Lets talk suspension

[Matador]

Originally Posted by [es vi: eks]

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

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).

[NESW20]

Originally Posted by RZNT4R

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.

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

[[es vi: eks]]

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

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).

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

[overvolting]

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

[Midship Runabout]

Originally Posted by overvolting

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.

[EyeZer0]

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.

[[es vi: eks]]

Originally Posted by Dixie Normous

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.

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.

[overvolting]

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.

[Midship Runabout]

Originally Posted by overvolting

Maybe I need to revisit the lastest strut systems

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.

[RZNT4R]

[Double wishbones] Makes for the best handling FWD cars I've ever driven.

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.

Even the corvette leaf springs felt nicer to me and yet not quite as nice as a properly set up wishbones.

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.



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.

[bigbcraig]

^all three of your points:
, , and

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

[Siriusly.Andrew]

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.

[overvolting]

Originally Posted by Siriusly.Andrew

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.

From wikipedia:

"Although it is a popular choice due to its simplicity and low manufacturing cost, the design (Mcphearson strut) has a few disadvantages, with regards to the quality of ride it provides and how it affects the handling of the car. Geometric analysis shows it cannot allow vertical movement of the wheel without some degree of either camber angle change, sideways movement, or both. It is not generally considered to give as good handling as a double wishbone suspension, because it allows the engineers less freedom to choose camber change and roll center. The wheel tends to lean with the body, leading to understeer. Another drawback is that it tends to transmit noise and vibration from the road directly into the body shell, giving higher noise levels and a "harsh" feeling to the ride compared with double wishbones, requiring manufacturers to add extra noise reduction or cancellation and isolation mechanisms. Also, because of its greater size and robustness and greater degree of attachment to the vehicle structure, when the internal seals of the shock absorber portion wear out replacement is expensive compared to replacing a simple shock absorber. However, despite these drawbacks, the strut setup is still used on high performance cars..."

IMHO they are not saving enough money to justify struts, it's a stupid design decision to put struts on a performance car. Sure the crazy germans do it and seem to make it work but they're known for making stupid design decisions and making them work.
If you're building a performance car, put double wishbone on all round. It's stupid for the FT-86 to use strut and it's stupid for honda to use strut.
The 1997 integra type-R outperforms the 2010 civic Si partly because of suspension desgin.

[mrtodd]

Originally Posted by overvolting

The 1997 integra type-R outperforms the 2010 civic Si partly because of suspension desgin.

I think you bring up some good points, but I do not think that Double Wishbone is *always* greater than Macpherson. Sure, it *may* have the potential to be so, but ultimately that's up to the ingenuity of the manufacturer. Even so, there is more to a car's suspension geometry than it's particular type of strut/shock setup.

Your above comparison of the ITR vs 2010 Si... First of all, I love the ITR, and I'd take one over a new Si ANY DAY; however, such is not really a fair comparison. If the Si weighed exactly as much as the ITR then you'd be able to make more of an accurate comparison on the suspension setup. An additional 250 lbs makes a difference on a car with essentially the same HP figures and dimensions.

BUT EVEN SO, I know you're reasoning is well intentioned, and I agree with your thoughts. Just keep in mind though that the FT-86 is not really a hardcore performance vehicle. There has got to be some cost-cutting somewhere on this thing - and IMHO a well thought out Macpherson design for the front end isn't at the top of my worry list... Things could be worse, MUCH worse. I for one, don't think we'll be disappointed at all by the final suspension setup.