Sphere mount bracket

[davetherave]

I have been cleaning and de-rusting my spare strut heads and was wondering what people thought of this one, some of the others have had good rubber to metal bonding on the base. However I have a few where the rubber has fully come away from the metal.
This one has only slightly parted round the edges, would this one be a saver? If so whats the best way to stop it progressing?

[xmexclusive]

Recovered the set of C5 heads and struts today.
Got to go back tomorrow to finish off and tidy up.
Not been able to do much in the way of checking while I was working.
Still some key things were obvious.
C5 strut heads are not handed so will fit either side.
The strut centre for hydraulic connections looks very similar.
Will have to measure up to know about size and fit.
The metal base plate only has 3 bolts but they are larger.
It also has the same type of raised centre metal section but square not round.
The metal is treated but is also starting to surface rust.
The rubber centre section is very different, just two metalastic bearings to provide resistance across the car.
Does not appear to be any rubber to restrict fore and aft movement.
Will let you know what else I glean once I have them on a work bench.
Might be interesting to know the current Citroen price for C5 strut heads.
Did not get to keep the spheres so at least I will not be wasting time looking at those.

John

[minijet]

.
Only just discovered this thread (missunderstood the title), but glad to see the search for an answer to the strut top failure problem is alive and kicking on here
I've nothing usefull to add at the moment, but I'll be following the thread with great interest.

Paul

.

[robert_e_smart]

For series 1 C5 they list 2 strut top part numbers, one for hydractive 3, and the other for hydractive 3+

00005271G0 SUPPORT 118,97 GBP 139,79 GBP 139,79 GBP Hydractive 3

00005271G2 SUPPORT 115,60 GBP 135,83 GBP 135,83 GBP Hydractive 3+

Both the initial C5 and the facelift 2006 onwards cars share the same strut tops. On the C Funf and the C6, they use a differnt system again, and sell a complete unit of suspension cylender and what we know as the strut top.

[kenhall]

Quote davethe rave

'I have been cleaning and de-rusting my spare strut heads and was wondering what people thought of this one, some of the others have had good rubber to metal bonding on the base. However I have a few where the rubber has fully come away from the metal.
This one has only slightly parted round the edges, would this one be a saver? If so whats the best way to stop it progressing?'

Hi Dave,

From your pictures I would say that this one looks in reasonable shape. The torn/split thin layer of rubber in the voids does not appear to have come away from the metal and is not significant as regards the function of the strut top. However the tears could act as an initiation point for a crack to extend into the main thick rubber sections which presently appear to be sound and fully bonded. The strut tops on my Mk2 XM 2.1TD are showing the same symptoms and I now routinely inspect them so that potential developing problems are spotted early. Once cracking or rubber/steel delamination starts in the thick rubber sections I don't think that there is much you can do to stop it progressing apart from keeping your strut spheres in good shape.

Ken

[davetherave]

Thanks Ken,
Thats pretty much as I thought, I shall carry on cleaning then and stick this one in the save pile, My other few that have de laminated are rather obviously not a great idea to use! Ill have to put some pictures up.

Interestingly all of my failed ones are exhibiting signs of rubber failure rather than the baseplate going. However all the baseplates are rusty, so I suppose they just go.

[xmexclusive]

Hi Dave

You are seeing the most typical mode of failure with XM strut heads.
The rubber, particularly the thin sections, suffer bond failure with the steel.
Surface rust sets in and the expansion caused by rusting peels more of the rubber.
Flaps of rubber trap water, even suck it in by capilliar action and the rusting starts a new cycle.
Before rust treatment I carefully trim any loose rubber, particularly the thin layer on the strut base top side.
I have only recently recognised that the thin rubber in the insets on the underside is best removed as well.
You only have to look at failed Xantia strut heads to see the importance of rust control.
In the UK XM strut heads generally rust from the top down with the rust concentrated under the failed thin top rubber layer.
The Xantia one goes twice as fast because that extra thin rubber layer on the underside fails rapidly and is fed salt water.
The thin flaps of rubber keep the metal damp all the time hence the rapid rusting.
The XM strut head underside starts life as bare unprotected metal.
It will get wet and salt on it but it air dries rapidly and spends most of its life dry.
So you take them off an XM after 15 years and there is nothing beyond surface rust.
A typical 10 year old "thin rubber protected" Xantia one will have rusted right through.

John

[XMX]

.....
On the Xantia strut head I think it will be worth modifying a good secondhand one to see if we can life extend it.
I think there is real scope here and I would even modify a new Xantia one before fitting it.
..................................................................................

John

Hi John,
We've already been down this road :-

I'm almost certain Xantia strut tops won't work, even if you find VSX or Exclusive
ones; highly unlikely BTW. They're just not strong enough never mind dimensionally
accurate/compatible. I wouldn't expect drilling the feed pipe out would work
remotely well either!!

Andrew

Hi Andrew
Looked out a large type XM strut head and an Xantia strut head this evening and compared them.
Surprised that the Xantia one was a bit deeper with a larger baseplate than the XM one.
It looks as though the Xantia centre hole will fit a small XM strut taper.

John

Hi John,
Having looked over a strut top from an Xantia (albeit being a 3.5mm feed pipe type) and compared it to the XM's ,
I'd agree with Andrew there's no possibility of adapting the Xantia type as the dimension from the strut top mounting face on the XM's (Which is generally flattish) to the top of the casting (where the piston/rod nut fit up to) this measures 106.5mm.
In comparison the Xantia one is approx. 145mm in the central position as this dimension of the base-plate increase's (due to it being of a spherical type mounting face) also the dimensions between the four mounting stud/bolts are dimensionally different too !

So all in all, a modified strut top from an Xantia as a retrofit is a none starter IMHO.

XMX

The /\ quote from THIS thread (As already stated by Andrew), IT really would be a good thing to have a Technical 'Sticky' all under ONE title/thread:- 'Front Suspension Strut Top (Failure/Repair)' IMHO !

XMX

[Dieselman]

some of the others have had good rubber to metal bonding on the base.

Do you want to donate a pair or wrecked one in the name of science?

[steelcityuk]

This may be a really silly question but how different is the full strut and 'head' from a xantia/C5? Are they fatter/thinner, shorter/longer, etc. What I'm getting at is could we use the complete unit? If just the strut 'head' to wing mounting is different could an adapter plate be made?

Steve.