blown struts

Took my truck "off roading" through Death Valley National park. Went to the "Racetrack" where 26 miles of road to there are "washboard" and did some steep climbs and rock busting in the back way out of the park. I blew out 2 of the rear struts. Ive read on edmunds.com that one of the testers took a Demo Ridge to DV too and blew out 4 of their struts. Im in the market for heavier duty suspension if anyone can help me out with any info on aftermarket stuff. Thanks.

I used to live in Death Valley. Went to the Race track several times You should have gone through Titus Canyon. The toughest drive is to the Barker Ranch where Charles Manson was caught. Sorry to hear about your struts.

The RL isnt an offroad vehicle, what did you expect?

I am also curious how fast you traveled over some of these areas. ?

I have driven real 4x4's for most of my driving life, (im 36), speed is not your friend. I could have torn up my Jeeps in the past by speeding over offroad areas as weel, and those vehicles are designed for the ofroad, skid plates, etc..

I drive my RL through construction sites with 1,000 # of brick, and to haul materials into my lot. No strut issues...Maybe blame the strut manuf.

this thread sounds much like the Edmunds article from Aug 2005...:rolleyes:

BTW almost 20,000 miles on my RL, and it drives the same as the day I drove it off the lot.

Chisoxjim, for someone that purports to be a staunch RL & ROC supporter, you have probably done more to drive people away from this site than anyone else. Whenever anyone posts a question or problem that doesn’t portray the RL as perfect they are immediately treated to a rude response that includes your doubting that they are telling the truth. You willing to brand a newcomer as a troll and a liar just because you have never experienced the problem yourself. Caliridge didn’t knock the RL or blame anyone. He simply asked if there where HD struts available. He didn’t even mention warranty replacement. And there have been a few other reports besides Edmunds about blown struts. While the RL is a great truck, like anything else made by humans, it is subject to the errors that humans make. While you have been fortunate enough to not have any failures, they do occur. If the RL is perfect, why has there been so many leakage problems reported? Are they all liars too? And how does it make an owner feel better about their RL if they do report a problem and your response each time is “Well my RL is perfect and I haven’t had any problems”? If you had been treated the way you treat newcomers to the forum, would you have returned?

Amen! :( :(

I reread my post,


never called him a troll, or a liar, or was rude,

maybe a matter of perception...

just asked how fast he was driving and gave my own experience carrying 1,000 lbs of brick while traversing ruts, and mud.

Never said all RL's were perfect, just mine.... :)

Maybe Ill just stick to the "vanilla" posts like baseball, etc, . seems real world performance, takes a back seat to hypothetical, and remote situations on this site.

[QUOTE=chisoxjim]The RL isnt an offroad vehicle, what did you expect?

Honda better edit the brochure I'm reading right now. Quote: GO WHERE YOU WANT. It won't matter if your adventures take you off-road or on-road. Honda's sophisticated VTM-4 4-wheel-drive system can handle just about anything, from a slick,steep boat ramp to a rough-and-tumble back road. It goes on but you get the drift......

light to medium off road use.

no skid plates, I wouldnt take mine anywhere I would need them..

Also who takes a $30,000 plus vehicle truley off road?


I would have gotten another Jeep if I wanted to go offroading I wanted a SUT, that can carry my stuff, and do a little medium duty work.

on the Honda website, it says rough road capability...

symantics..

Then Honda should state light-medium off-road use, maybe some folks are misled by the current advertising......

possibly, but who trust marketing folks anyway..?


I didnt buy my RL because of an advertising campaign though, I just had to open and close one of the doors, and hear that solid thud, and then drive it. I was sold, all for $24,700.

The weekend is here... Gotta haul 20 bags of topsoil home that i picked up @ lunch.

Ill see who has piled on when I check back in on Monday, I dont have/want a computer @ home so I only check @ work.

The weekend is here... Gotta haul 20 bags of topsoil home that i picked up @ lunch.


Sure it wasn't 20 bags of BS........Sorry, but i know you can take a joke.....

I do not want to get in the middle of this whizzing match....but I don't think Chisoxjim was being outta line in his first post. I mean, yeah, his first question could have been taken the wrong way (A little sarcastic, it was), but for the most part I thought he was pretty civil.

Also, I think the blown strut thing is bit of a sore spot for RL owners. According to what they said, most folks here agree, that would be impossilbe to blow out all 4 struts like that.

