Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 94

Thread: Corvette leaf springs

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St Marys Western Sydney
    Posts
    20,953
    Quote Originally Posted by pimento View Post
    A next-gen Zeta platform could be designed with the 'Vette in mind, that'd share things with the Conformadore anc Camaro and whatnot. 'Cept the rear gearbox, that wouldn't make sense in a family car.
    Rear transaxle might actually work pretty well, and will undoubtedly happen in the future. Dont think theres a chance in hell Commodore and Corvette will share any more than engines though. Maybe electrics and some other systems, but nothing structural.
    I am the Stig

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,456
    Yeah I know C6RS, the company I work for did the height adjustable airspring on the car. Also saw one couple weeks ago at Novi MI....

    How do you do asymmetric rate on one leaf spring? I can see you can do preload, but rate can't be different on the same piece of leaf?
    Last edited by RacingManiac; 10-06-2010 at 07:24 AM.
    University of Toronto Formula SAE Alumni 2003-2007
    Formula Student Championship 2003, 2005, 2006
    www.fsae.utoronto.ca

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,508
    I'm not sure how it's done but Vette Brakes and Products says they can do it. My GUESS is they move the leaf spring pickups either on the A-arm or at the chassis. You could also make an asymmetric leaf. Let me reiterate that these are guesses.
    Corvette and the leaf spring...

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    culver, the first pics of suspension you show are so old it is laughable
    The latter set you're getting close to modern setups used in US cars perhaps.
    BUT, modern cars are using much more complex and compact than any of those.
    AND that I think is the poitn, it is more expensive.
    So we get an excellent handling econobox for the price US consumers are used to paying for "top of range" Fords and GMs.
    Different customer-focus.
    and when you get to "performance" cars then many are already supplied with or offer remote reservoir coil overs thus reducing the space needed and most importantnly of all providing cooling on the harder working short throw.
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,508
    Matra,

    I don't think you intended it this way but your US vs Euro comments can be taken to be quite condescending. Let's please not let this devolve into an us vs them sort of discussion.

    The second picture I included is the 2010 world version of the Honda Accord. That is hardly an outdated design. It looks very similar to the current front suspension used on the Fiat 159. It doesn't seem any more compact than the system Honda is using.
    Agility with total control - Alfa Romeo Hong Kong
    I don't see anything suggesting that the design used by either make is outdated.

    Which econoboxes are still using double wishbones in front. In the US market Honda was the last to move over to struts. I know we don't get the range of small car's Europe gets but really, how many are using double a-arms in front?

    Incidentally when Honda did the S2000 they put the spring above the upper A-arm.
    http://automobiles.honda.com/images/...suspension.jpg

    Now the Corvette setup doesn't look radically different than this picture
    http://site.titanmotorsports.com/blo...tecF430-19.jpg
    The Ferrari does mount the damper higher up (thus making for a taller overall assembly than the Corvette. The Ferrari also clearly bows the upper A-arm to clear the springs. Ironically the Kappa pictures seem to have a suspension setup (not the chassis structure but the damper, arms, spring etc) that looks very similar to the Ferrari setup. The biggest differences I see are the Ferrari mounts the outboard joints in double shear and the upper pickup for the damper is strut like in the Kappa (and more like mass market double wishbone setups).

    Comments about remote reservoirs are a red herring. How many sports cars that cost about the same as the Boxster come with remote reservoir dampers? Of course Ferrari is using a set of trick magnetically adjusted dampers in the 458. They look a lot like the ones in that Edmunds link...

