks fully up and down a few times before fitting them to make sure they are ok. Daryl >There is still fluid in gas shocks and the gas is there to stop air >getting into the oil so I don't think its as important to prime gas [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Daryl Not quite right with the gas shock Daryl. The gas is there above another piston. The gas acts like another 'damper' to 'soften' the movement of fluid thru the valves which will lessen the chances of the fluid foaming. http://www.monroe-eu.com/monroe/gas_shock.htm OzOne of the three twins I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace. >> There is still fluid in gas shocks and the gas is there to stop air >> getting into the oil so I don't think its as important to prime gas [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Not quite right with the gas shock Daryl. True but it was enough to give the general idea without going into great detail which anyone could find without looking too hard. daryl >>> There is still fluid in gas shocks and the gas is there to stop air >>> getting into the oil so I don't think its as important to prime gas [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >daryl Yup. OzOne of the three twins I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace. >>>> There is still fluid in gas shocks and the gas is there to stop air >>>> getting into the oil so I don't think its as important to prime gas [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Yup. Thanks Guys, I really doubt though if not priming the shocks has caused the excessive ride height - I reckon I was given something like heavy duty 4WD ones in the wrong pack!!, cause they are very hard indeed to press down on. Steve. >>>>> There is still fluid in gas shocks and the gas is there to stop air >>>>> getting into the oil so I don't think its as important to prime gas [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > excessive ride height - I reckon I was given something like heavy duty 4WD > ones in the wrong pack!!, cause they are very hard indeed to press down on. It does sound like you have either the wrong shocks inserts or they are faulty. When you find the receipt you should be able to check the part numbers against the recommended part number on the Monroe web site. If you still don't have any luck maybe you could contact Monroe directly. Daryl >> Thanks Guys, I really doubt though if not priming the shocks has caused >> the excessive ride height - I reckon I was given something like heavy >> duty 4WD ones in the wrong pack!!, cause they are very hard indeed to >> press down on. > Daryl Walford wrote: > It does sound like you have either the wrong shocks inserts or they are [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Daryl Yeah ta, Just found the receipt! Yippee! The part number on the receipt is the same as the recommended shocks on monroes website! So now all I have to do is find the part number on the shock itself. Hopefully without having to get it out! Steve. >>> Thanks Guys, I really doubt though if not priming the shocks has caused >>> the excessive ride height - I reckon I was given something like heavy [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Steve. I wonder if a claim (from the supplier)could be made for ALL costs associated with and incurred by being supplied with the WRONG part, if Steve can proove this to be the case, that is. Maybe 'aus.legal' can help. Mark : >>> Thanks Guys, I really doubt though if not priming the shocks has caused : >>> the excessive ride height - I reckon I was given something like heavy [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] : : Mark I seriously doubt it unless fitted by a recognised mechanic and you could claim negligence that the bloke failed to correctly match the part BEFORE it was installed. (As you should have done) > : >>> Thanks Guys, I really doubt though if not priming the shocks has > caused [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > bloke failed to correctly match the part BEFORE it was installed. (As you > should have done) just show them the box they came in, you would reasonably expect the parts inside the box to match the described contents of the box, push hard enough at the dealer who sold them to you (If indeed they are the wrong shocks in the right box ) mention your States version of the Department of Fair Trading, mention Solicitors and you might just be surprised with the outcome. Signature"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color." Don Hirschberg >just show them the box they came in, you would reasonably expect the parts >inside the box to match the described contents of the box, push hard enough >at the dealer who sold them to you (If indeed they are the wrong shocks in >the right box ) mention your States version of the Department of Fair >Trading, mention Solicitors and you might just be surprised with the >outcome. It'll probably go along the lines of. "It's your responsibility to check that the parts are correct before installing them" OzOne of the three twins I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace. >> : >>> Thanks Guys, I really doubt though if not priming the shocks has >> caused [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > Fair Trading, mention Solicitors and you might just be surprised with the > outcome. Unfortunately I don't have the box they came in