Camber Hell: Monroe struts poor quality

'89 Mustang 5.0 ...

I went to replace the front struts and got the standard
replacement parts (Monroe brand, blue color) from Advance.
To fit my spindles I had to use the (included) 2 spacer plates
between the strut mount and spindle. This should have been
the first redflag, that and the fact that the part seems to be
intended to fit everything from '78 Fairmont/Zephyr up through
T-Birds, Cougars, LTDs, Marquis, Continentals, MarkVII,
in addition to the Mustang/Capris from '79 on.

After the mounting bolts were installed there is a very
sloppy (lack of) fit between the spindle and strut.
I can't believe this setup will hold alignment (camber).

Anyone else see such poor fit on struts ?

The counter guy said as long as it's torqued properly
it will be safe, and that a (even partially) installed part
can't be refunded. Even the more expensive Monroe
part uses the spacer adapters.


rd

In article .com>, RD Jones wrote:
> '89 Mustang 5.0 ...
>
> I went to replace the front struts and got the standard
> replacement parts (Monroe brand, blue color) from Advance.
> To fit my spindles I had to use the (included) 2 spacer plates
> between the strut mount and spindle. This should have been
> the first redflag, that and the fact that the part seems to be
> intended to fit everything from '78 Fairmont/Zephyr up through
> T-Birds, Cougars, LTDs, Marquis, Continentals, MarkVII,
> in addition to the Mustang/Capris from '79 on.

> After the mounting bolts were installed there is a very
> sloppy (lack of) fit between the spindle and strut.
> I can't believe this setup will hold alignment (camber).

> Anyone else see such poor fit on struts ?

> The counter guy said as long as it's torqued properly
> it will be safe, and that a (even partially) installed part
> can't be refunded. Even the more expensive Monroe
> part uses the spacer adapters.

I put bilsteins on my car and my dad's mustang (97 & 99) and the fit was
perfect without shims or any other nonsense. I've done my car's front's
twice as the 1st pair of bilsteins wore out after about 80K miles. Didn't
need an alignment until after I had replaced the struts for the second
time and replaced the drivers side tie rod for the second time. And all
that needed to be adjusted was toe as far as I can tell.

However I've heard of some cars where slop in the bolt holes between the
spindle and strut is used to adjust camber (and caster?). So will it
work? Probably, but you probably now need to align the front end. It's
obvious that they are just using the same parts (including pieces of
the strut assemblies) for as many cars as possible since mustangs have a
tight bolt fit with adjustments made at the top of the strut with the
camber/caster plates (aftermarket or factory).

RD Jones wrote:
> '89 Mustang 5.0 ...
>
> I went to replace the front struts and got the standard
> replacement parts (Monroe brand, blue color) from Advance.
> To fit my spindles I had to use the (included) 2 spacer plates
> between the strut mount and spindle. This should have been
> the first redflag, that and the fact that the part seems to be
> intended to fit everything from '78 Fairmont/Zephyr up through
> T-Birds, Cougars, LTDs, Marquis, Continentals, MarkVII,
> in addition to the Mustang/Capris from '79 on.
>
> After the mounting bolts were installed there is a very
> sloppy (lack of) fit between the spindle and strut.
> I can't believe this setup will hold alignment (camber).
>
> Anyone else see such poor fit on struts ?
>
> The counter guy said as long as it's torqued properly
> it will be safe, and that a (even partially) installed part
> can't be refunded. Even the more expensive Monroe
> part uses the spacer adapters.
>
>
> rd
>

I installed Monroe struts on my 84 Mark VII (also a Fox chassis). The alignment was
spot on after installation. No alignment issues, but they seem to transmit a lot of
road noise into the body. I spent a little more for Gabriels on my daughters 88.
They're much better, IMHO. Ya gets what ya pays for.

> RD Jones wrote:
> > '89 Mustang 5.0 ...
> > Anyone else see such poor fit on struts ?

Tom Adkins > wrote:
> I installed Monroe struts on my 84 Mark VII (also a Fox chassis). The alignment was
> spot on after installation. No alignment issues, but they seem to transmit a lot of
> road noise into the body. I spent a little more for Gabriels on my daughters 88.
> They're much better, IMHO.