    I can't say why GM didn't bow the upper A-arm to fit a conventional coil but I can't see any reason to dispute their packaging claim. No other explanation passes the sniff test.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,456
    Don't a lot of "modern" econoboxes in Europe still uses twist beam setup at the back anyway? Doesn't seem to diminishes their handling necessarily, just like some IRS rear setup can also drive poorly. We have a couple of Peugeot at work that we work on here(407s) and while they are neatly packaged and compact(great trunk space), the motion ratio for the spring and damper is poor and a lot of that is driven not by "performance" but rather packaging. The stock vehicle also doesn't drive very well, but Peugeot now probably rates pretty low on the totem pole anyway. Complexity is not necessarily the answer to the optimum handling car, rather I see most of the time to address packaging issue. Most multi-link setup now are designed to be geometric/mechanically overconstaining, but through bushing and compliance tuning to allow them to be kinematically "solvable", thats something you won't see in a performance oriented car(say, a open wheel car or a Caterham, for example).
    University of Toronto Formula SAE Alumni 2003-2007
    Formula Student Championship 2003, 2005, 2006
    www.fsae.utoronto.ca

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    culver, it is a matter of FACT that us consumers have cheaper cars and that the designers aim to meet that expectation.
    THUS why most of Ford range is 2 year old designds from RoW until recently

    in terms of age of design, the pics you showed are OLD>
    That it is on a new car is irrelevant.
    Look at Mini and the original Z rear for examples of innovative and different to get packaging right.

    EVO and Subaru performance versions come with remotes ( or they do here )

    Other explanatinos to "pass the sniff test" are they jsut want it to be that way.
    It is "tradition" and no amount of defending it works
    It's like the original air-cooled REAR engined 911s. EVERYONE new there was a better way but 911 buyers didn't want change and so Porsche had major develompent programs to make it work !! Motor industry is FULL of examples, just I suspect WE are nto as touchy or have as big a chip on shoulder about it
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    RM, yes torsion bar suspension was always a common system in France to handle the very rough roads they were used to and modern systems used them for packaging.
    A good torsion bar is the equal of a spring !
    Competition and adjustability.
    My Matra has torsion front Best of all they are VERY easy to swap in/out and heat treating can adjust characterstics ! To be fair I've only 2 sets for the Matra as I've avoided too stiff.

    BUT the development of advanced shocks has led to a massive reduction in size and so the space is readily found for coilovers for performance cars.

    Ps, THe torsion in MODERN cars is about the rear passenger width, not the boot (trunk) and so as cars have become MORE compact and still want 4 seats then more have and will go that route. Trailling arm and torsion bar and with the likes of the BMW Z-links provide good performance. And in FWD competition cars there is buggar all weight at the back to control anyway
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,508
    I'm not disputing that. I agree that on the whole US consumers are more cost contious and less interested in paying extra for features in our cars. However, this isn't just a Big 3 thing. Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Hyundai and VW all see this hence they produce cars that target American taste. This is traditionally, softer riding, larger cars with larger displacement motors. GM and Ford knew this first but the others figured out it wasn't backwards engineering but customer preference that dictated those features (that isn't saying the Big 3 didn't have their owner backward issues).

    You are claiming the Honda design is old, well prove it. That car is only what 3 years old. What makes that an old design. Can you show a modern version?

    The Mini was innovative... decades ago. However, we shouldn't try to play that game. The Corvette's 1963 suspension was very innovative compared to most IRS designs in 1963. It was one of the earliest multi-link road car designs.

    As I recall you guys in the UK get very high performance versions of the EVO and Subi. I also believe those start to really take a hit in terms of daily driver status. The Corvette is more in line with the 911 in terms of comfort while still having performance.

    The claim that it's tradition is just flat wrong. Do you really think GM decided it was better to spend the money developing a new pair of leaf springs for the C5 rather than using a set of coil springs? Come on. When the C5 came out no one even realized or ever complained about the leaf spring. It had no tradition or history. Almost no one knew or cared until the C5 was getting long in the tooth. The C4 reviews hardly mention the spring design. All Corvette's Are Read mentions the discussions regarding the car's suspension design. The engineers never set out to use the leaf design because they knew it was expensive and from a marketing POV offers no value to the customer. We have a company with a reputation for going too far to cut costs and now you are claiming they chose an expensive option because they just thought it was cool? This isn't like a front engine Porsche where people rejected the 928 as a 911 replacement in part because it wasn't a flat 6 under the tail. No, the Corvette DID use coils for many years. The classic Corvette have coil springs. The leaf was a purely engineering choice because NO ONE would have missed it had GM selected coils in 1997 (or 1995 or when ever the real choice was made).

