Quote:
Originally Posted by GS guy
G - seems like you're confusing suspension pivot points with drive axles.
|
No, sorry bud, I'm not confusing anything. Thanks for the 'lecture' though, it was interesting...
The swingaxle has exactly the same number of joints as the IRS semitrailing-arm suspension, and I've never said otherwise.
Likewise the number joints in the transmission has nothing to do with the suspension geometry. A simple fact which most people on here seem to have missed, yourself included.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GS guy
The IRS semi-trailing arm has the advantage of Significantly better camber control through the full suspension travel - at the expense of added weight and complexity.
|
Not true at all. It just reduces camber changes to 1/3 the value of a swingaxle when travelling in a straight line. This is good for stability but doesn't improve cornering ability at all.
Do some research, you'll find the semi-trailing arm design doesn't make the car corner better, just gives a more linear response and therefore a more predictable ride and better straight line stability that's all.
The IRS car will have more body roll and likewise more positive camber than the swingaxle in the same corner, since the suspension on a swingaxle car is not affected AT ALL by body roll. That's a simple fact of the laws of physics that most beetle 'experts' really don't seem to realise.
In fact body roll causes positive camber on the IRS semi-trailing arm design. And some negative camber on the swingaxle.
BOTH cars suffer from jacking GS_guy, and this also causes more positive camber in the corner. The semi-trailing design just suffers 1/3 the amount of jacking that the swingaxle gets.
So at the end of the day if you work out the math you find they generally have the same amount of positive camber in the same corner, and neither car has more grip.
