Suspension question

[amalventano1 at tds.net (Allyn)]

> It turns out that the nut "cap" 
> that retains the insert in the tube was missing.

I can't imagine the wear that occurred between the strut cartridges and housings without those caps.  Instead of rebounding, the
insert would basically pull itself out of the tube slightly, followed by impacting itself against its bottom (with the weight of the
car behind that impact).  If that was actually the case, even if filled with oil, it is likely those housings will never be the same
again, and will never hold a strut with tigh enough tolerance to keep an alignment.  I would trash the struts _and_ housings.

> If I remember right, the piston diameter of the shock was 
> much larger than stock, so the cap would not come close to 
> fitting over it. I drew a picture and concluded that as long 
> as the shock is always under compression, it doesn't have to 
> be forcibly attached at the bottom. But, isn't it possible 
> that the shock would not be under compression (say, if the 
> front of the vehicle was briefly airborne) and thus the 
> insert would slam in to the bottom of the tube?

IIRC, those struts (are supposed to) come with their own replacement caps, with larger bore openings, because they do in fact not
fit under the stock caps.

HTH
Al