I always hear about these in magazines and the like. How modern cars have better suspension and therefore corner better etc. However, when you see underneath a lot of cars, the suspension appears to be basic mac struts and torsion beams at the back, much the same as a load of other stuff from the last 20 - 30 years.
Where does the difference come from? Better suspension setup? Stiffer shells? Better tyres?
Often the suspension isn't quite as simple as it appears at first glance. Several designs have passive rear wheel steer, the springs are not as simple as they appear having variable rates, dampers have much better characteristics than older designs giving more optimal damping and less bounce than older models. And yes all of the above. Plus possibly lower unsprung weight and a better understanding of the use of anti-roll bars.
Fords (and the baby Jag) have the "control blade" rear suspension which looks superficially similar to a trailing arm but separates the spings and dampers and allows a degree of RWS.
Better everything: dampers (now almost universally with a gasreservoir), springs (variable rate), pivoting parts and bushings (does your car still needs to be greased at 60 points every 2500 km?), tires (only 15 years ago a 205/50 on a rim of 15 inch was considered only for real sportscars), powersteering (so that hydraulics take the effort away and allow for a more free suspension design)
What has gone up too? Weight of the cars. This is strangely enough not detremental to roadholding *as long* as the grip is there.
Things become however a bit less in the rain or with overheated shockabsorbers or when the grip asked is not there anymore.
Best of both era's? Something light with modern components. Think Lotus Elise, a good Lotus Seven-clone and the like. Less obvious choices: a Pug 309 16V or BX16V with the softest tires you can find...
Come to think of it, I'm sure one of the big advances with dampers is that nowadays you don't get cavitation causing the oil to froth so the damper is better able to control the return of the spring.
Its the same as the "modern turbo diesel". Not really better by any major amount but percieved to be if enough people say it. And like global warming being caused by CO2...Like its a fact! The main thing that has actually helped is tyres and the lower profile.
Chassis design? When people talk about that these days, they are normally really meaning suspension design - there is no chassis, of course, and most modern hatchbacks have very stiff shells. The primary determining factors on handling are the weight of the car and the suspension geometry - the dimensions of the main body of the car are largely irrelevant.
Hehe. Have you actually been near a diesel in the last 10 years dude? I mean, I know you have a phobia, but you have to try to overcome these things. The PSA XUDT engines were amongst the best available 15 years ago - I quite like them and still run two cars with them in, but compared to almost any modern common rail unit they are coarse and gutless, with a narrow powerband. The really good modern diesels are *vastly* better. I haven't tried any of the BMW lumps, but the 6-cyl merc CDi lumps and even cheaper units like the 4-cyl Honda 2.2 Cdti lump are superb. They will pull properly from ~1200rpm up to near as damn it 5krpm.
Before you say it, I know that a turbo petrol of sufficient size would produce more torque and more revs and is better, but I couldn't afford to run one, so I don't really care. Modern diesels let me go fast for cheap, so I like them.
Albert T Cone gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
Not that a common-rail exactly has a hugely wide powerband, but you're right. However, there's one thing that the older-tech lumps are which the newer ones aren't.
Should you be interested heres a picture of his merc ion my drive. Apart fromn the usual tiny knot of power and about 35 auto gears to try and keep the engine happy and working in its "happy" zone which is enough to drive you nuts with hundreds of gearchanges per mile it also sports the ubiquitous smelly diesel oil stain smeared over the rear corner. And yes it still sounds harsh and like a truck, and its tiring to drive. If this is an example of the best "modern turbo diesel" that everyone keeps talking about then god help us... In real terms its about 10 percent better than the old diesel trucks I drove in the 70s. The petrol ones are massively more relaxing and smoother to drive. The only reason he has to suffer it is because the company accountant insists.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.