Lets talk suspension
 

http://s10.directupload.net/images/100313/qwnygdgy.jpg
Looks to me like the strut is mounted on the lower control arm. That means the FT will come with a SLA (short long arm) or double wish-bone setup and not a MacPherson type. Is anyone else excited by this?


(picture stolen from another thread, sorry)

Looks to me, there's coilover... yay~

I don't know the diffrencrs I'm what the setups mean but if it ones with coilovers I'm really excited!! Where can I place my order!?!? What will the spring rate be 8fronts and 10rears??


might want to upload image again go to http://hangimages.com and post it on there..

8f/10r? That might be too soft. I wanna stiffer.

That's what she said.

yeah thats soft for a 2600lbs+ chassis, coming from a solid rear axle, im just excited to enhance what i've learn on my AE86 on a better chassis. I'll be happy if i can match the speed of my ae86 on the first year i take my FT86 on the track.

Wouldn't get my hopes up on any mechanical part of a show car.

so would rates would you like it to be at?

12 front 14 rear?

yeah...coil overs on a showcar so they can adjust the height easily

Hopefully double wishbones front and rear to the final production model...

Hm... 14f/12r maybe

I dunno. Ya the adjustable height coils will not be production, but you think they would have a different suspension setup completely on the show car.
I mean they would have to subtract an upper control arm and modify the lower if they were to have mac struts on the production version :iono:

Not really what im talking about but yes thats true.

This

Hey there, I was looking at that pic and comments and I couldn't resist doing my first post on it.

This isn't an SLA setup, it's missing too many links, with just 2 I-arms in plain sight. Looking at how the components are layed out and taking into consideration the little bit of arm visible in the bottom right corner, this should be similar to a ford/mazda control blade. It's interesting to note that the top link uses a ball joint and not a bushing, for a consistency in camber I presume.

There does not seem to be a toe link in sight. Perhaps because the "control blade" is tubular and not pressed steel, thus much stiffer.

Also, the front should be MacPherson. Subarus are tight in the nose because of the wide engine. there's just no room double wishbone up there.

Not gonna happen.

Thank you for the info.
hmmmm i guess i never really thought about how wide a boxer is. :bonk: good point

don't matter what coilover or non coilover ill change it to a better spring rate and better strut rebound, I'm thinking 14kg front/ 12kg rear

So pretty much same as me then.

lol didn't see your replay but yeah something like that but im thinking joining another of the R&D on a small shop here in socal so I can get free stuff.

Lucky you, I envy ya. Send some on my way too lol

A quick follow up.

While at work, the rear suspension on an '06 RAV4 struck me in the eye, and it's mechanical workins seemed to jive with the pic of the FT, minus some expected differences.

http://www.pressroom.com.au/newpress...06RAV4-084.jpg

You can see the two main structural lateral arms, one really fat under the coil and one smaller and slightly curved attaching at the top of the knuckle. The big pressed steel longitudinal link would be equivalent to the tubular arm visible in the bottom right of the FT picture, and the small toe link at the bottom/front of the knuckle is the only thing I can't find in the FT pic. An eccentric at the end of the lower arm might be doing that job.

Subarus are tight in the nose because the engine is mounted ahead of and over the front axle, the FT-86 won't have that problem. But since the platform already uses MacPherson you are probably right that they will keep it.

That's not quite the full scope of the situation...

Yeah subarus are tight in the nose, but that's with the engine slightly forwards of the front axle. I was under an impreza before leaving work, and they even kink the subframe inwards behind the engine to fit control arm that's a bit longer.

The FT however, had the engine sitting right between the wheels, taking up space from the suspension, as evidenced by this pic from geneva.

http://s10.directupload.net/images/100313/vr5678pj.jpg

You can see the oil pan amongst the exhaust bends, right between the wheels.

I was hoping for more of a S2K setup. Technically mid engine but not really.

Well, it was easy in the S2000's case to push the firewall back and fit a whole I4 behind the front axle since it's a 2 seater, but the FT needs a bit more space since it's a 4 seater.

The engine should already be very far back in the engine bay, the open hood shot in the original GT5 reveal trailer hinted that unlike the traditional subaru rear throttle/airbox layout, they had to put the throttle on the front of the manifold and plumb the intake tube between the AC compressor and alternator (now on either side of the engine), so I don't think they could have pushed the engine any farther back.

But given that a boxer is only 2 cylinders long, even if it's right over the front axle, there's next to no weight protruding forwards, so I don't think you have to worry, it's not any less front midship than the S2000.

This. :word:

Nice pic, good find. I was hoping for a full front midship configuration like RX8 or S2000 (both at the top of my list if I can't hold out for the Ft-86) but I guess with the car that small and the need for a back seat sacrifices have to be made.

Btw, I was working on my 2.5RS coupe yesterday and saw what you said about the subframe. All that weight pushed up forward makes me want to experiment with a carbon fiber hood...

Someone on NASIOC had a theory that the engine is not based on the EJ 2.5L family but on the EZ H6 3.0L family with 2 cylinders removed but keeping some of the other components making it even more compact longitudinally. I'll try to find the exact post.

The last FR flat 4 engined Sports coupe had this double wish bone set up up front in 1950.
Its in front of the axle but the motor is pretty light.
And still handle very well
http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i1...nderbonnet.jpg

Just for a reference, though.. that kind of design wouldn't work today. The car had ZERO space or a modern bumper or crumple zone, andeven a small front-end collision would mean totalling the car.

