[s-cars] shocks

[Vincent Frégeac]

Taka,

That's why I precised me pushing on it was not the most precise tool. But a
better assesment of the shock state was the ride quality and handling, which
was better with the 158Kmiles OE shock than with the new TurboGas. Of
course, a mismatched shock is not either a good comparison but, IME, a dead
shock is much worse than a mismatched shock.



Vincent.


2007/3/30, Taka Mizutani <t44tqtro at gmail.com>:
>
> Vincent-
> No offense, but your pushing on the shock is not an accurate measure of
> damping ability.
>
> The only way to really know if the shock is working properly is to take a
> shock dyno curve
> of the shock when it was brand-new and compare that to the dyno curve of
> the shock after being
> used for 158k miles.
>
> Taka
>
>
> On 3/30/07, Vincent Frégeac <s.sikss at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Other Audi's shocks doesn't last as long as urS', by far. On my '86 CGT,
> > the
> > first shock died around 90Kmiles and there was no doubt it was dead,
> > either
> > when on the car or out. On my '90 90Q20V, they lasted - or I endured
> > them -
> > a bit longer but when they went out, with around 110Kmiles on them, both
> > were obviously dead.
> >
> > But the shocks I took out of the S-Bitch, with 158K potholed miles,
> > still
> > had a lot of damping, though me pushing on the shocks is not the most
> > precise measurement tool, and the car was finally more confortable with
> > a
> > better handling with the 158Kmiles old shocks than with the new
> > TurboGas.
> > Too bad I throw the original shocks away before test driving the new
> > ones.
> > Now, the shocks may have been changed by the P.O. but, as the car had
> > only
> > 70Kmiles when I bought it, there's little chance shocks were not
> > original.
> >
> >