Skip to content
56

leaf spring bushings

Worth a look

Shows a thin review moat (72 avg reviews), but a failed launch gate (market size, growth, or returns) keeps it on the watch list.

Market size 14Growth 33Conversion 26Competition 95Returns 47Price range 69Avg price 95Brand share 81Review moat 96Quality gap 63

Review moat

Incredible71.76

avg incumbent reviews — the moat a new listing must climb

Competition

Incredible20%

top-5 click share — an open shelf

Avg price

Incredible$39.80

avg listing price — sweet spot $15–$100

Brand share

Great54%

top-5 brand share — no brand owns this niche

Price range

Good$5.01–$128.29

cheapest to priciest tracked listing — scored on the share inside $15–$100

Quality gap

Good4.4★

avg incumbent rating — lower means beatable quality

Returns

Okay3.4%

return rate — above 6% kills the launch gate

Growth

Okay+6.3%

90-day search growth — must beat 0% to launch

Conversion

Okay2.0%

search→purchase rate — share of searches ending in a sale

Market size

Bad$55K

$55K/yr · 67K searches

Competition

Clicks spread well past the top 5 (20% combined) — an open shelf where new products get seen.

Brands

43 rising

Sellers

158

Top-5 brand share

54%

Open market

42%

  • MOOG20%
  • Prothane15%
  • Energy Suspension10%
  • BST BSSP5%
  • Roneeson5%
  • ACDelco4%

Product shelf

Each bubble is one product — market share against review moat; bubble size tracks estimated sales, color grades how beatable the incumbent looks.

0%2%$1K4%$2K6%$3K8%$4K1101001K10K Reviews — right = deep review moat Market share (90d) ≈ est. sales
Beatable (≤4.3★) Contested Strong incumbent (>4.7★)8 products missing review or click data not plotted

All 93 tracked products in this niche — three views at once, no toggling.

Demand

Weekly Amazon search volume, last 10 weeks — +6.3% search growth over the last 90 days.
2K1KMay '26May '26May '26May '26May '26Jun '26Jun '26Jun '26Jun '26Jul '26

Reviews

What buyers praise and complain about, mined from review topics.

What buyers love

Size-Overall34%

“Fit good”

Quality-Overall20%

“Hardware and quality was nice,”

Value For Money7%

“Great value”

Ease Of Use6%

“easy enough”

Efficiency5%

“Effective”

Durability5%

“Been holding up great against all the use and abuse”

Advertised Vs Actual Product4%

“Everything arrived as described”

Material Quality3%

“Good quality Nylon”

Thickness2%

“These are thicker and fit nice”

Correct Contents2%

“Good Replacement Kit”

What buyers complain about

Size-Overall45%

“Too big”

Compatibility-Overall11%

“Did not fit for 2002 chevy 1500 hd”

Hard Feel7%

“Hard fit”

Lubrication7%

“Missing the lubricant”

Advertised Vs Actual Product4%

“Not what is shown”

Material Quality4%

“Not the highest grade material”

Rubber Quality2%

“were way undersized when replacing the old rubber type that I needed to replace”

Thickness2%

“Rather thin anyways”

Durability2%

“so dont know how long they would actually last”

Top return reasons

Size-Overall59%
Compatibility-Overall11%
Advertised Vs Actual Product8%
Defective Material/Parts6%
Width3%
Value For Money2%
Assembly/Installation2%
Functionality-Overall1%
Material Quality1%
Thickness1%