McPherson? Double Wishbone

Discussion in 'General Motoring' started by 93 Fox, Aug 14, 2003.

  1. 93 Fox

    93 Fox Guest

    Just wondering... I know the double wishbone configuration consists of 2
    parallel control arms (to minimize camber change throughout motion). Then
    there is the McPherson setup... BUT, from what I've read, the Mcpherson
    setup is defined as a coil + damper combined into 1 unit. Now, could a
    double wishbone setup include a McPherson strut for damping??? I guess my
    question is what is the mechanism in a double-wishbone setup that provides
    damping? Any good websites cover this???


    Thanks!
     
    93 Fox, Aug 14, 2003
    #1
  2. 93 Fox

    Randolph Guest

    See drawings at
    http://www.chris-longhurst.com/carbibles/index.html?menu.html&suspension_bible.html
     
    Randolph, Aug 14, 2003
    #2
  3. A McPherson strut combines a vertical control arm and damper in one.
    The only other wheel connection is the bottom control arm.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Aug 14, 2003
    #3
  4. 93 Fox

    93 Fox Guest

    Thanks! Great info.
     
    93 Fox, Aug 14, 2003
    #4
  5. The key about the strut design is that as well as having the concentric
    damper/coil spring arrangement, the damper unit's upper mount also
    functions to locate the axle hub unit laterally and longitudinally. In the
    the MacPherson strut the damper upper mount is also the upper steering
    pivot - IOW the strut turns with the wheel. In both cases the lower hub
    mount is some kind of lateral arm with variations to cover longitudinal
    location... either an A-arm or with an add-on radius rod or link.

    You'll sometimes see reference to a MacPherson strut in the rear but it's a
    misnomer, since the MacPherson is uniquely a front suspension design - when
    a strut is used in the rear it's sometimes, more properly, referred to as a
    Chapman strut... named after Colin Chapman of Lotus. This was the famous
    design which caused Enzo Ferrai to shake his head in disbelief, since in a
    RWD car of the day (racing car that is), it caused the drive shaft to be a
    stressed member of the suspension.

    In the double wishbone design you do not have a strut at all, though many
    dealer service folks and mechanics will call any concentric damper/spring a
    strut... again a misnomer. In the DW design the damper and spring are not
    structural members in the suspension - they only have to do their
    particular jobs of springing and damping.

    BTW I disagree with Chris Longhurst's categorization which shows Coil
    Spring Type 1 as different from a Double Wishbone. What he shows as DW is
    really the Honda design - there have been many DW implementations which
    used his Coil Spring Type 1 arrangement. An A-arm is, in most cases, only
    a variation on a wishbone... which may allow elimination of a radius rod
    for longitudinal location.

    Rgds, George Macdonald

    "Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
     
    George Macdonald, Aug 17, 2003
    #5
  6. 93 Fox

    DTT Guest

    I don't know much about car suspension design, but any Honda with
    D-wishbone has precise handling, fun to drive, and even tread-wear. On
    the other hand, any old Toytota I have use McPherson and they sucks.
    If not for the engine reliability, i would never want to keep the
    Toyota.
     
    DTT, Aug 18, 2003
    #6
  7. Toyota suspensions soak up the bumps well but I don't care for their
    handling either. An 89 V6 Camry seemed to corner well but steering
    wheel was abnormally low, making driving awkward. An 84 I4 Camry felt
    solid but the back end would spin out on nothing. An 88 Tercel had well
    balanced skids but it felt extremely unstable and it lifted the rear
    wheels off the ground during hard stops! A 98 I4 Camry had so much
    front-to-rear bobbing that I almost got sick during the test drive.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Aug 18, 2003
    #7
  8. I agree, though there are claims that the MacPherson strut in the RSX -
    dunno how much it's been tuned over the Civic version - actually works
    quite well... said to even be an improvement in handling over the Integra.

    The Toyota struts are the weak area of their cars - the only thing that
    really wore out on our '93 Camry. When we sold it at 106K miles they were
    umm, tired. The nasty thing about MacPherson strut is that when they go
    and you get too much suspension travel it tends to break the boot which
    seals the steering pivot from dirt and the cost for replacing the strut
    goes up another notch.

    Rgds, George Macdonald

    "Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
     
    George Macdonald, Aug 18, 2003
    #8
  9. 93 Fox

    Gus Guest

    My Porsche 911 had McPherson struts and it had precise handling, was fun
    to drive and showed even tread wear. The devil is in the details.
     
    Gus, Aug 19, 2003
    #9
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.