I think most folks here would agree the RL is not perfect. Then again, there are quite a few "trolls" who come to this forum trying to stir up crap. The title of this thread alone is enough to get some RL owners dander up. Instead of "blown struts", it could just as well have been titled "Suspension Question", then I doubt anyone would be screaming, "troll"! Personally....I just think some folks need to use a little common sense when naming threads, that's all.

My .02.

I do not want to get in the middle of this whizzing match....but I don't think Chisoxjim was being outta line in his first post. I mean, yeah, his first question could have been taken the wrong way (A little sarcastic, it was), but for the most part I thought he was pretty civil.

Also, I think the blown strut thing is bit of a sore spot for RL owners. According to what they said, most folks here agree, that would be impossilbe to blow out all 4 struts like that.

I think most folks here would agree the RL is not perfect. Then again, there are quite a few "trolls" who come to this forum trying to stir up crap. The title of this thread alone is enough to get some RL owners dander up. Instead of "blown struts", it could just as well have been titled "Suspension Question", then I doubt anyone would be screaming, "troll"! Personally....I just think some folks need to use a little common sense when naming threads, that's all.

My .02.

I agree. Too many people are taking comments way to personal. It's becomming more of a headache comming here and a lot less fun.

The comment wasn't made just in response to this one thread. It's an ongoing pattern with chisoxjim and I think it's detrimental to the forum to continually treat newcomers in this manner. It didn't use to be this way and it shoudn't be this way now. What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

In my next life I want to come back as a " STRUT " .....:rolleyes:

I tend to agree with Webwader... Chisoxjim, to my ears you usually sound more skeptical than sympathetic about people's problems with their trucks, and you always remind everyone that you've had no problems with your truck. It may not be explicit, but I often feel that you're implying that people are trolls, liars, etc. For someone new to the forum, your approach may be pretty unfriendly.

I think it's great that you've got a perfect truck; but I think you could maybe be a little more sympathetic to those with non-perfect trucks.

Sorry if it feels like I'm piling on, but that's my impression of you.

Well, I think everybody who are regulars to this forum are a little skeptical.... I know I am.....when threads like this pop up. There always seem to be a reoccuring theme:

1). A person with a very low post count comes in and starts a thread like this.

2). The person who started the thread doesn't come back and post for quite some time, or ever, after starting a thread.

3). A thread is started with a title that they know will get most forum members attention (Just like going into a Ford F-150 enthusiasts site and start a thread with a title like, "My 2003 F-150 Just Burnt Down My Trailer).

Now, am I saying the person who started this thread is troll? No, I am not. But, I am one to be skeptical, just like chisoxjim. I may not post quite as "aggressively" towards new-comers as chisoxjim does, but it doesn't mean I am not as, if not more, skeptical.

My .04.

Arrghhh!!!!

People that are new to the internet are going to be finding the ROC for years to come. Please be patient with them.

ChisoxJim - Stuff a sock in it!!! (removed Smiley!)

It is not necessary for you to comment on every post that mentions a problem with the RL. By now, we all know you love your perfect truck.

It seems that sometimes there is excessive pride for the RL in these Forums, not just in this thread. I would like to point out that we, as forum memebrs didn't do the R&D for the truck. We purchased the truck, plain and simple. (excluding a few member's that are involved with Honda or suppliers)

Like any complex product purchased, there will be things that could have been done better or features that we wished the truck (first model year) would have.

Lets say I am at a party talking to someone about my washing machine, yes, washing machine! He tells me that he has the same model, likes it but had a problem with it not mixing the hot and cold water correctly and thinks that maybe the valve could have been designed differently. Would I feel that I was attacked and he must be full of it because our washing machine is a gift from the R&D gods and is perfect? No, I would talk about it in a calm manner (until I could excuse myself from the boring topic of washing machine's at parties).

If I replaced the word washing machine in the above sentance with Ridgeline, then some people would feel that they would have to defend the the RL. The RL is perfect, all flaws are made up by people that wished they owned a RL.

A car is a big purchase and we all want validation that we bought the right truck.

For the struts, the only people that should be getting defensive about them should be the people the designed and built the struts (or the Honda folks that spec'd them). The same holds true for other issues with this truck.