    No, claiming GM did it because doesn't pass the sniff test.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,508
    Quote Originally Posted by RacingManiac View Post
    Don't a lot of "modern" econoboxes in Europe still uses twist beam setup at the back anyway? Doesn't seem to diminishes their handling necessarily, just like some IRS rear setup can also drive poorly. We have a couple of Peugeot at work that we work on here(407s) and while they are neatly packaged and compact(great trunk space), the motion ratio for the spring and damper is poor and a lot of that is driven not by "performance" but rather packaging. The stock vehicle also doesn't drive very well, but Peugeot now probably rates pretty low on the totem pole anyway. Complexity is not necessarily the answer to the optimum handling car, rather I see most of the time to address packaging issue. Most multi-link setup now are designed to be geometric/mechanically overconstaining, but through bushing and compliance tuning to allow them to be kinematically "solvable", thats something you won't see in a performance oriented car(say, a open wheel car or a Caterham, for example).
    Twist beams can actually work quite nicely. A lot of people get bent out of shape because they aren't "independent" but they can actually be very cleaver in their "non-independence".
    This wiki entry shows how a twist beam can keep the wheels parallel bounce but allow camber gain in roll. Very clever. I think Audi was the first to figure this out.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,456
    Funny about that reduction in size for "advanced" shock, I got a Sachs unit sitting on my desk now from one of the new Bimmer(I think its the 2011 X6 or the 7 series), its got 2 solenoid valves one for each direction and a controller tack on to the side of it(whole thing is $800 a pop from the dealer, may not sound like a lot compare to a machined racing damper, but typical road car shocks are dirt cheap), this thing is massive....

    Shock sizes are not necessarily just they are "advanced" or not. The force requirement and how they are packaged drives greatly on how big they are, and then the whole strut vs damper only is another issue too. Poor motion ratio means you need more damping force to be effective and if you are limited in travel then you need even more. And that drives for larger piston and rod size. If you are using a damper as a strut(which I believe WRX does), you are required to have a bigger rod diameter because it needs to take significant side load, and that means you need to have a bigger fluid reservoir to take up the rod flow, and AFAIK Subaru still runs their inverted strut? That means conventional twin-tube valving won't work(they don't work upside down), so a remote design is needed to run a gas charge with a separating piston in them.

    Passenger car stuff is so packaging driven that there are no set formula on how to make something.....majority of how well the final product drives ends up I believe not necessarily due to what type of layout they choose, but who's calibrated butt they are using for that ride/handling engineer and how much time they spent on it. In NA the requirement typically is so different from Europeans that the cars ends up driving a certain way.
    University of Toronto Formula SAE Alumni 2003-2007
    Formula Student Championship 2003, 2005, 2006
    www.fsae.utoronto.ca

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    jeez guys I do wish you'd do soem critical thinking before posting @(
    REALLY reading the responses shows NO attempt to understand orirginal points.
    First Honda suspension. Go look at Rover designs in the 60s.
    Next MINI Z-beam is BMW Mini.
    Next Evos etc are used daily and we've got shitty roads. ALREADY SAID, cultural/customer preferences. But I'm using it to point out solutions ARE there. Nobody seems to graps that not so hidden message !
    "tradition ... flat wrong" -- BS I claim, jsut look at the COrvette fans who demand the "same" ... yes another possible mid-engine idea put fgorward which will get thrown out as "not a corvette". Look at all other cars who have better handling, built to price and more flexibility ?
    "sniff test" -- roflmao - don't know what you're sniffing
    911 - again PLEASE think before closing the mind air-cool rear engined IS the 911 and IS - AS I SAID - difficult for Porsche to have developed to the handling levels it has. TRYING to pick the direct opposite 928 etc is just pointless and missing ANY chance to engage in any sensible discussion on the subject
    SACHS units for Seris 7 or X6 -- you SERIOUS ? Totally different beasts and weight !
    Really this is pointless. Hey look, I've got a coil over from a ceterham R500 so I've "proff" it coudl be tiny. Get real. OF COURSE it would be too small and not up to the task. Please don't muddy reasoning with arguing. This is like wathcing GLenn Beck on automotive design
    "cars end up driving a certain way" and thus WHY Corvette owners will want ti ever to stick leaf ? Or are you pickign a different tack.
    I'm out of this - again - as the discussion is going nowhere for as long as you guys are going to take extremes when a minor step is being pointed. That's just plain poor detaing and woudl lose in every step.
    Bye.
    See you in 2 years when Corvette come back to debating the leaf/spring choices and nothing will have changed.
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,508
    Matra, I don't think your last post really made any sense. I think you are saying since the Honda design isn't brand new it's thus out of date? I mean pneumatic tires have been around for a long time so the latest and greatest Michelines aren't late or great? You said the Honda design isn't up to date, prove it. Tell me what about Honda's design makes it old fashion compared to what IS the latest and greatest in double A-arm designs on family cars. What should Honda have done to make this design up to date? What is state of the art according to you?

