If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Hey Perce - what did you do Suspension parts for 300M withPerformance Handling Package?
You might find this interesting:
http://www.dodgeintrepid.net/showthr...=186735&page=7 Starting around post 99. I think I have the clunking problem - probably don't need a new mount. I can't figure out from reading that (and the thread on 300mclub) if the washer fix is for the shock absorber rod/nut, or for one (or more) of the upper strut mounting studs. http://300mclub.org/forums/viewtopic...807&start=1350 And then there's this: http://www.toyotanation.com/forum/10...que-issue.html The shock rod needs to be seated - is it square? I'm going to have to check this rod nut tommorrow. |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Hey Perce - what did you do Suspension parts for 300M withPerformance Handling Package?
On 12/26/2014 11:23 PM, MoPar Man wrote:
> You might find this interesting: > > http://www.dodgeintrepid.net/showthr...=186735&page=7 > > Starting around post 99. > > I think I have the clunking problem - probably don't need a new mount. > > I can't figure out from reading that (and the thread on 300mclub) if the > washer fix is for the shock absorber rod/nut, or for one (or more) of > the upper strut mounting studs. > > http://300mclub.org/forums/viewtopic...807&start=1350 I think they're referring to the shock absorber rod. > And then there's this: > > http://www.toyotanation.com/forum/10...que-issue.html > > The shock rod needs to be seated - is it square? > > I'm going to have to check this rod nut tommorrow. If I understood correctly, the reports on the 300Mclub forum were not just concerning noise but claimed that the whole assembly was shot after a comparatively short time. And if the OEM LH and RH mounts are different (and presumably for some good reason), why do the after-market quick-strut assemblies use identical ones left and right? Perce |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Hey Perce - what did you do Suspension parts for 300M withPerformance Handling Package?
On 12/26/2014 10:32 PM, MoPar Man wrote:
>>> Can the plastic dust boot be separated from the bearing? >> >> I used the new boots that came with the Moog strut assemblies. > > OK. > > So now that I've taken apart the original left strut, I can list the > part numbers for all parts. The dust boot is in great shape (no cuts or > scratches). > >>> If WerMoPar gave you a P/N for the bearings - what are they? >> >> Bearing and Seat: 68140264AA. The same both sides. The boots >> are separate. > > The only thing that looks like a P/N on the seat (the big black plastic > part) is 04782016. > > Throwing that into google gives many pages like this one: > > http://www.moparpartsoverstock.com/p...8140264AA.html > > Where they specifically give this: > > ---------------------------------- > Stock Code 68140264AA;04782016 > ---------------------------------- > > So I have no idea what "68140264AA" is for, or if it's interchangeable > for 04782016. I didn't look at number(s) on the seats. Presumably the seats and bearing assemblies do have their own individual part numbers but are sold only together as a set. >> If you enter the VIN at wermopar.com, it should show you the >> correct part numbers for everything. > > I'll give that a try. > > Just for the record, here's what my P/N's a > > Refering to Figure 64 on page 2-35 of the service manual, from top to > bottom: > > Part 9 (Upper mount) - 04782019AB Black > - 04782018AB White 99201 > Part 1 (seat and bearing) > - FAG RG 559342 SAE PASS GF33 2-2 > - 04782016 Time-stamp wheel (see below) > Part 8 (upper spring isolator) - 4782233AA (foam) > Part 2 (dust shield) - 04782235AA SAE TEEE > Part 3 (cup) - 04782238AB 11 SAE PASS FAG 559374 CANADA > - plastic cup with large metal washer in bottom > Part 6 (jounce bumper) - 4782017 77484 BASF 31 (foam) > > Time stamp wheel: looks like clock face with 99 in the center surrounded > by 12 sectors, with 6 of the sectors having a dimple (or 2 dimples) > stamped into them. Possibly indicating the part was made in June 1999? > > I am really impressed with the durability of the high-density foam upper > spring isolator. I wouldn't have thought that a material like that > would have stood up over time to the forces applied to it without > eventually crumbling. I could clean away the grease and dig out some of > the rusted crust that came off the spring, and it would look almost new. I don't recall how the upper spring isolators looked, but the lower ones were definitely shot. > And this is something I don't get: Correct me if I'm wrong, but the > foam spring isolators and the plastic seat and the rather skimpy-looking > bearing races (and the tiny bearings!) - all those parts are basically > holding half the weight of the front of the car - and god knows how much > additional force when the car is manouvering, breaking or hitting pot > holes? > > I can't believe that the skimpy-looking bearing races (and the tiny > bearings - about 2 or 3 dozen of them, maybe a tad larger than 1/8" > diameter) are durable enough to be exposed to what - a thousand pounds > of force at rest? So each ball supports a comparatively small load. > Did you get a new seat/bearing assembly? What holds the upper and lower > bearing races together? (mine can just be separated by hand with nothing > to hold them together). I replaced both seat/bearing assemblies. Mine came apart too. I never really thought about what keeps them together once they're installed. >>> Do you know if the shock absorbers are "gas charged"? In other >>> words, will they have a tendency to extend if not restrained by >>> a wire? >> >> On the one I cut to disassemble, the shaft self-retracted into the >> body of the strut. > > Hmmm. > > With my original, with a light amount of force I can push the shaft into > the strut body all the way by hand, but when I let go it will naturally > extend out slowly about 6-8 inches over about a minute. So maybe there's a difference between the OEM and the Monroe ones. Perce |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Hey Perce - what did you do Suspension parts for 300M withPerformance Handling Package?