In getting back to the struts, there are multiple reports out there about the strut issue. I see two options
1) Some struts were flawed during manufacturing
2) The struts were underdesigned and are in moderate off roading they tend to fail



Personally I hope for option 1, but I am leaning toward option 2. So far with my Honda, Honda has seemed to be honorable and reengineer and fix problems discovered. I hope that if the sturts are an issue, Honda will issue a TSB and install better struts. Not a big deal in the overall scope of the truck

In the end it make economic sense in today's auto market to release a car early and fix problem that come up instead of holding for an additional year and catching problems inhouse. This is true for ANY company, thus the concerns that people have for first model year cars (and washing machines)


-W

Nice analogy, Whaleya, and well stated.

I watched a very helpful auto forum turn to crap because of the actions being talked about here.Calling every new poster a troll drips of paranoia and a whopping ego.Lets let the trolls prove them selves and just ignore them.I am no saint but attracting posters and mutual benefit is the goal of this forum.Is it not?What is a strut and why are they failing?

all the best,

Chisoxjim often has intelligent posts but his "my truck is perfect everyone else's must be too" schtick is at the very least annoying. He seems often to be the opposite of a troll - as if he were a paid Honda plant that does nothing but rant in favor of the RL. Many examples of this exist - authors who review their own books on Amazon.com, Sony Pictures planting positive reviews for their movies. I don't actually believe Chisox is a Honda "plant" but he sure acts like one.

I KNOW the RL isn't a serious offroad vehicle. Honda DOESN'T MAKE ANY. But Honda is guilty of at least over-hyping the ruggedness of this truck. I don't personally care but some percentage of RL buyers will buy the truck because the marketing message worked. Chisoxjim says no one should take a $30K vehicle offroad. A $60K Range Rover is a very capable offroad vehicle, one of the best in the world. And Hummers, as beastly as they are, are definitely not in the pretender category. The Nissan Xterra is a real offroader, as is a Toyota FJ. Not the RL, and not the Pilot.

I think the RL is a fine vehicle, but it ain't perfect. Honda obviously let some flawed (leaks) RLs off the assembly line early on. It seems things have settled down and they should be able to work on an even better Version 2.

I agree with most of you. I don't feel there is a need to be overly politically correct here on either side of the argument. The suggestion that someone should be more careful in how they title their thread is ridiculous. If the guy blew out his strut driving off-road, then he should be able to title his thread"Blown Strut". He don't need to lighten up the title as not to offend us happy Ridgeliners. Also, no need to belittle someone for believing an advertising campaign that says you can use your truck off-road. Most of us can't do our own off-road testing prior to purchase to confirm the manufacturer's claims.

My Ridgeline has been perfect, but with over 50,000 of them on the road, they won't all be perfect. And some people will come to this forum only after they have experienced a problem in search of advise. And that should be why we are all here. Not to pat each other on the back and tell each other how smart they are for having the same taste in vehicles, and then gang up on anyone who has experienced a flaw or problem. If any one of us truly thinks all Ridgelines are perfect, then there is probably on online help group to assist with that delusion.

And to reiterate; I love my truck, no problems at all so far.

I think the issue here is that --- Struts were blown on the Racetrack at Death Valley. For those that have never been there -- it is a 30 mile harsh (and I mean harsh) washboard road to get there (far worse than it has even been in past years). I opted not to go out to the Racetrack when I was in Death Valley last March because it was noted at the Ranger's Station that it was "eating tires" --- just to give it a final blow --- when I was out there last year...I broke a shock in a CJ-5 getting out to the racetrack. The point (you knew it was coming)...I'm not sure that the quality of Honda Struts ought to be measured by the harsh conditions of the Racetrack in Death Valley.

OK....can anybody explain to me exactly what they mean by a "blown" strut? What constitutes a blown strut and, if somebody suspects a strut is blown, what should they be looking for?

OK....can anybody explain to me exactly what they mean by a "blown" strut? What constitutes a blown strut and, if somebody suspects a strut is blown, what should they be looking for?

Here's a page with a detailed description and diagram:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacPherson_strut

Most are referring to the shock part of the strut loosing it's seal and oil leaks out in which the shock won't dampen the up and down motion so the ride feels springy.

On this 30 mile stretch of washboards that's going to be alot cycles for the shock and it's going to heat it up pretty quick unless your driving really slow. I'm not too suprised the seal failed on an OEM strut.

Thanks vertrkr. Good information on struts there....especially for us non-mechanic types.

I found the following sentence, from the article from the link you provided, interesting, and it got me thinking:

"Also, because of its greater size and robustness and greater degree of attachment to the vehicle structure, when the internal seals of the shock absorber portion wear out replacement is relatively expensive compared to replacing a simple shock absorber."

