|
I see a lot of subjective, "the handling isn't GOOD, it's just fast because x,y,z..., fast doesn't mean good handling..." going on here on the anti-leaf spring side, and almost no empirical evidence or engineering oriented reasons why the spring type is to blame for those issues. It could all be a combination of spring rate, bushing stiffness, steering linkage slop etc. that cause the softer feel Pobst mentions.
The bottom line is that the Corvette has a double wishbone suspension with springs providing the restoring force. Whether those springs are leafs or coils is really a non-issue as far as the chassis dynamics go. The chassis only cares how hard the springs are pushing back when a force is applied to them, how hard/soft the bushings and joints in all the components are, and how the geometry of the suspension combined with that hardness/softness in the bushings and springs combines to keep (Or not keep) the rubber planted effectively and communicating that information to the driver.
Everything else is a load of verbal (written) diarrhea until some direct comparison evidence is shown with an identical suspension setup with everything about the car held identical except for the spring type. That means the only thing changing is the type of spring providing the restoring force.
Until that type of comparison is made, any comment to the effect of, "the suspension design is sloppy because it has leaf springs" or "the leaf springs are holding back the suspension and responsible for the poor handling." or, "leaf springs are worse than coils" is completely meaningless and solely keyboard jockey conjecture.
From a logical engineering perspective there isn't any major indicator that the springs are worse or better. So until that is proven, those saying, "It's no worse or better, it's just different" are correct. Because that's the only conclusion we have the evidence to make at this point.
Cheers
Nathan
|