h&r or eibach

I don't think either spring is better, not sure why people argue that the one they use is better. Just being fanboys.
 
StuLax18 said:
I don't think either spring is better, not sure why people argue that the one they use is better. Just being fanboys.
Click to expand...

I personally didn't argue if one is better or not but from what it looks like Eibachs for the FX are not reliable. Average use time for the ones snapped were around 3-4 years. Shorter life for sportier springs is normal, IMO, since they're more under stress in a heavy application like an SUV but 7 snapped springs in a small group of people like in an enthusiast forum is just too much. If you assume there are say 20 Eibach users on our forums, 7 out of 20 makes a 35% failure rate in a sample which is a LOT high...

So.. Eibachs For-The-Worse.. In reliability terms.. It might be "luck" but you don't want to push your luck when driving 80 mph on the highway... Just my .02
 
EG3 said:
I personally didn't argue if one is better or not but from what it looks like Eibachs for the FX are not reliable. Average use time for the ones snapped were around 3-4 years. Shorter life for sportier springs is normal, IMO, since they're more under stress in a heavy application like an SUV but 7 snapped springs in a small group of people like in an enthusiast forum is just too much. If you assume there are say 20 Eibach users on our forums, 7 out of 20 makes a 35% failure rate in a sample which is a LOT high...

So.. Eibachs For-The-Worse.. In reliability terms.. It might be "luck" but you don't want to push your luck when driving 80 mph on the highway... Just my .02
Click to expand...

+1 on that
 
Time will tell.

The one photo posted of the break is great - the spiral fracture is indicative of improperly heat treated metal that was placed in torsion.

The corrosion on the outside of the spring looks pretty bad - there is pitting on the surface of the metal, which can lead to weaker cross sectional areas. This can be mitigated by passivation of the metal (acid dip) followed by corrosion protection at the time of manufacture. Plating, coating or painting. It appears that the paint had worn off in the area of the break, allowing corrosion to get under the coating and into the surface of the metal.

Couple that with a bad heat treat (the metal wasn't baked at the proper temperature profiles for the proper times) and I see why this particular spring failed. Sorry if I turned up the geek volume there - I'm a rocket scientist.

The question is how many springs were made with the production run that used this metal?

If the forums could unite, we could collect the serial numbers that failed - allowing Eibach to trace them to a production lot number, which should provide material sources and quality testing results. But that ain't gonna happen. Instead, Eibach gets a few complaints or warranty claims and go do the check themselves, if we're lucky.

If we are not lucky, that metal supplier keeps making the same mistake, Eibach continues to miss it and springs continue to fail around the globe. In which case...

Time will tell. Till then, I'm gonna enjoy my ride. :glasses:
 
IMO...Eibach not worth the risk. I agree that for this small forum there are too many snaps. The majority of snaps would not even be reported here or the org just maybe to Eibach. That being said do we even have a single reported FX H&R snap?
 
You are in Texas and you should be fine. Eibachs springs have had other failures for springs made for other vehicles.

I've mentioned this couple of times, but Eibach was the manufacturer of Comptech springs. Comptech was the way to go about 5 years ago for Honda and Acura. Do a search on google for "Comptech Springs Failure" and I'm sure you'll get plenty of hits. All failures were associated with East Coast and failures were all related to heavy oxidation/corrosion. Massive amounts of salt during winter beat the crap out of the springs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top