anymore, but I have the receipt. The receipt shows the the part number. If I was to remove them (and they were the wrong ones) and take them back with the receipt, I think they have an obligation to exchange them for the correct part. Afterall, I paid for something I didn't get!. Whether they have an obligation to pay for the removal, AND re-fit of the correct ones AND wheel alignment AND new front tyres . . . that's probably never going to happen. Unfortunately that may be the end result - bit unfair really considering if I had been given the correct part everything (most likely) would be sweet. . . . of course this all relies on IF they are the correct ones. Steve. >Unfortunately I don't have the box they came in anymore, but I have the >receipt. >The receipt shows the the part number. Best of luck then... without the original packaging I wouldn't particularly fancy your chances of getting a refund (or a replacement). Might be a good time to read the fine print regarding returns. SignatureJohn H >>Unfortunately I don't have the box they came in anymore, but I have the >>receipt. >>The receipt shows the the part number. > John_H wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Might be a good time to read the fine print regarding returns. Yeah, might be the case. Neverthless, I would have thought the receipt should be enough. Also, there is no return policy details on the receipt. What would their angle be? - that they didn't sell them to me! There are other items on the receipt that I do have the packaging for. I bought quite a lot of stuff from them - wheel bearing kit, bushes, tranny fluid etc... Maybe it will be a matter of "good will" whether they want to replace them. All up, the $200 I paid for them is jack sh.t compared to what it has cost me, and will cost me to remove & replace them - I could always sell them 2nd hand (3 mnths old) on ebay I guess. Small comfort! steve. >>> Unfortunately I don't have the box they came in anymore, but I have the >>> receipt. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Neverthless, I would have thought the receipt should be enough. > Also, there is no return policy details on the receipt. Which is legally ineffective if the item is defective or not in accordance with the description - as for example (and if it turns out to be the case) where the shocks actually supplied were not the shocks ordered and documented as having been supplied. > What would their angle be? - that they didn't sell them to me! > There are other items on the receipt that I do have the packaging for. > I bought quite a lot of stuff from them - wheel bearing kit, bushes, tranny > fluid etc... They could claim that they did indeed sell you some shocks, but the ones in question are not the ones they sold you. However, you would be claiming that they are. If it came to court (small claims) it would be your word against theirs. You're in a much better position to say that they made a mistake than they are to say that they didn't. > Maybe it will be a matter of "good will" whether they want to replace them. > > All up, the $200 I paid for them is jack sh.t compared to what it has cost > me, and will cost me to remove & replace them - I could always sell them 2nd > hand (3 mnths old) on ebay I guess. > Small comfort! I think you would have a good case for recovering the cost of removing them and replacing them. Recovering the cost of damage to tyres etc. is a bit iffy. Sylvia. >>>> Unfortunately I don't have the box they came in anymore, but I have the >>>> receipt. [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > I think you would have a good case for recovering the cost of removing > them and replacing them. Nah , any competent person would check they were the correct item , the mechanic installed them on instruction so has no liability. As usual you are wrong . Recovering the cost of damage to tyres etc. is > a bit iffy. > > Sylvia. > Nah , any competent person would check they were the correct item , the > mechanic installed them on instruction so has no liability. You seem to have contradicted yourself there. At least, unless you're suggesting that the mechanic who installed them wasn't competent. Sylvia. >> Sylvia wrote: >> I think you would have a good case for recovering the cost of removing >> them and replacing them. Thanks for your positive comments Sylvia, I'll just have to try and see how far I can get. > atec77 wrote: > Nah , any competent person would check they were the correct item. Maybe that might be true if I purchased them from 7/11 and expected that they would have the expertise to recommend and select the right shocks for my vehicle - But that's not the case. I purchased them from (let's call them Redco) and I relied upon their expertise to recommend and select a suitable replacement part. I think that's a fair enough assumption to make. Besides, they've never let me down before (eg. bearing kits, bushes etc.) and haven't seen the need to check those part numbers. I'd be interested to know how many people on this newsgroup have replaced there own shocks and checked the part number on the side to be sure, and also kept the packaging. > the mechanic installed them on instruction so has no liability. A mechanic certainly didn't install them - I DID! with the help of someone else. Good job it was too. I got it all check over by (let's call them Pudders) and they said it was a