An overview of Suspension Design...Warning, Rahther British

Here tis, fellows!
http://www.newprotest.org/projects/510/carBible/suspension.htm

Please note and respect his copyrite:
{The eBay problem: This paragraph may seem a little out of place but I have had a lot of problems with a couple of eBay members stealing my work, turning it into PDF files and selling it on eBay. Generally, idiots like this do a copy/paste job so they won't notice this paragraph here. If you're reading this and you bought this page anywhere other than from my website at www.carbibles.com, then you have a pirated, copyright-infringing copy. Please send me an email as I am building a case file against the people doing this. Go to www.carbibles.com to see the full site and find my contact details. And now, back to the meat of the subject....}

 

Good encyclopedia of info.

Im curious about what the camber/caster controling upper mount actually looked like on the "Rover 2000 MacPherson derivative"

 

Not sure about Rover's, but in past inquiries, I've noticed that either a cam-type eccentric bushing, or steel shim fork-washers were used, depending upon the mounting hardware layout. The article even goes on to describe de-Dion and air-bag setups.

 

Btt...

 

Very cool article.... thanks

 

Iteresting stuff.

Am I correct in thinking the Ford Control Blade Suspension could be a good candidate for a suspension swap in the Fat Fender cars?


Granted, old tech, but I'm wondering if there are any write-ups on the typical Ford transverse sprung axle?
Would be interesting to see what he has to say about a dropped axle vs undropped.

After reading the tire and oil section, my first thought was that this bible is quite brilliantly written.
And . . . should be in print.

Thank you for your generosity in placing it on the Internet.

 

I noticed that he wasn't much for beam front axles, then, in further reading the concept re-appeared with out the initial bias. I thought the images showed the different suspensions very well. You could get your head around the idea after looking them over.
Not sure C9, sorry. My guess would be a concern for the concentrated load at the lower bend, and stability of the beam to spindle area, as a result of the drop geometry. I think it's long been proven that the lowering of the frame gains more than is lost...in terms of handling and component/axle life.