Just look how little room is in front of the front axle!
http://www.shorey.net/Auto/Miscellan...ster%20f3q.jpg

:bellyroll: You say it as if there has been lots of them.
FYI, it wasn't the last either. A better point of reference would be Toyota's Sport 800 which came out in 63 or thereabouts (never mind that it was 2cyl).

great picture!! i don't think that will be the final exhaust layout. it looks like the picture is looking rearward from in front of the right front tire. to me, it looks like the oil pan drain plug is behind the front axle centerline, but most of the engine mass might be centered right on or ever-so-slightly behind the centerline.

either way, it's pretty far back. :) man i can't wait to see the production car.

-Mike

Thats why I said flat 4 and not straight out boxer motor lol :)
The same company had been produced FR boxer engined cars/vans/untillitys from 1910 to 1954 so there has been lots produced over that time... not lots compaired to modern standards tho.
So Im looking forward to the FT86 as a modern equivelent :)
Any way I could afford the Toyota FT86 but not a Jupiter

You know, if they go with struts instead of wishbones all around I might not want one.

I assume you will be using the FT as a track only vehicle? Because with street driving, there is no real advantage to either.

Since I saw you have an integra, I got to thinkin. A flat motor cant be to much wider than a transversely mounted traditional four cylinder + transmission. No? If i remember correct civics/integras have double wishbones up front with the huge steering knuckle.

If Toyota/Subaru is still going to be using a shortened Impreza platform for this car then the Impreza has a strut front and double wishbone rear. I am starting to think the FT86 is going to ape a lot more of it's parts from the Subaru bin rather then the Toyota bin.

In the later shape Justy, a wrx engine can fit into one.
The Justy is fitted with a 1.0 or 1.2 transversely mounted 3 cylinder.
:)

Yeah, my integra is both my DD and my RR car so I can't claim to be completely hardcore. But I've had it for so long now and it handles so frieking well with it's all round double wishbone. Not only that, you throw a fully adjustable coilover in there and you vary the height up and down and measure camber, it's a beautiful thing. The double wishbone give the designer complete control over the camber throughout travel. For anyone who's never driven an integra, especially the type-r or any integra with a set up suspension or even one of the all round double wishbone older civics, you should DEFINITELY try it sometime. Makes for the best handling FWD cars I've ever driven.

Maybe I need to revisit the lastest strut systems, but all the mcphearsons I've seen don't have that control over camber and feel kinda sad when you push them. Even the corvette leaf springs felt nicer to me and yet not quite as nice as a properly set up wishbones. Do any proper race cars use anything other than double wishbone?

I do really miss the RWD factor of the corvette I drove though. I still want to keep the fwd car I have, but RWD is so different and so much fun that I need both types of cars.

What I'm looking for in an ideal world is a RWD, lightweight (sub 2700lbs), NA, high revving 4cl engine that looks as sharp as the FT-86 with 2+2 seating and has double wishbones all around. Preferably something that's going to respond really well to a properly sized turbo setup.

The thing for me is that I'm going to be comparing the FT-86 against things like a used audi RS4 or corvette. If the FT-86 is priced at 20k and handles well and is under 3000lbs, I'll probably buy it and turbo it.

If it's priced over 25k that's too close to the price of a used current model corvette. you can snag a 2008 corvette with a 6.2L LS3, 430 bhp, 424 lb·ft and very low miles for just over 30k, it has more than enough power so it wouldn't need to be turbo and it only weighs like 3200lbs. I'm not a huge corvette fan either, but I can't match the performance for the price of a used one.

So for me, small things like weight, price and mcphearson vs double wishbone matters since I'm so torn between options.

You said lastest hehe

For the manufacture, Macphearsons are alot cheaper to mass produce. Thats why with the low price tag, Im afraid the FT we wont be getting all it could be. And like others have said the double wishbone up front wouldn't work with a flat motor.

The all-strut Neon ACR would like to have a word with you. Granted that's only one example, but it hints that a properly setup anyting can be quite good, hell, even the properly setup live axle of the '11 mustang is giving some good results. My first car was an all-strut MR2 Supercharger and it was glorious. I remember one time I had it in the shop and the curtesy car was an EG civic and it's handling made me want to cry.

Corvettes are all around double wishbones. The leaf spring is a moot point since it's transverse, thus it acts like any other kind of spring, only it has the advantage of being very thin, so it takes virtually no room, it occupies the same space as the lower arms.

If the pics from geneva are anything to go by, the rear will not feature struts, and that despite my previous posts saying it looked a lot like a mazda control blade or a toyota rav4 rear end, I've found it's even more a dead rigner for honda's own work in the rear of the RSX.

And again, from the geneva pics, it's certain the front will be using struts.

http://s10.directupload.net/images/100313/vr5678pj.jpg

See the pressed steel A arm that isn't load bearing (does not have a spring attached to it), This kinda implies that there's a strut at the other end of the knuckle.

IMO, that's an almost perfect setup: a rear end that just doesn't quit, and a frontend that's tactile and progressive.

^all three of your points:
:word:, :word:, and :word:

I I've just missed you, sorry; otherwise, welcome to FT86Club!

the new Civic Si's have MacPherson Struts on the front, and Double Wishbone rears, and with coilovers the car the can be tuned to completely eliminate under steer.

Just sayin, Double Wishbone isn't everything. As nice as it would be, you'd likely still end up changing something eventually. So I'll take Macpherson Struts to save costs up front, and put in my own adjustable coil overs down the road.

Just can't get over the camber tuning for double wishbone.. so nice and simple.