OK, now this may be a stupid question but.....since the strut is supposed to be simplier in design and more "robust" than a standard suspension that uses shock absorbers.....wouldn't shocks blow out before struts....if they were driven the same way/on the same road conditions?

I guess blowing a shock isn't that big of a deal, because they are fairly easy and much cheaper than a strut to replace...and that's why we never see any articles about vehicles blowing out shocks on the same stretch of road, right? :confused:

I guess the design can't be all that bad. I mean, as the article says, "However, despite the stated drawbacks the strut setup is still used on high performance cars such as the Ford Mustang, Porsche 911, all BMWs and several Mercedes-Benz models."

I'm a newbie here myself but I'll offer my own 2 cents. Whether you choose to put them in your pocket or throw them over your shoulder are up to you.

First of all, I can see where Chisoxjm is coming from. He makes a very good point. If you go off roading, especially serious off roading, speed is not your friend.

He also points to his own personal experiences with his truck but comparing hauling a load of bricks to driving across death valley is like comparing apples to bowling balls.

Caliridge's post does look like it may be improvised from the following article.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/9470/do-it-all-compact-pickups.html

If you haven't read it, please take the time. The surroundings are very similar.

The rest of his post is up to your interpretation, I choose not to interpret.

All the while, Caliridge is still sitting back there waiting for someone to answer his question pertaining to aftermarket upgrades, which I don't believe anyone directly addressed. (Cali, Sorry, I can't answer your question because I am a newbie as you are and am researching some of my own questions because this board seems to get wayyyy too off topic for my likings sometime.)

I have driven pretty much everything in my life from a Yugo to a top fuel dragster. (One time and it's scary as it looks.) Vehicles are designed for the use they are intended for. I would be very surprised if any of the struts on your truck survived a trip to the Racetrack in Death Valley. Heck, I know a couple of trails here in Cincinnati that I wouldn't try with ANY stock truck, SUV or SUT.

I have a 3rd gen Honda Accord that has a lowered suspension. It is lowered about 3" at all 4 corners. I went thru a lot of planning and did a lot of reseach in "doing the job right" in that I bumped up the spring rates, installed upgraded struts and even installed a complete 2nd gen Honda Prelude front suspension which allows correct camber and still have blown several sets of struts hitting some of the monster potholes that seem to materialize out of nowhere even when it's not snowing. My point here is sometimes no matter how much prevention you take, when you use something for an unintended use, it doesn't work.

BTW. People outside this board DO read this and more people read it than you think. Please think before you post. Something happened to me the other day when I went to the gas station that NONE of you would believe.

BTW. People outside this board DO read this and more people read it than you think. Please think before you post. Something happened to me the other day when I went to the gas station that NONE of you would believe.

OK... I don't know if I will believe it or not....because I haven't heard the story! You've piqued my interest.....OK.....spill it!!! :D

I guess the design can't be all that bad. I mean, as the article says, "However, despite the stated drawbacks the strut setup is still used on high performance cars such as the Ford Mustang, Porsche 911, all BMWs and several Mercedes-Benz models."[/QUOTE]

The strut's value lies in the integration of several separate suspension components into one compact module. A typical strut replaces, the spring, shock absorber and upper control arm. It is lighter, as a rule than the components it replaces and takes up less room. In addition there are less pivot points and moving parts. However it has limitations. Because there is no UPPER control arm, the lower control arm must be more robust. It must be located close to the wheel/hub assembly due to a taller profile. That means the stroke (up/down movement) is generally longer in relation to the wheel and tire than a shock absorber that can be located closer to the fulcrum.

The stroke is important because it dictates the duration that the damper fluid is forced through the damper valve.* Part of the kinetic energy of supension movement not absorbed by the spring, is converted to heat when compression forces the oil at extremely high velocity through that little valve. (You can't compress a liquid)

If the suspension movement is rapid enough, and violent enough and the stroke is long enough; The heat and pressure generated will eventually overcome the valve assembly. In short, struts generate more fluid flow through the valve and therefore more heat than a typical shock absorber.

Anyway that's my theory.

*A shock absorber does two things. It dampens the shock of suspension compression by using it to squirt fluid through a restricted opening. It also 'centers' the spring action to ensure the tire doesn not bounce over and over like a rubber ball.

Maybe there needs to be a name change. How about Death to Struts Valley. If you reallu want a challenging drive in Death Valley try to get to the Barked Ranch where Charles Manson was captured or drive the West Side Road. You need to be careful the rangers get about 12,000 miles per set of tires on their trucks.