WOW! I didn't expect to start such a heated debate on the topic. I agree
with one responder that the rear kit (I'm looking at) bolts on to the same
mounts as the existing, after you remove the originals, so the loads should
be the same. Correct me if I'm wrong, but probably the genesis of the tube
shock conversions were:
1) the tube shocks were more widely available for replacement;
2) easier to replace (and cheaper).
3) wide variety of tube shocks so makes it very 'tunable' (i.e. adjustable
gas shocks)
4) due to the more common design, they probably last longer.
If the above items were not at least mostly true, there would not be the
number of kits out there being successfully sold.
If I were the type that put only a few hundred miles on my car every year,
the refurbished Armstrongs would probably do me for life, but I use mine as
an (almost) daily driver. I have heard stories of the poor life of the
Armstrongs. Maybe true or not, but replacing a couple of tube shocks takes
a couple hours. Pulling a couple of the Armstrongs is a big pain and puts
the car out of action for a good while. I agree that when it comes to the
ride, the average driver probably couldn't tell between the tube or
Armstrong when in good working order. It's the above listed advantages I
was after.
John Hed
80 MGB LE
john.hed@faa.gov
|