Cadillac Owners Forum banner

'97 Eldo - riding high after shock / strut replacement

22K views 124 replies 17 participants last post by  Eldorado99ETC 
#1 ·
Hi all,

Yesterday, I had a local shop install new shocks / struts on my 97 Eldo (base model / ESC). My car has the FE1 soft ride suspension. It does NOT have F45.

I had them install the Monroe 90011 suspension conversion kit in the front, and Monroe 40046 shocks in the rear.

When I picked the car up, I noticed it was riding higher that it had before. There is now an extra inch to two inches (closer to two inches) clearance between the top of the tires and the bottom of the wheel wells. This is occurring both in the front and rear. It looks really weird now. Also, the suspension is now quite hard. There's no element of "float" like there was before, although I'm not sure how much of that should be attributed to the new shocks.

Below is a pic of my car BEFORE the new shocks. The height looks "normal", yes? I'm having a bit of an issue transferring a pic of what it now looks like from my camera phone to my computer, but maybe I can do that later. In the meantime, imagine the below pic, but jacked up a few inches and all weird looking.

I pulled the codes and am not getting any. Any ideas on what might be wrong?

 
See less See more
1
#36 ·
Thanks for the info. I just measured and I've got 2 1/2 inches in the rear and 4 inches in the front. The head mechanic did say that perhaps there's a problem with the ELC in the rear which is causing the upward slant so they'll check that out. They've also printed out the ride height specs from GM to compare with. Guess we'll see.
 
#37 ·
If the rear was too low, and the front at normal ride height, there would be an "upward slant" and the problem would be the ELC system and sagging rear springs.

You have an upwards slant, because the rear ride height is correct, and the front is too high.

It is impossible for the ELC system to increase front ride height.

You don't have to be familiar with these cars to understand the physics behind that. I think you need to start looking for another shop after they fix this problem.
 
#38 ·
The ELC has minimal (if any) influence to the front ride height.
If the rear is too high then some (small amount) of the vehicle weight will shift towards the front thus the front will lower a bit (you won't be able to see it by looking at it).
If the ELC is too low then some of the vehicle weight will move towards the back thus the front will rise a bit (again we are talking about 10" in the rear and 1/16" in the front).
The key the original springs were installed on the car and there are no spacers and such installed and the distance between the lower spring pocket and the mounting holes are the same between the original struts and the aftermarket ones. I do remember ~2 years ago a member with a red ’96 STS had the same issue after installing some aftermarket struts, not sure the brand (his goal was to lower the car among others).
 
#39 ·
So I just got back from the shop. They had the car all of 30 minutes.

They measured the ride height vs. the GM specs and determined that the rear was near exact, but it's riding between 3/4 of an inch and and inch high in the front. They couldn't find anything wrong with the front. However, they did say that when they installed the rear shocks last week, that the ELC compressor never kicked on, and they had to manually pump air into the system (wish they had told me this last week). I checked the ELC fuse, and that's ok, so it looks like I've got a bad compressor. They said they couldn't fix that, and I'd have to take it to a stealership.

My new question is how essential is it that I get the ELC fixed? They told me the current sate of my car shouldn't hurt anything, and it wasn't worth worrying about unless I noticed the rear settling. I've never driven with rear seat passengers, and rarely carry anything in the trunk heavier than a load of groceries. With the compressor non-functional, is the rear basically now a closed system and should maintain it's current height, or will air slowly bleed out and settle the rear?

Still getting no codes. Not sure if a bad compressor is supposed to throw a code or not.
 
#40 ·
Bad rear compressors typically throw a code (almost bought a '00 SLS once with bad rear compressor; can't remember code now) but I don't think it will hurt the car if you don't have the compressor replaced right away. The rear will just sag with any kind of weight back there that the ELC would typically compensate for.
 
#41 ·
Non F45 cars (like the OP's) won't throw a code, the system is not monitored with the data line, is just a simple time delay relay controlling the ELC compressor and exhaust valve.

To OP, forget about ELC, sure is not working and all this, but you have issues with the front side of the car, so you are barking at the wrong tree.
Sure there is nothing wrong with the car, heck is better off road, but on the other hand is higher center of gravity so not good at high speeds.
Now hearing they pumped the system without telling you the compressor is not working (or they can't figure it out), well that's one minus for the shop. I guess is the kind of shop is assuming you just want the wheels to spin and that's it (like 95% of the people).
 
