Look at it this way... If you are still rolling on the original(2007) shocks/struts/strut mount, they are all pretty much ready to be replaced anyway. So you are really not throwing away good parts for new ones because of the lowering. Think of it as an opportunity to upgrade to better parts instead of using OEM replacement parts.

FC

 

IMO it sucks that 'Ford' wouldn't do it the right way from the get-go !

FWIW, I lowered mine with Ford K Racing springs (1.5"), had it re-aligned(lucked out no need for camber plates), stock panhard bar (lucked out again only 1/8" movement, too little for me to worry about).

My car was brand new when I did this last Nov, if it were a year or two old I too would probably gone with new dampers as Sam and others have said.

 

So what is the life span on the stock dampers? My car is 2 and a half years old, but with only 5800 miles on it. So are those dampers say ok or is there a shelf life to them, and lowering the car shortens that life?

 

Even if shocks are on a car sitting in a garage for years, seals will still eventually dry up and render the shocks useless. As long as they are not leaking, I guess shocks that have been sitting around for years are still ok.

It's not so much the lowering that shortens the usable life of the shocks. It is the increased spring rate. Lowering springs that are properly designed will have a heavier spring rate to keep the car from bottoming. Shocks (OEM) that are not designed to handle this spring rate will simply wear out faster.

There are too many variables to say how long a particular shock will last. But if you are modifying the car for handling, it is a good opportunity to get everything done at the same time.

 

My belief is that dampers don't actually wear any faster with lowering springs, but that lowering springs, because they're stiffer than stock, need a higher minimum level of damping to control their motion. A modestly worn damper might work fine with stock springs but allow too much movement with a stiffer lowering spring.

Same difference in the end, I suppose.

 

Higher shock piston velocities (caused by the higher spring rate) during extension (rebound) would involve higher fluid velocities inside the various internal passages and openings. If there is going to be any measurable erosion (which would translate directly to less damping due to the loss of resistance to flow), stiffer springs would make it happen faster. How much faster = ???

That's the theory. While I don't know where you could find where somebody ran that sort of test, I imagine that somebody has.

Edit - maybe Dixon's book on shock absorbers has something . . .


Norm

 

The harder something is made to work, the less durable it is.... OEM shocks aren't meant for the job of lowering springs, and frankly aren't all that great with stock springs.

Oil breaks down, seals break down, etc. Add the higher level of damping required to do a good job to OEM shocks that are built only to "be ok" with stock springs and things just aren't that good for an OEM shock work so well.

If you were to change shocks on a 5800 mile car with stocks springs, you'd notice a difference. And the stock stuff isn't worn out at that point.

 

Thanks for the info guys, sorry if I hijacked the thread!

 

You said it better than I did, but it's pretty much what I was driving at. The slightly worn shock is only "too soft" if you have lowering springs, otherwise, it's just fine for continued use with stock springs.