I put the same part (Monroe "blue") on the teenager's '02 V6 Mustang.
The part fit reasonably well and did not have the el-cheapo spacer
plates.

> Ya gets what ya pays for.

Yeah ... the reason for my rant.

I'm restoring the '89 on a tight budget, but if I knew the junky fit
the Monroe's would provide I would have found a better brand.
The over $100 each KYB's Advance has are probably out of my
reach for now.

rd

RD Jones wrote:
> > '89 Mustang 5.0 ...
> > Anyone else see such poor fit on struts ?

On Apr 17, 12:17 am, (Brent P)
wrote:
> I put bilsteins on my car and my dad's mustang (97 & 99) and the fit was
> perfect without shims or any other nonsense. I've done my car's front's
> twice as the 1st pair of bilsteins wore out after about 80K miles. Didn't
> need an alignment until after I had replaced the struts for the second
> time and replaced the drivers side tie rod for the second time. And all
> that needed to be adjusted was toe as far as I can tell.

The OE struts (E9ZC-BA, Made in Japan) wore out after almost 250k.
There's no way the caster will be anywhere near correct except by an
extreme miracle of coincidence.

I'm also concerned that with so much slop in the fit and the weight of
the
V8 if I hit a pothole the camber will get knocked out. Is 150-180 ft-
lbs
of torque on the spindle bolts enough to hold it ?

> However I've heard of some cars where slop in the bolt holes between the
> spindle and strut is used to adjust camber (and caster?). So will it
> work? Probably, but you probably now need to align the front end. It's
> obvious that they are just using the same parts (including pieces of
> the strut assemblies) for as many cars as possible since mustangs have a
> tight bolt fit with adjustments made at the top of the strut with the
> camber/caster plates (aftermarket or factory).

I doubt if a '78 Fairmont has as high a performance suspension as the
'special handling' suspension on the V8 Mustang. Part of the selling
point
on the late '80s car was the yearly improvements made on the
underpinnings
such as revalving the shocks (struts). I understand the need for
replacement
parts to be generic in nature, but even Monroe's better part (black)
uses the
wimpy spacer plates.
I wonder if a good used part from the Pull-A-Part yard would as good
or better
for my use.

Where should I tighten them down at ? all the way positive ?
Which way will it get knocked out under use ?
There's seriously about 10 degrees of play before being torqued down.


rd

"RD Jones" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> '89 Mustang 5.0 ...
>
> I went to replace the front struts and got the standard
> replacement parts (Monroe brand, blue color) from Advance.
> To fit my spindles I had to use the (included) 2 spacer plates
> between the strut mount and spindle. This should have been
> the first redflag, that and the fact that the part seems to be
> intended to fit everything from '78 Fairmont/Zephyr up through
> T-Birds, Cougars, LTDs, Marquis, Continentals, MarkVII,
> in addition to the Mustang/Capris from '79 on.
>
> After the mounting bolts were installed there is a very
> sloppy (lack of) fit between the spindle and strut.
> I can't believe this setup will hold alignment (camber).
>
> Anyone else see such poor fit on struts ?
>
> The counter guy said as long as it's torqued properly
> it will be safe, and that a (even partially) installed part
> can't be refunded. Even the more expensive Monroe
> part uses the spacer adapters.
>
>
> rd

My comment is concerning your last paragraph only. If the part doesnt'
properly fit, it's defective for your application. There's no way a
national chain will say otherwise if you press the issue. I've always had
very good service from Advance, and go out of my way to deal with them if I
can. Try talking to someone else, perhaps within the same store, or even up
the food chain a bit. Ask to talk to a district manager, or a customer
service line if they have one.

CJB

> "RD Jones" > wrote in message

> > '89 Mustang 5.0 ...
> > The counter guy said as long as it's torqued properly
> > it will be safe, and that a (even partially) installed part
> > can't be refunded. Even the more expensive Monroe
> > part uses the spacer adapters.

