Quote:
Originally Posted by dave96dcm
Some food for thought. |
This is an almost exact copy of the suspension that was used on many, many IRS race cars in the late 60's to the early 80's. There is nothing wrong with it at all, very tunable, and was mostly superseded by inboard suspensions for aerodynamic reasons. Dive and squat adjust by moving the trailing link forward attachments, toe is adjusted at the lower arm outer rear attachment, camber at the upper link. Camber curves are easily adjusted, but it lacks an easy way to change toe through suspension travel, something that many designers would like.
The weak point about the OP design can be seen easily in this illustration, as the OP design is essentially the same thing but with a lower arm that is restrained from fore and aft movement by two inner mounting points. Imagine this suspension with no trailing arms and a lower H shaped or box arm. The only restraint of the torque of the spindle is by the
twisting of that lower arm, something that is not desirable, and is accounted for in the various OEM designs in this thread by having a very stout and wide based lower arm. The easier, stronger and lighter way is to spread the load between a lower and upper arm, ie like a vette or viper, or a modern racecar, or the trailing arms seen in this design.