Go back to previous topic
Forum nameHandling/Suspension
Topic subjectAre our cars considered to have multi-link (SALA) suspension front and rear?
Topic URLhttp://forums.2gnt.com/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=6&topic_id=22545
22545, Are our cars considered to have multi-link (SALA) suspension front and rear?
Posted by WickedESi, Dec-31-69 06:00 PM
Simply Question :)
22573, RE: Are our cars considered to have multi-link (SALA) suspension front and rear?
Posted by WickedESi, Dec-31-69 06:00 PM
I found the info in the tech manual. It's a yes.

I just got confused after hearing some people saying we just had a multi-link rear.
22574, RE: Are our cars considered to have multi-link (SALA) suspension front and rear?
Posted by MCubed45, Dec-31-69 06:00 PM
haha so was that a good thing or a bad thing? i remember reading some threads but i forgot what the conclusion on our suspesion was...
22578, RE: Are our cars considered to have multi-link (SALA) suspension front and rear?
Posted by WickedESi, Dec-31-69 06:00 PM
It actually says in the tech manual that our suspension is a multi-link that has a high mounted upper arm and two lower arms
that act like a double-wishbone arrangement.

So it's like the best of both worlds (but not macpherson strut setups, which are for economy and matainence). We have bad ass handling machines.
22702, RE: Are our cars considered to have multi-link (SALA) suspension front and rear?
Posted by AznKaos15, Dec-31-69 06:00 PM
handling? what kind of car do you drive? lol. i think these cars understeer like a bitch.
22703, RE: Are our cars considered to have multi-link (SALA) suspension front and rear?
Posted by Uberingram, Dec-31-69 06:00 PM
body roll is severe too. I can't nail second good enough without nearly having the ass end bottom out :P
22704, RE: Are our cars considered to have multi-link (SALA) suspension front and rear?
Posted by WickedESi, Dec-31-69 06:00 PM
Well w/ the stock ride height, stock components, etc... they are not handling machines, but w/ this setup you can make them one.

Get stiff springs (adjusting the toe & camber properly is a given), stiff/adjustable shocks and all your body roll problems will be gone.

Get beefy front and rear sway-bars and your understeer/cornering roll will be gone.

Get polyurethane suspension bushings and all the looseness/slow repsonse time will be gone.

Get upper/lower strut tower bars to make your car solid/less cornering roll.
22705, RE: Are our cars considered to have multi-link (SALA) suspension front and rear?
Posted by CODE4, Dec-31-69 06:00 PM
I second that Wicked:thumbsup

Good job finding that info out too.
22713, RE: Are our cars considered to have multi-link (SALA) suspension front and rear?
Posted by WheatKing, Dec-31-69 06:00 PM
Originally posted by WickedESi
Well w/ the stock ride height, stock components, etc... they are not handling machines, but w/ this setup you can make them one. Get stiff springs (adjusting the toe & camber properly is a given), stiff/adjustable shocks and all your body roll problems will be gone. Get beefy front and rear sway-bars and your understeer/cornering roll will be gone. Get polyurethane suspension bushings and all the looseness/slow repsonse time will be gone. Get upper/lower strut tower bars to make your car solid/less cornering roll.


actually.. stock they handle well.. just need better tires..

depending on what surface your driving on as well.. might not want to make the suspension so stiff your kidneys bleed.. that isn't helping you at all..

For less understeer.. get a thicker rear antisway bar or a thinner front antisway bar.

and if you want great handling.. don't lower it.. it f'cks up the dynamic caster/camber angles that are engineered into the suspension.. not to mention the passive rear steering.

Get a bit more dampening.. for street use.. don't get coil overs unless your spending $$$ on GAB's or Teins..

and as always.. like he says.. make the chassis as stiff as possible.. for the suspenion to work right, the chassis shouldn't be flexin..

-- WheatKing
I generated this page in 0.0084280967712402 seconds, executing 7 queries.