Replacing the springs but not the shocks would be pointless.
EDIT: I read this as "Replacing the shocks but not the springs would be pointless.", so this whole post is talking about that.
I agree with everything else, but I think the wording here is a bit strong, and actually not necessarily true. EDIT: I agree with everything said before; it is foolish to replace a worn spring, while keeping the worn shock.
(Although, I think if you're really stuck for money, you should at least replace broken springs no matter what.)
Here's why there's a point to replacing your shocks even if you don't replace the springs:
If the springs are broken, of course you have to replace them (no argument there).
And of course, ideally, if money and component availability are not a factor, you should replace them, but this does not mean that it's pointless to just replace your shocks and not springs.
What wears out springs the most is the metal fatigue caused by the number of compression/expansion cycles, but shocks in good mechanical condition prevent exactly that. Ideally, the strut assembly compresses once and then returns to the original ride height. A spring with no shock will contract + expand many times until it eventually comes to rest. As the strut wears out, the tendency is to go from the former to the latter. Maintaining your shocks in good condition (i.e. changing them) will actually prolong the life of the spring, so it may not be necessary to change it at the same time, but it depends on what you've done with the car.
A good indicator for worn out springs is ride height. If it's close to the original, you're probably safe to keep your springs.
How so? The strut assembly (spring + shock) can be modelled as a damped harmonic oscillator differential equation. The first part of that equation is the only place where the spring plays a part of, and it's the same as Hooke's law , F=-kx, where x is the amount of compression and k is the spring characteristic factor, which changes as a the spring ages. An older spring would compress more under the same weight (of the car at rest) and thus the change in x would be larger, and thus the ride height would be lower. So comparing 2 identical cars of the same weight, both with new shocks, one with new springs and one with old ones, if the ride height is the same, then the handling characteristics will be the same.
There are also a number of other factors that come into play:
- OEM shocks are designed to be used with a certain spring with a certain weight car; even when comparing brand new cars, switching out springs or shocks to a different brand will yield unfavourable handling characteristics. The above description of a damped harmonic oscillator explains this - different characteristic constants for components means they're no longer tuned to be an specific suspension.
- however, once you deviate from the standard and go with aftermarket shocks - we can't find OEM shocks anymore - or change from sport to non-sports or vice versa, all of that goes out the window. No one has any quantitative information to substantiate that a Bilstein shock may not be better suited with a used Lincoln spring than with a new one for our given application OR that new Bilstein shocks+springs will yield better results, when they're made for a different car with a different weight. And this is even more of a factor when dealing with the other garbage suspension brands out there.
Of course, intuition tells us that new springs will be better, but we don't really have the evidence to say how much better,
so I don't think it's fair to call it pointless, especially if you don't have the money to spare or can't source the right part.