#43 ·
Yeah, I'm pretty much done with them. They're too far away anyways. Sucks that they came highly recommended. Oh and the initial issue that caused me to have this work done in the first place (intermittent squeaking in rear suspension) is back. It appears that in the week since I had the new shocks / struts installed, the rear has settled a bit (was too high, now is at spec), but this also brought back the squeak. My guess is that they overcharged the shocks, and the ELC bled off the excess. Now my options are to find a new random shop that may be incompetent and lie to me, take it to the stealership which may be incompetent and lie to me and will charge me a s*&t-ton (but at least is convenient), or do nothing.

I think at this point I'm going to do nothing.

Currently, my car is riding a bit under an inch high in the front, at spec in the rear, squeaking in the rear, and may have a bad compressor. The good news is that with the new shocks & struts, the ride quality is much better than it was. I think I'll just drive it for a while and see if the rear drops below spec, and if so, I'll take it to the stealership. No clue what to do about the front. It seems that it is what it is.

Thanks for all of your help.
 
#44 ·
There's clearly something wrong. I would not ignore it.
Not only is the center of gravity off, thereby making the car more unstable at speed, but there may be other
parts that will be effected due to incorrect suspension geometry. :bomb:

I'd take it back to the clowns in mechanic's suits and demand they make it right.
Send the struts back and get a new pair..........something.
There's got to be a wrong part somewhere.
 
#45 ·
Yup, well the clowns are too far away and I can't take any more days off of work for this.

The stealership's got it as I write this. We'll see what their certified techs have to say.

I'll post the resolution in case it ends up helping someone else. I will not post what I end up paying them, due to embarrassment (gonna be ex-pen-sive).

A fool and his money are soon parted. :(
 
#47 ·
Update:

Just got back from the dealer. My ELC compressor is in fact shot so I'll need a new one.

However, I talked to their tech, and he said that as far as the front struts go, there's an inch gap between the upper plate that the spring rests on, and the body of the car. He said that with OEM struts, the upper plate sits flush against the car body.

I just snapped a pic of what (I think) he was talking about. The pic was taken from the inside on my left front wheel well, facing upwards. You can see the uppermost two coils of the spring, then the upper plate (with the spring resting against it) above that, and then a gap with the greyish, discolored area above that which is the body of the car.



He's claiming that for OEM struts, that gap should not be there and the upper plate should be flush with the greyish area.

The thing is, I felt around in the gap and found that that's where the greyish rubber-donut-looking component in the pic of the Monroe 90011 kit (shown below) is sitting.



Could you guys do me a favor and check your Eldo or Seville and see if that gap exists, or if the upper plate is in fact sitting flush against the car body (if you've got OEM struts). Or if you've used the Monroe 90011 kit, could you check if you also see a gap which contains that greyish rubber-donut-looking component, and let me know what you find?

In the meantime, I'm trying to find the Monroe 90011 kit installation instructions online, but haven't had much success yet.
 
#49 ·
I'm a bit confused by your response.

I've added captions to the pic to clarify. I was wondering if you also have the 1'' gap depicted below? If I feel around in that gap, I find the rubber donut from the Monroe kit. The tech says that gap should not be there for OEM struts.



----------


An additional question...

I found this blurb about strut / shock replacement, albeit from a different manufacturer:

"There is a common problem that many auto repair shops seem to have with applying torque to some of the main bolts on the suspension. This often results in high and/or uneven ride height. The issue is that there are about 3 bolts at each corner/wheel that have bushings associated with them and if the bolts are tightened while the car is up on the rack and the wheels are dangling down, then the bushings are set or pre-loaded at that wheels extended position and the car then wants to ride high when placed on the ground. The fix is to put the car back on the rack, loosen the affected bolts, put the car back on the ground with the loosened bolts (maybe drive it around the block in both directions and then tighten the affected suspension bolts with the weight of the car on the ground. Loosen - Lower - Torque under load."

Does the same apply with Cadillacs?
 
#52 ·
The gap I was mentioning appears to be between Parts 2 and 3. The bottom of Part 2 contains the "rubber donut" I was referring to. Looks like it's integrated in the OEM ACDelco part...



but is a separate piece in the Monroe kit.



At first I thought maybe they were of varying thickness but now I'm doubting that. The stack appears to be correct from what I can see.

