I've checked the part numbers with two other Toyota parts departments and can confirm that the part numbers on the service order sheet are correct: LR - #48530-A9021 RR - #48540-A9021 Whether or not they actually installed these, I don't know. I'll have to return the car for inspection to know for sure. I have an appt tomorrow morning to have the dealership look at it. I can just imagine they will tell me every thing looks "normal"
My experience with gas filled struts is that they do have a tendency to push out and increase ride height. I'm experiencing about a 1/2 to 1 inch increase. I also thought perhaps they had swapped out the springs too, to save time, but the service dept. said that's not their policy. Daniel, you are correct ? the original struts (both front and rear) were gas charged. I thought I remembered something about the 4-cyl models only having front gas charged struts with standard units in the rear. Wrong.
I can live with the ride height change. It annoys me, but that?s about it. The thing I want fixed is the stiff ride. As I mentioned in the original message, I don?t care about ?feel of the road.? I don?t carry
50# bags of cement in my trunk. I don?t take corners at high speed. That?s not what I bought the car for.
After reading other threads in this forum, I?m convinced that I?m in the minority with this issue. Seems like most Camry owners are complaining about the rear suspension being too soft and bottoming out. Perhaps Toyota made a specification change to the struts to correct this (common) complaint?
Chicken, I had the work done almost a month ago, so I suppose that?s enough time for the struts to settle-in. If they have become more compliant, I haven?t noticed it. Also, I don?t think this is an example of ?the frog in the frying pan? effect. That is, time has not caused me to forget how stiff the original struts were when new.
Assuming that the dealership finds nothing wrong my question remains: Who makes a strut with minimal resistance?