"CJB" > wrote:
> My comment is concerning your last paragraph only. If the part doesnt'
> properly fit, it's defective for your application. There's no way a
> national chain will say otherwise if you press the issue. I've always had
> very good service from Advance, and go out of my way to deal with them if I
> can. Try talking to someone else, perhaps within the same store, or even up
> the food chain a bit. Ask to talk to a district manager, or a customer
> service line if they have one.

I'll persue it further with Advance, and I've also attempted to
contact
Monroe's tech assistance dept. Nothing back yet.

Tnx,
rd

"RD Jones" > wrote

> > > '89 Mustang 5.0 ...
> > > The counter guy said as long as it's torqued properly
> > > it will be safe, and that a (even partially) installed part
> > > can't be refunded. Even the more expensive Monroe
> > > part uses the spacer adapters.
>
> "CJB" > wrote:
> > My comment is concerning your last paragraph only. If the part doesnt'
> > properly fit, it's defective for your application. There's no way a
> > national chain will say otherwise if you press the issue. I've always had
> > very good service from Advance, and go out of my way to deal with them if I
> > can. Try talking to someone else, perhaps within the same store, or even up
> > the food chain a bit. Ask to talk to a district manager, or a customer
> > service line if they have one.
>
> I'll persue it further with Advance, and I've also attempted to
> contact Monroe's tech assistance dept. Nothing back yet.

On the T-Bird boards I frequent, there's several threads about swapping
spindles and such for brake upgrades, and notations that Birds, Stangs, etc
have different mounting pads on the spindles. The Mustangs pad is about
3/4" thick, while T-Birds are 1".

Many aftermarket struts are made with the wide opening, to fit either one,
so spacers are included. If you don't have enough spacers, big washers
can also be used. You might have to file one edge flat to make them fit.

There is some slop in the holes, but if you're worried about it, let the
spindle drop all the way, then lift it all the way, then hold it mid-way
between those points as you snug down the bolts, then torque them all
the way down. It won't slip. Have the alignment checked afterwards.

> "RD Jones" > wrote
> > > > '89 Mustang 5.0 ...

> > "CJB" > wrote:
> > > My comment is concerning your last paragraph only. If the part doesnt'
> > > properly fit, it's defective for your application. There's no way a
> > > national chain will say otherwise if you press the issue. I've always had
> > > very good service from Advance, and go out of my way to deal with them if I
> > > can. Try talking to someone else, perhaps within the same store, or even up
> > > the food chain a bit. Ask to talk to a district manager, or a customer
> > > service line if they have one.
>
> > I'll persue it further with Advance, and I've also attempted to
> > contact Monroe's tech assistance dept. Nothing back yet.

update:
Advance has replied to my emails that 'customer satisfaction is
important.etc.' but has not actually contacted me to attempt to
resolve the issue yet.

Monroe tech support has not responded at all either by email or phone.

I have invited both Advance and Monroe to join the discussion here...

"MasterBlaster" > wrote:
> On the T-Bird boards I frequent, there's several threads about swapping
> spindles and such for brake upgrades, and notations that Birds, Stangs, etc
> have different mounting pads on the spindles. The Mustangs pad is about
> 3/4" thick, while T-Birds are 1".

Correct that the pad is 3/4" on the '89 just as it is on the '02.
The Monroe replacement for the '02 fit properly without the need
for spacers. If a good one from the '02 worked on the '89 I would
have used it but the body length is not the same.

Why not supply a correctly fitting replacement for the '89 ?
Surely a high performance Mustang should not get the same
part as a '78 Fairmont ...

> Many aftermarket struts are made with the wide opening, to fit either one,
> so spacers are included. If you don't have enough spacers, big washers
> can also be used. You might have to file one edge flat to make them fit.
>
> There is some slop in the holes, but if you're worried about it, let the
> spindle drop all the way, then lift it all the way, then hold it mid-way
> between those points as you snug down the bolts, then torque them all
> the way down. It won't slip. Have the alignment checked afterwards.

Obviously the part can be made to work, but this is the type of
process I'd like to reserve as a last resort.

It's now Friday afternoon and my weekend is shot because I
can't get decent parts for one of the most common models
of Mustang on the road. Darn !


rd