The PROBLEM is that now I'm dealing with a dealer tech, who is starting to pull the "You installed aftermarket struts and I've no idea about those so your best bet is to buy OEM replacements from us for a crap ton of money" card, and I'm not having any of that.

I dunno. Maybe the Monroe kit rides high and that just how it is?

Has anyone else here used this kit on an Eldorado and can confirm or refute this statement?
 
#53 · (Edited)
Back in from a dark garage with a few shots which may help... Shot while trying to hold a flashlight with one hand and camera with the other. Tried to get the focus in the right spot. Left front on my 2002 Eldo. You can clearly see the gasket (part #4 in the exploded drawing?) squished by the top of the coil spring against part #3. Part of the gasket shows under the bottom of the top coil. Reaching my index finger over the edge of part #3 isn't possible because part #3 is indeed nearly flush to the frame (?) of the car. I think the edge of part # 3 is likely curled downward just a little bit showing the small gap, perhaps a 1/4", between part #3 and the frame. As your stealership tech indicated, no real gap should be between #3 and the frame. Hope this helps, Bob. :hmm:
Best,
Ron

PS. Bob, just a guess of course but perhaps the upward extended shoulder of part #2 on the Monroe kit is not molded (forged, cast?) properly not allowing part #2 to fit completely into the hole in the frame thereby not allowing the outside edge to "flush up" to the frame?...







 
#54 ·
Thanks Ron. That was of great help. :)

I think the issue lies with Part 2 as well. Either the Monroe part is designed differently, or the install was done incorrectly.

I'm taking the car back tomorrow to get the new ELC compressor put in (they had to order that), so I'll have the tech check it out. He'll have to tear one strut down to see. Ugh. Hopefully it was done wrong and can be corrected or maybe they can just replace Part 2 with the OEM version. Guess we'll see.
 
#58 ·
Lol. Tell me about it.

Anyways, an update. They took apart one of my struts and also compared it with another Eldo that was brought in. It turns out that the gap is in fact caused by the aforementioned Part 2 (strut mount, pictured in my post #52 above) being differently sized than the OEM version. More specifically, the "rubber donut" is much thicker, which is what is causing the spacing gap and high ride height.

I am having them replace the mounts with OEM versions (and paying for it). :(

I wonder why Monroe advertises their versions of the strut mounts as direct replacements when they are obviously not? I'm also surprised I couldn't find any other reference to this issue on the internet (it sucks to be the guinea pig). Anyways, once I get the car back and if all is in order, I'll make a final post to confirm.
 
#60 ·
I don't know about the strut length comparison, but it appears that the OEM strut MOUNTS are different based on whether or not the car has electronic suspension (AcDelco part# 501-189 with, and part# 501-95 without). However, the Monroe 90011 kit is advertised as the proper kit for cars with both types of suspensions on their website. So something is still fishy here.
 
#64 ·
Another update:

Well, they got the OEM strut mounts (Part 2) but it turns out that the seat plate (Part 3) from the Monroe kit does not fit these OEM mounts, so they have to order that as well (salvaged because that's all they could find). This really sucks because the car had some perfectly good seat plates before the original shop tossed them out. Note to self: in the future, have the shop return original parts to me.

So at this point, it looks like the Monroe struts (Part 9) ARE acceptable aftermarket replacements, but the mounts and plates are different and will cause the car to ride higher than spec. I can only claim this for an Eldo that originally had passive struts. I have no clue if the same will hold true for an ETC or base with CVRSS when doing a conversion.

Hopefully someone else will gain from my experience, because this info is not coming cheap. :(
 
#65 ·
Final Update:

I got my car back from the dealership today. It took them a while to order parts. Anyways, here's how she sits now, after getting the Monroe strut mounts, seat plates, and the insulator that sits between the two replaced with OEM versions.



I am now putting together a claim to file with Tenneco Inc (the owner of the Monroe brand) to reimburse me for the cost of this replacement, as their 90011 kit did not restore my vehicle to factory ride height as advertised on their website. If that doesn't work, it's off to small claims court I go.

In conclusion, I would recommend that the Monroe 90011 Front Strut Conversion kit be avoided by anyone reading this, unless you want to risk having similar problems. The Monroe struts themselves are fine, but there are design differences with their strut mounting hardware which cause an increased ride height. Stick with OEM equipment for those.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top