# Shocking ?



## redzone98 (Jun 10, 2004)

I have noticed that the ride in the Routan seems to have gotten really harsh...has anyone replaced their shocks yet? I have a 2009 w67k miles


----------



## cscsc (Jun 14, 2009)

I replaced the rear shocks in my '09 at about 70K. We have hauled quite a bit of heavy 'stuff' so I thought I'd be proactive and replace the rears before there was a problem. Put on Monroe Sensa-Trak shocks [about $60. from Amazon]. The old shocks were quite soft, but not completely shot. Didn't notice any big difference in the ride or handling, but there probably is some improvement. Overall, the van rides beautifully. [wish I had the tow pkg with the Nivomats like on my old van, but they are EXPENSIVE].


----------



## redzone98 (Jun 10, 2004)

I think the ride quality problem is being compounded by my tires. I have some Michelin energys on there, they have some good tread, but they are dry rotted pretty bad.
What tires are on your van, and what is the age on them?


----------



## cscsc (Jun 14, 2009)

I replaced the original Bridgestones with Michelin Energy A/S tires at 50K. I chose these because they are now the original equipment tire on the Routan, and I like Michelins. After about 20K, no problems - they ride well, are quiet and are wearing well.

I will say that the Bridgestone Turanza that was OEM gave me the most mileage of any OEM tire I've had. Usually, they are toast at 20-25K

That's my 2 cents.


----------



## redzone98 (Jun 10, 2004)

cscsc said:


> I replaced the original Bridgestones with Michelin Energy A/S tires at 50K. I chose these because they are now the original equipment tire on the Routan, and I like Michelins. After about 20K, no problems - they ride well, are quiet and are wearing well.
> 
> I will say that the Bridgestone Turanza that was OEM gave me the most mileage of any OEM tire I've had. Usually, they are toast at 20-25K
> 
> That's my 2 cents.


yea. i have the same Energy a/S's but they have nearly 40K on them. and living in the salt lands of SNJ... i think they are toast.


----------



## Zambee500 (Jun 23, 2011)

I went with the Yokohama YK580 when it was time to replace them, but that tire model is only available at Discount Tire and (DiscountTireDirect.com). They are on-par with the Michelin Energy, including on price. But last summer the price difference was closer to $10/tire higher for the Michelins and the Yokohamas also had a $100 Visa rebate card attached to it. Came out nearly 25% cheaper for similar rated tires. Similar warranties (60k miles on Yokohama and 65k miles on Michelin Energy) and both are LRR. The Yokohamas have slightly better speed and heat ratings, which are important down South. That seemed like a bonus.

Anyway, I like the tires quite a bit. Seem quieter and better performance. But to be honest the OEM Bridgestones were so terrible that perhaps anything would seem like giant leaps of improvement.


----------



## redzone98 (Jun 10, 2004)

Zambee500 said:


> But to be honest the OEM Bridgestones were so terrible that perhaps anything would seem like giant leaps of improvement.


have to agree, my OEMs lasted 28K miles, before i trashed em.


----------



## 58kafer (Jun 27, 2007)

We're at 66K and our van still rides nice, mind you we have the nivomat rear shocks and I don't notice any "bounce" in the front struts. I used our Turanzas up to I think 45K-47K??? I then put on Yokohama Avid Ascend tires and absolutely LOVE the ride, super quite, firm going into the turns quickly (no roll). So around 20K on them and they still look brand new where the Turanzas were showing wear already but after 30K the Turanzas hit a wall and didn't wear that fast. If not for winter coming I would have ran the Turanzas until 55K, they were still the longest lasting OEM tire I ever had, and honestly I thought they were a half decent tire in rain and snow. I'd buy these Yoko's again in a heart beat.


----------



## redzone98 (Jun 10, 2004)

*NEW KYBs*

I had some free time to put on my new rear shocks. Pretty Easy job, no real special tools or procedures.

I need to say... Oh MY GOD! what a Unbelievable difference! The OEM shocks that i pulled out were very very hard to compress. I woould almost consider them siezed. 

When driving around, the bumps are a solid 'thud' in the rear, not like before which would bang and rattle the van.

I still need to replace the front Struts. I notice a distinctive difference in the noise of the front vs the rear.


so, I would say, Def replace the shocks and struts at 50K miles to keep the van riding like New.


