It’s not always the shocks

I’d like to respond to the letter “When should you replace your shock absorbers?” (Drive Out #109), and Mic van Zyl’s reply. I am getting on in my years, and have driven various vehicles, from those with not much power to some of the more potent ones. I have also had my share of mishaps on the road, and in hindsight I’ve analysed why things went wrong. As far as shock absorbers go, Mic is quite right in saying that one can’t tell how worn a shock absorber is after many years, or the life that it’s had. Most fitment centres don’t have the equipment for testing the shock on the vehicle. It takes some effort to take out and refit a McPherson strut if the shock is still healthy, and the work entailed wouldn’t be justified. Most fitment shops work the labour cost into the price of a new shock, should it come to that. I have had vehicles where the shocks lasted ages (my Mazda bakkie weighs 2000 kg or more and it doesn’t feel strange at all when towing a heavy trailer). On the other hand, I’ve seen some new cars (2-3 years old) that have wheels hopping around like crazy, a definite sign that a shock has given up. But it’s not always shock wear and tear that causes accidents when drivers have to swerve or when they get a fright on the road. The tell-tale skid marks are evidence that some drivers are unable to cope with emergency swerving, regardless of the reason. So no matter how good the shocks are, they won’t help. A tourist recently overturned a vehicle in the Kruger Park, which is another incident that makes you wonder. How, under normal circumstances with the speed limit in the park of 50 km/h, does this happen? So if it comes down to ascertaining shock wear, I think common sense should prevail (although common sense is not that common these days).