good job - so it MUST be good! Also did the front disc rotors, wheel bearings, left and right front side windows, transmission mount, heater, thermostat, fanbelt, headlight reflectors . . . Checked over by my local *reputable* mechanic and given a RWC. So I MUST have done a good job. I'm certainly not incompetent, but I'm not a mechanic, that's why I handed it over to *experienced mechanics* because I rely on them - they should know more than me - I also pay them to do their job. I have to admit though, if you were a good mechanic, experience would tell you to check part numbers before fitting - if you were good. Steve. The other option is that they are defective. What happens there? If a reputable mechanic fitted them, and a week later I came back and said they were stuffed - who would be liable? My guess is that the company that made the shockers would have to cough up for a replacement set. But what about the installation and labor costs? I'm sure the mechanic wouldn't foot the bill and I certainly shouldn't - so that would leave the manufacturer, and maybe some sort of a deal with the mechanic. Does that mean because I'm not a licensed mechanic I would have to pay? Also, I'm sure all those guys at pudders and other suspension specialists just grab the pack off the shelf and fit them - I doubt very much that they would check the part number stamped into the side. You would hope that an Aircraft Mechanic would though. $450 Car - Countless hours spent - Good job done by me and help - RWC finally - incorrect or defective part = Disaster. Anyway, I've vented my spleen enough (for now) Steve. > The other option is that they are defective. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > they were stuffed - who would be liable? My guess is that the company that > made the shockers would have to cough up for a replacement set. But what > about the installation and labor costs? Yes. If they were defective when you bought them (in the sense of not being capable of withstanding a reasonable period of proper use), then both the retailer (if any) and either the manufacturer (if in Australia) or importer (otherwise), are liable not just for the cost of the shocks, but also the cost of fitting replacements to the car. The issue with damage to the tyres etc. is again iffy. The difficulty, of course, lies in establishing that they were defective rather than the alternative which is that you installed them incorrectly, or abused them. The former could probably be addressed by getting an independent mechanic to examine the installation (ie, not the mechanic you've been using). The mechanic would have to be willing to make an affividavit about the installation, and, if necessary, to give evidence in court. The latter might be addressed merely by the observation that the rest of the suspension is still intact. You'd want your independent mechanic to take note of that. Someone may want to shout me down here, but I'd have thought that treatment that could ruin a set of shocks in a week would also leave a total wreck of a car. Sylvia. > Sylvia wrote Yes. If they were defective when you bought them (in the > sense of not being capable of withstanding a reasonable period of proper > use), then both the retailer (if any) and either the manufacturer (if in > Australia) or importer (otherwise), are liable not just for the cost of > the shocks, but also the cost of fitting replacements to the car. I'm not in the habit of car abuse. I just want to have a safe car. And I hope they are defective - easier to prone. > The difficulty, of course, lies in establishing that they were defective > rather than the alternative which is that you installed them incorrectly, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > mechanic would have to be willing to make an affividavit about the > installation, and, if necessary, to give evidence in court. Unfortunately the mechanic has mucked with the passenger side strut rotation now - so it's not the same as it was - much worse in fact than my rough alignment job - the camber on the passenger front is is now very positive on that side only - not only looks stupid but is wearing the tyre out to almost bald on one edge! It's almost as though they did it on purpose - left me with a car that I don't like to drive in the wet - not fast anyway. > The latter might be addressed merely by the observation that the rest of > the suspension is still intact. You'd want your independent mechanic to > take note of that. Pudders had already previously done a safety check - clean bill of health. >Someone may want to shout me down here, but I'd have thought that treatment >that could ruin a set of shocks in a week would also leave a total wreck of >a car. I'm sure I won't have a prob convincing a court that i'm no hoon. - done that - a long time ago. > Sylvia. Sylvia wrote: >You'd want your independent mechanic . . . Thanks Sylvia, Yes, you are right there. I need to do this asap. The recent mechanic is going to have some issues. They gave me a roadworthy bout 3 weeks ago. It aint roadworthy now! - bald front tyres - badly aligned camber - steering like sh.t. Unless of course I did all that! Frigged with the camber - raced around like a maniac making my front tyres bald. (strange that the back ones are fine - of course I've probably replaced them to conceal my misuse) All this just to get someone else to pay for my incompetent