CIH Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 I was musing over the rear suspension of this Rover when one of the peeps was fixing a puncture. It's a mid-90s design so probably a carry-over from a similar Honda (Civic, maybe an Accord, FWD anyway); As you can see it's a trailing arm with a combined spring/shock and lateral link. What interests me is the rear link, which projects over the wheel and is articulated to allow for suspension deflection. I read in my expensive book the upper link is projected to the top so longitudional complaince can be built in without excessive geometric disturbances ie; where the upper and lower balljoints are spaced closely together, large longitudional compliance in the joints would cause large geometry disturbances, so complaince is designed in elsewhere, usually subframes. That makes sense in front suspension with SAI, Castor etc but why bother on the rear ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 Isn't this more applicable to RWD?.... at least in your book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CIH Posted December 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 not sure what you mean there dude ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammy Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 hate them link bars on rovers grhhh had 2 snap on me before and could i get the beepin bolts undone for em.........NO!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 not sure what you mean there dude ? The move from live bean to independent suspension meant there is some trade offs namely toe gain on squat and bump. Squat on a RWD independent suspension is a real issue so the need for a traction rod was required to control toe during compression and bump, common on cars like the 200/ 300 SX. Be warned the traction rod cannot be measured or tuned on the calibration rig, it's totally dynamic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CIH Posted December 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 The IRS in 4-pot Omegas is the same as S12s (more or less) but, I'm sure you're aware, they have a seperate toe-control arm. Presumeably for the same reasons. So that arm on the Rover is for toe control on bump/squat ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted December 11, 2009 Report Share Posted December 11, 2009 The axel under load will dive pulling the unsprung body down, this in turn generates conditions with the toe and camber (mainly toe) so a control rod can be used to adjust the dive...squat... gains. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.