And that is the part that is beside the point.

The failure mode is that the strut can't control tire bounce anymore, just
as the failure point of a shock is that it can't control tire bounce. The
fact that the suspension is the strut is beside the point, Captain.






"L.W. (ßill) Hughes III" > wrote in message
...
> Thank you. This is the part I believed you did realize, and keep
> blowing off: "The strut
> also is a major suspension component."
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> http://www.billhughes.com/
>
> Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >
> > When the struts fail, the affect is identical to the failure of a shock.
The
> > resulting tire wear looks a certain way, and it looks the same way - for
all
> > practical purposes - regardless of whether the car is fitted with shocks
or
> > struts.
> >
> > You are talking about the tires falling off the car, I am talking about
the
> > tires bouncing. Bouncing happens with shocks or struts. Falling off
never
> > happens.
> >
> > The question was, (paraphrasing here) "Why are my tires worn out and the
> > struts are to blame?" I answered that question, and included the
reference
> > to shocks because for some strange reason some people grasp the job of a
> > shock but fail to grasp the idea that a strut does the same thing. The
strut
> > also is a major suspension component, but the quality of a strut that
> > affects tire wear is the quality that it shares with a shock, and the
> > suspension component HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS.
> >
> > Thanks again, Captain Beside the Point.