A little tired I'd say!

Simon Blythe

Zorg Guru (I)
Joined
Nov 29, 2016
Points
95
Location
South Birmingham
I thought the rear shockes were a little tired!!

image.webp
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Exhausted by the looks of things! Just extra weight being carried whilst not performing their intended function. :woot:
 
The time is nigh sean when your going to have to stop doing cosmetics and start some mechanical :whistle:
Still more cosmetics to do yet mate :), plenty of time to do the mechanical stuff before the cruises begin, I will be doing some mechanical when santa brings me an induction kit, =)) does that count !!!
 
Still more cosmetics to do yet mate :), plenty of time to do the mechanical stuff before the cruises begin, I will be doing some mechanical when santa brings me an induction kit, =)) does that count !!!
Yerp!! :party:
 
Can't quite make the label out but I would say those are the originals from the factory. If they look like the picture below they likely are! Not as uncommon to find the original rear shocks on a Z3 as you'd think.

upload_2016-12-20_16-45-51.webp
 
Changed mine last month and they were original.
 
Might were the same until the guys in the Zed Shed replaced them.
 
Mines getting done Saturday (hopefully) plus new springs :)
 
Sad thing is you can't do the "bounce" test on shockers on an M.O.T. anymore. Not part of the test procedure???

Tony.
 
Sad thing is you can't do the "bounce" test on shockers on an M.O.T. anymore. Not part of the test procedure???

Tony.
Thats because its not a consistent test tony
For example you could have a tester 6ft 6 goes to the gym every day and a tester 5ft 3 slim built no way both guys can bounce a shock at same load so a non consistent test so dropped from fail list .
In a way agree with your questions marks tony as a lot of modern cars dont leak oil due to gas filled so all but impossible to fail a knackered gas shock which in my opinion should not be the case
 
There is a side issue to this that a lot of people look at the MOT to tell them whats needed maintenance wise to their car. Some of the time it's blind ignorance that things may actually need replacing every now and then. It's the perception that an MOT is a "clean bill of health" on your car, but isn't at all. This is why we get 20 year old cars running around on original shock absorbers.
 
Doesn't matter how big a man is Steve if you fully compress a shocker you watch the rebound.
Just another of the absurdities of the testing scheme IMO. When you talk about consistency most of it is down to personal opinions after all, based on tester's knowledge and experience.

Tony.
 
There is a side issue to this that a lot of people look at the MOT to tell them whats needed maintenance wise to their car. Some of the time it's blind ignorance that things may actually need replacing every now and then. It's the perception that an MOT is a "clean bill of health" on your car, but isn't at all. This is why we get 20 year old cars running around on original shock absorbers.
That is also down to the fact the test is a " no strip/dismantle test, just a visual inspection.

Tony.
 
Gaz is right unfortunately a lot of people wait till mot time if it fails fix the fails then unless something breaks in between nothing gets fixed till following year.
But at the end of the day an mot is a basic road safety check.
Tony to address the points you made on a lot of larger modern cars you have no chance of fully compressing suspension enough due to spring rates multi link etc various ones of the mot sites i work in are atl and when you put something like an audi a6 s line on the shaker plates it barely moves compared to maybe a hyundai i10.
Again unfortunately a strip down style mot would then take considerably more time so then a much larger cost would be involved and also opens up a whole minefield of potential damage being caused in the dismantle so think in a lot of ways dvsa hand are tied by various factors.
Sorry @Simon Blythe for dragging your thread slightly off topic :whistle:
 
Back
Top