----------



## Steveaut (Sep 16, 2010)

I have 68k now, 2010 SEL. I have not replaced the shocks. They are not mushy. If I understand correctly, as a shock wears it becomes weaker and more soft, not hard. Is that correct? Mine are not soft. Seem okay to me. 

As far as tires go, my wife put on new Michelin Defender - XT or something like that. I definitely prefer Michelin tires. These came with a 90,000 mile warranty; which is crazy long for a tire. The stock tires went to about 45k (Turanza). These Michelins ride well and wear is good so far. The catch to these tires I discovered, might be that they are not the best for snow. I am thinking that's the tradeoff for getting a harder material tire that will go longer. 

My wife had to get new tires for my Jetta at the same time and she went with Michelin on that as well. I have to tell you a funny story, but also ask for some thoughts on any damage that might be done. So my wife had the new tires put on and at some point last summer the tire light came on. So my son knew that it meant a tire was low. Which on the Jetta it tells you which tire is low. He took the tire gauge and went and checked the tires. Saw that one was low. His definition was it didn't max out the tire gauge. So he proceeded to fill all the tires to 100psi. 

As soon as I got home I discovered the car was riding really rough. I kept trying to figure out what the problem was. I don't know why I never thought about the tire pressure. I checked it and it's 100psi. Lowered the pressure back to 34psi and it rides beautifully again. So my first advice, ensure the tire pressure is at the recommended level.

Does anyone have any thoughts on potential damage to the tires?


----------



## redzone98 (Jun 10, 2004)

Steveaut said:


> He took the tire gauge and went and checked the tires. Saw that one was low. His definition was it didn't max out the tire gauge. So he proceeded to fill all the tires to 100psi.
> ?


wow, so people like this guy is why there are warning labels on EVERYTHING !


as far as this shock topic....

what is a "good" ride for one person will not be a "good" ride for someone else. so this entire thread is up for different interpretation. What a shock is designed to do is dampen movements of the suspension. when a shock fails it can become soft or hard, depending on the type of failure.


----------



## Steveaut (Sep 16, 2010)

redzone98 said:


> wow, so people like this guy is why there are warning labels on EVERYTHING !
> 
> 
> as far as this shock topic....
> ...


Really, I had no idea that's why there are labels on EVERYTHING. A little dramatic I would say. A kid that airs up tires too much is a jump of the imagination. Has anyone experienced or have knowledge of any long term issues with over inflation. My son missed the labels. 

You mentioned above that your stock shocks were very hard to compress. I have had new shocks that are very hard to compress. Is it possible you misinterpreted a normally stiff shock as a failure? Were they the NIVOMAT (sic) - tow package shocks? I would be curious to know what that new shock's operational characteristics were when new. Maybe they come failure stiff? 

Anyway, I don't agree that this entire thread is up for different interpretation. All of our initial products are identical and the rate at which failures occur (degradation in ride quality) will be quite similar. Sharing failure types, mileage and experience with optional replacement products is useful and will lend to objective decision making. That said, I can't say I have ever had a shock go bad causing the ride to go hard. I have only ever experienced soft riding shocks and relied upon that as an indicator for replacement.

Those that have had a shock failure, can you share what type of failure (soft or hard) and what you went with in terms of replacement. I would be curious as to how you compare the ride quality with the factory experience. 

Thanks.


----------



## redzone98 (Jun 10, 2004)

Steveaut said:


> Were they the NIVOMAT (sic) - tow package shocks?
> .


No.




Steveaut said:


> All of our initial products are identical and the rate at which failures occur (degradation in ride quality) will be quite similar.


Not true. A shock that is driven under hard conditions (load, road type, Temp) will degrade differently than others


----------



## routan2010se (Jun 17, 2013)

redzone98 said:


> wow, so people like this guy is why there are warning labels on EVERYTHING !
> 
> 
> as far as this shock topic....
> ...


I am surprised the tire didn't blow!

The SO had a slow leak and would normally fill it herself, but for whatever reason on a fillup she asked the guy to do it. She told him 29psi or whatever but he said no, the sidewall says max PSI 49 and proceeded to insist it be filled to that level. She said whatever, let him do it and then let the air out later.

So warning labels still don't help


----------

