Leaking shock failed NCT, replace or clean it up?

Col200sx

Just failed NCT on a leaking rear driver side shock.

Rear shocks were fairly consistent, 39mm and 38mm with imbalance only 3% (above 30% is a fail).

No clunks or anything.

NCT tester said to "just have a look at that shock, see what you can do with it".

Thinking if a replace only that one I could totally mess up the imbalance.

As it has to go through suspension test again, what would ye do, replace the shock now, or just clean it up before test as tester suggested?

Car is a Skoda Octavia VRS by the way.

Thoughts please, cheers : )

corktina

high performance car and faulty shocks don't sit easily in my head

mickdw

corktina wrote: »

high performance car and faulty shocks don't sit easily in my head

Its hardly a performance car but regardless 2 new shocks is the only sensible option. If they are in balance now I can only suggest they are both f*cked.

TGi666

get 2 new shocks then lob it through they you can have peace of mind that your car is in top condition

Col200sx

Reckon best thing to do is replace both so.

Thanks folks.

mickdw wrote: »

Its hardly a performance car

180bhp is performance enough I reckon ; )

mickdw

Col200sx wrote: »

Reckon best thing to do is replace both so.

Thanks folks.



180bhp is performance enough I reckon ; )

Ya defo replace both. 180 bhp is a reasonable amount of power but I hate this performance car expression. Should be reserved for real power and for something special.

peter barrins

This post has been deleted.

Dilbert75

Replace both - it's the only answer.

shinkansen

mickdw wrote: »

Its hardly a performance car but regardless 2 new shocks is the only sensible option. If they are in balance now I can only suggest they are both f*cked.

what do you drive to say that a VRS skoda is not high performance out of interest.

JerCotter7

Col200sx wrote: »

Reckon best thing to do is replace both so.

Thanks folks.



180bhp is performance enough I reckon ; )

I thought the VRS is 170bhp? And I agree with mick on all fronts.

mickdw

shinkansen wrote: »

what do you drive to say that a VRS skoda is not high performance out of interest.

Audi A5 with similar power and i would never refer to it as a high performance car. Insurance companies are the only ones who do when trying to justify a quote.

shinkansen

an Audi A5 is not a high performance car, from Audi's perspective, its more of a cruiser cum coupe. The high performance Audi's are the ones with turbos and the S/R variants.

however, certainly on the Skoda the VRS is high performance material., its not going to blow away a M3 but its still about as fast as needed on roads without getting jailed.

Micks A5 is a petrol turbo.

mickdw

shinkansen wrote: »

an Audi A5 is not a high performance car, from Audi's perspective, its more of a cruiser cum coupe. The high performance Audi's are the ones with turbos and the S/R variants.

however, certainly on the Skoda the VRS is high performance material., its not going to blow away a M3 but its still about as fast as needed on roads without getting jailed.

i agree. My A5 is 170bhp and is basically the entry level. Its not a performance car however its lower wider and to hazard a guess lighter than a vrs skoda yet just because the vrs is the better version of boring saloon skoda fans believe its the dogs bollocks.
Its just an improved dull saloon. It is not a performance car.

sean1141

JerCotter7 wrote: »

I thought the VRS is 170bhp? And I agree with mick on all fronts.

The mk1 vrs is a 1.8turbo petrol.

peter barrins

This post has been deleted.

Col200sx

JerCotter7 wrote: »

I thought the VRS is 170bhp? And I agree with mick on all fronts.

Nope, 180bhp

shinkansen

does the VRS have sports suspension?

mickdw

shinkansen wrote: »

does the VRS have sports suspension?

Certainly sportier than a normal octavia.

shinkansen

right, well proper sports suspension is expensive, only cars gears for high performance would have it, ie: sports dampers and springs.

peter barrins

This post has been deleted.