Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo
I apologise. I got heated and that was unwarranted.
Lowering the driver lowers much more than just the roof. There's all the glass, the pillars, crash beams, wiring looms and more.
I'm not saying that the boxer is the only reason the car has a low CG. I'm saying that if you replaced it with an I4, you'd have to raise up a significant portion of the car to get it to pass international regulations. In fact Tada has said that the car initially sat 15 mm lower than it does, but in order to comply to some countries standards they had to raise the suspension, causing it to have slightly more ground clearance than the WRX 😆
|
apology accepted. i still disagree with just about everything youre saying. maybe not the idea but rather the magnitude.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extrashaky
I'm sorry you're having difficulty understanding it. I don't need to have specific COG numbers for other Subaru vehicles to have heard about the boxer configuration contributing to a low COG, just as I don't need actual temperature readings to recall that it's hot in the summer in south Texas or annual snowfall totals to have heard that there are good places to ski in Colorado. I get the sense you're intentionally playing obtuse just to have something to argue about.
|
im not playing obtuse. youre simultaneously telling me that subaru is known for their low center of gravity, while not knowing any of the cars center of gravity and that they also dont market the low center of gravity. its just a bunch of counterintuitive statements you make.