"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote:
> >>> Do you know if the shock absorbers are "gas charged"? In other > >>> words, will they have a tendency to extend if not restrained by > >>> a wire? > >> > >> On the one I cut to disassemble, the shaft self-retracted into > >> the body of the strut. > > > > Hmmm. > > > > With my original, with a light amount of force I can push the > > shaft into the strut body all the way by hand, but when I let > > go it will naturally extend out slowly about 6-8 inches over > > about a minute. > > So maybe there's a difference between the OEM and the Monroe ones. Ok, so what I've done today: Took a 13/16" Craftsman sparkplug socket and drilled out the internal 3/8" hole to 1/2". The hole is formed by a short internal shoulder, but still it was a real bear on my drill press and I had to take it in 1/32" drill-size steps. This allowed a 3/8" extension to pass through the socket. A 10 mm 6-sided 3/8" drive socket fits on the shock-rod, the 13/16" sparkplug socket on the rod nut, a short 3/8" drive extension through the sparkplug socket, and a wrench on the sparkplug socket. Even though I put the left Monroe quickstrut on exactly 2 years ago, I was surprised by the amount of corrosion on the shock-rod threads. But with penetrating oil and some effort I managed to free the strut nut and work the threads with the nut to clean them. All this with the wheels on the ground. I didn't want to take the nut off completely - because of fear that the rod might withdraw itself down into the strut and I'd be really screwed. But looking at the height of the rod with the nut almost off vs fully tight, the rod height doesn't change - so it doesn't have any tendency to get pulled down. If true, then both the Monroe shock and the factory original shock have some sort of gas-charge (or a weak internal spring?) that gives them a natural tendency to extend the rod. With the nut fully tight (as tight as I can make it, with no regard to a torque wrench), I can turn the rod/nut pretty easily with the 10 mm socket/wrench on the rod. Can turn it 360 degrees, multiple times. So if the rod has any seating flats on it (like the Toyota problem) then they're not making contact with anything. But nobody on the chrysler/intrepid forums mentioned anything about the monroe strut rod needing to be rotated into a seated position. But still, the fact that I can rotate the tightened rod without much effort - should I be able to? Is that where the extra washer comes in - because they didn't put enough threads on the rod? Looking down into the upper strut mount on the monroe I can see the 2 ears or flanges as mentioned in the service manual. Regarding the early failure of the Monroe quick struts as mentioned in the forums - those seem to have happened in 2010, and Monroe seems to have known or learned about the failure and made some correction to them. I installed my left quick strut in Dec 2012, and the right in Dec 2013. So presumably my struts will not have the same issue that caused the problems in 2010. Now whether they have this issue with the rod nut / washer, if that is indeed a systemic issue - I don't know. I'd just like to know if you're supposed to be able to turn the rod (by grabbing the rod nut) in a normal situation. A very small amount of play between the shoulder on the strut and the lower surface of the strut mount would easily cause the knocking that I've been feeling from that side since I put the strut on. I think by tonight I'm gonna have an extra washer under that nut... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
PICS: NEW Performance Appearance Package 4 Dodge Challenger | JLA | Dodge | 0 | January 5th 10 01:51 AM |
325xi sport package, suspension? | kpb | BMW | 6 | October 20th 07 08:44 PM |
Performance Auto Parts at Mach Performance Parts Inc. | [email protected] | Ford Mustang | 0 | July 19th 06 11:40 AM |
Bad Gas Mileage with 2005 330i BMW with Performance Package | Kent Lewis | BMW | 26 | December 10th 04 06:14 PM |
Used 330i with Performance Package vs. Sport Package | GRL | BMW | 9 | November 21st 04 09:22 PM |