screwup on my 1982 Commodore! Yeah - Sure - that's always been my master plan! Steve. (I'm sure in my last post I said I would stop venting my spleen - oh well) >>> Sylvia wrote: >>> I think you would have a good case for recovering the cost of removing [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > they would have the expertise to recommend and select the right shocks for > my vehicle - But that's not the case. infact this will be the exact argument you will receive and a difficult one to alter or beat , after all the box was taped and you accepted it . I purchased them from (let's call them > Redco) and I relied upon their expertise to recommend and select a suitable > replacement part. I think that's a fair enough assumption to make. Besides, > they've never let me down before (eg. bearing kits, bushes etc.) and haven't > seen the need to check those part numbers. you have about the same level of expertise in parts examination as many of those serving at the counter , few of them have trade experience or training > I'd be interested to know how many people on this newsgroup have replaced > there own shocks and checked the part number on the side to be sure, and > also kept the packaging. Always >> the mechanic installed them on instruction so has no liability. > > A mechanic certainly didn't install them - I DID! with the help of someone > else. ok so my memory is bad , and you proved the argument you will receive , I wish the best of luck BUT experience tells me it's a steep hill to climb > Good job it was too. I got it all check over by (let's call them Pudders) > and they said it was a good job - so it MUST be good! [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > reflectors . . . Checked over by my local *reputable* mechanic and given a > RWC. So I MUST have done a good job. > I'm certainly not incompetent, but I'm not a mechanic, that's why I handed > it over to *experienced mechanics* because I rely on them - they should [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Steve. >>>> Thanks Guys, I really doubt though if not priming the shocks has caused >>>> the excessive ride height - I reckon I was given something like heavy [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > can proove this to be the case, that is. > Maybe 'aus.legal' can help. There may be a slim chance for a claim if it is the wrong part but there is no way of knowing that without removing them. Daryl >> You said they were gas struts? So they are pressurised right? How easy >> were they to push down? Fairly hard I would imagine so if you use that [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > You are the first person on this thread to mention that the shocks can > raise the height. A few mill, possible on a very light vehicle but for a strut to raise a side 70mm on one side it would have to be either faulty or the wrong one for the application. Loosen the suspension bush bolts, lower the car roll it back and forth and bounce it a few times, then retighten the bushes whilst it's on the ground. See how that goes. On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 07:53:51 +0800, Clocky blathered on in:aus.cars >>> You said they were gas struts? So they are pressurised right? How easy >>> were they to push down? Fairly hard I would imagine so if you use that [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > See how that goes. Go to the top of the class. (Especially as the goose used nolathane:-)) For what it's worth, I won't use that shite for anything other than shocker and stabiliser bushes. And didn't the instructions with the bushes say to tighten the bolts for the bushes with the machine at normal ride height? The rubber bushes certainly get that little hint printed on their rubbish packaging. Oh, and boat propeller shaft bushings - nolathane stuff is fine in that application. SignatureToby "On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes and I see many of them in the audience here today – our sense of patriotism is particularly strong." Barack Obama - 2008 memorial Day speech Las Cruces, New Mexico I've come to the conclusion that as far as the shocks are concerned, I was given the wrong ones. I did some more manual bounce tests again and intially they have a movement of about 70-80mm then harden up after a couple of bounces to 20-30mm at take some time to settle. This would mean very hard suspension under normal driving conditions. As I have stated earlier the package they came in had been taped up. It's almost like they are meant for a heavy 4WD!! I'll have to find the receipt and see if I can prove that Repco stuffed up. Not sure how much all this would contribute to my wheel alignment probs. One other big thing I have noticed is that the steering wheel position changes! I've noticed that after reversing, then going forward, the wheel is in a 9-3 o'clock position but will change later to 8-2 o'clock position. Tonight I reversed out of a parking bay then cruised on down the road, steering wheel was in 9-3 posi, then whoa! the car veered to the right slightly and then after I corrected, settled back to 8-2 o'clock. Perhaps something loose? Ball Joint? Dunno. What I do know is that Pudders gave it a "safety check" and never picked up any problems, nor did my local mechanic. This IS A F*CKIN DISASTER! But I will go on . . . Steve. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.