    Evos are used as daily drivers here as well. However we don't have the models with well over 300hp. Regardless, I can't think of many cars that come with remote reservoir dampers. A few special cases does not prove your point. Ferrari seems to think the Corvette dampers are really trick as they are using the same system on the F458

    tradition ... flat wrong" -- BS I claim, jsut look at the COrvette fans who demand the "same" ... yes another possible mid-engine idea put fgorward which will get thrown out as "not a corvette". Look at all other cars who have better handling, built to price and more flexibility ?
    "sniff test" -- roflmao - don't know what you're sniffing
    Corvette owners and fans don't speak with one voice and don't all demand the same thing. Some want to keep V8s, some don't. Some want front engine, others don't. However, some parts are rather part of what people see as traditional Corvette. The front engine RWD seems to have settled in as part of the Corvette's legacy the same way the 911 is supposed to have an H6 behind the rear axle. The leaf spring is not part of the Corvette legacy any more than the targa top or the front coil springs (used on all Corvettes through 1982. The leaf springs were simply an engineering choice, not a design statement. The fact that they are an expensive engineering choice means that somewhere, someone thought they were the right answer to a problem. There was no cry to retain the leaf springs when GM went from the C4 to the C5. There was a cry to retain a V8 and not move to a turbo 6 or some other motor. There was a push to stay front engine-RWD to retain the car's cargo area and the traditional long nose, short deck look of the car. There was NO push to retain the leaf springs. Again, it is dumb to think GM chose an expensive solution to a problem if a cheap option was available. You are normally a smart person so I can't figure out why you are so blind to this point.

    Matra, I'm sorry but you really haven't made any sense in your last few posts. Perhaps that was your intent and I simply missed it. I think the burden is on you to make your point clear, not on us to try to decode what you think is modern or not modern.
    Last edited by culver; 10-06-2010 at 04:42 PM.

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    TH post rasied the points where the original post was not read and it not making sense proves it.
    NO, it is NOT my "burden" to explain for example that AS I STATED CLEARLY the Honda "new" is actually an "old".
    "engineering choice" -- and YET comparable cars and better/worse then package suspension using alternatives and Corvette "hang on to it" even when performance versions switch it out. Yeah, sure
    "a few special cases" .. erm so I only listed two, you REALLY need more when the one you are citing is a case of ONE ( the 'vette ) ? Missed the point completely and I determine deliberately.
    So on that I leave.
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,508
    You said the pictures I showed were old. They are of the current car so they can't be more than a few years old. Next you said the design was old and implied it was not a modern interpretation of the design.

    Your comments about the Corvette read as if you are drunk. Normally you are rather clear when making a point. This time you still aren't.

    Matra, really, your last two posts make me think you are drunk posting. You aren't putting together complete arguments and what ever point you were trying to make has been lost in a sea of grammatical errors and apparently random statements.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Really useful performance listings...
    By Egg Nog in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 04-18-2021, 05:13 PM
  2. Chevrolet Corvette (C6)-R 2008
    By Matt in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 06-13-2008, 09:27 AM
  3. Chevrolet Corvette C5-R
    By narb in forum Multimedia
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-17-2004, 12:47 PM
  4. Race Track Videos (85 videos)
    By DarkPhenix in forum Multimedia
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 05-18-2004, 05:46 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •