Monroe quickstruts front and Moog rear springs review

[Fargo]

Following the lead of some others in this forum I installed the Monroe quickstruts upfront and the Moog 81119 rear springs. Things are still settling in, but it appears I got about a 1/4" of lift up front and maybe 1/2" in the rear. So not as much as others appear to be getting. But my Pathfinder only has about 100,000 miles on it. So maybe my factory springs haven't sagged as much as others. But then again, we really shouldn't expect this setup to do more than restore factory height since these are all components made to factory specs. More or less.

I never saw any specs on the Monroe quickstruts, but the Moog springs are about 23lbs heavier spring than the factory. I found that by comparing the OEM spring rate in the OME catalogue and the specs given on Moogs website. The Moog does appear to be better quality though since it is a thicker rod material with more coil wraps than the factory springs.

In the end my Pathfinder sits near perfectly level when I measure from tire to wheel well. Which is better than the slightly sagging rear I had before. I would have preferred more lift, but I also didn't want to deal with alignment issues found in the 2" lift kits. So I am satisfied.

[Fargo]

As far as the ride goes. The Monroes felt very nice up front. However, I am dissappointed in the rear. The Monroe does not seem to control rebound dampening as much as I wanted. From experience with Bilstiens on my Jeep I think the Billies would provide a much improved ride. But since my purchase was made while Monroe had a $75 rebate, it was a much cheaper option.

[ShipFixer]

I have the Moog springs with Bilsteins in the back. It’s how the truck should have come stock! The Monroes are copies of the stock dampers which are underdamped.

FWIW I had a set of the Rancho adjustables in between sets of Bilsteins. They too were underdamped even when turned up to max. The Bilsteins are so spot on I can’t see myself trying something else again.

[Fargo]

Thanks for the input. My original plan was to go with Bilstein, but I was suckered into the Monroes by a rebate. I might put in the Billies yet. Sounds like that is the real solution I am looking for.

[disallow]

I put Napa NCP 2773590 rear coils into my 05 last year. I am certain they are the Moog springs you put in, listed as constant rate spring with the exact measurements of the Moog 81280s. At the same time I installed new Air Lift 1000s

For day to day driving, I'm not super happy with the handling characteristics I'm getting these days. But I am running 10 year old Bilstein 4600s, so thought I'd start going through the warranty process for that (probably not happening, the warranty is a joke), and I still have the original struts up front. So obviously I am due on both front and rear for shocks. Will probably do the front springs as well, or go with quick struts.

But I still think the rear springs leave something to be desired, and wondering if it would be worth going to a variable rate spring (ac delco offers these) and go with either the v8 or Armada springs for the rear, and v8 springs for the front. I am not after any lift really at all, just no sag. I pull a 28 ft travel trailer, and even with the bags inflated to 30psi, I am getting some sag. Never used to have that issue with my old springs before they broke.

Any thoughts? Will variable rate springs give better results while towing? If I don't want lift, would the v8 front and rear springs be the way to go?

[ShipFixer]

I was unable to find what you're talking about online. Are you referring to progressive rate springs? FWIW the AirLift 1000 gives you a progressive spring curve - even if capped at 0 psi. Air springs are inherently progressive, and in this case are adding a little bit of bottom-out resistance to a linear spring. That's how I'm running my AirLift right now, where I had about 10 psi at all times before with the stock springs.

I'm a big fan of progressive springs for a lot of reasons. Yeah, they'd probably be better for towing but they're also just better all around, particularly for vehicles with varying weights (everything outside of racing), road surfaces with varying input forces (everything outside of racing), and preventing linear oscillation from constant input from road imperfections or driver inputs (everything outside of racing).

I think they're less widely adapted because they're less easy to understand or tune for performance applications. Mechanics can learn enough about dampers and springs to intuitively tune them for ideal damping vs. other dynamics for a given track. But again, that's where the math is a lot simpler than out in the world.

[smj999smj]

Moog and Monroe list the same part numbers for the V6 and V8 front struts, FYI.

[disallow]

Moog and Monroe list the same part numbers for the V6 and V8 front struts, FYI.

I noticed that too... But the springs are rated differently if you look at the Moog and ac delco parts for the V6 vs the v8.

So not enough to make a difference? Or spec'd to the high side?

[smj999smj]

Moog and Monroe list the same part numbers for the V6 and V8 front struts, FYI.

I noticed that too... But the springs are rated differently if you look at the Moog and ac delco parts for the V6 vs the v8.

So not enough to make a difference? Or spec'd to the high side?

Good question! I don't know!