|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 301
CEG\'er
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 301 |
I drove a '03 Accord Coupe with the V6 and 6-speed. Nice car, but I wasn't all that impressed with the handling. It had that typical FWD rubbery, vague steering feel and a good bit of body roll. I didn't get a chance to push it hard, but it didn't strike me as a car that encourages that kind of driving.
I think it's interesting that the BMW 3-series has the "cheap", "primitive" McPherson strut suspension, but they are universally praised for their handling ability.
I don't know what Ford did differently with the Contour, but they certainly got something right. Mine is the first FWD car I've ever owned, largely because it's the first one I've driven that actually has steering feel, and in most normal situations has the neutral, balanced handling of a RWD car.
'99 Contour Sport V6 MTX
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882 |
Originally posted by rearden:
I think it's interesting that the BMW 3-series has the "cheap", "primitive" McPherson strut suspension, but they are universally praised for their handling ability.
you sure about that with the 3 series? having McP?
not to mention, theyre RWD and have the closes 50/50 balance of any car 
btw Corvette has double wishbone among other fast cars..
Originally posted by Tourgasm:
Sometimes you can mess up a word so bad that spell check doens't know what the hell you're talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 301
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 301 |
Originally posted by svt4stv:
Originally posted by rearden:
I think it's interesting that the BMW 3-series has the "cheap", "primitive" McPherson strut suspension, but they are universally praised for their handling ability.
you sure about that with the 3 series? having McP?
not to mention, theyre RWD and have the closes 50/50 balance of any car
btw Corvette has double wishbone among other fast cars..
Yep, 3-series have McP.
My last car was a Lincoln Mark VIII. It was RWD, with a double-wishbone front and independent rear suspension. The handling was pretty good but nothing spectacular, and it rode like absolute crap. It had air springs, but it felt like they were filled with cement.
My '88 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe (modified McP front, solid axle rear) actually handled better and had a smoother ride over big bumps.
The Lincoln's big problem was a profound lack of chassis stiffness. The suspension had to be firm to compensate for the flex so it'd handle well, and the stuff ride was made even worse when rough roads would cause the car to shudder.
What I'm saying is, although I agree that a double wishbone setup is technically superior, there are numerous other factors at play, so you really can't say a car will handle better based solely on its suspension setup.
'99 Contour Sport V6 MTX
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882 |
Originally posted by Tourgasm:
Sometimes you can mess up a word so bad that spell check doens't know what the hell you're talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867 |
Originally posted by svt4stv:
you just cant beat double wishbone suspension. you dont see any really fast cars with Macpherson do you?  Mac offers a softer ride which is why Honda put them in the civic.
Double wishbone is technically more advanced than MS, but your assessment is flawed. Plenty of fast cars with MS, and even some with live rear axles or dead beams.
You don't get much camber gain on a Mac strut, which is one of the challenges when setting one up for racing. One reason you might see more static camber dialed in on a race car.
Mac struts do not offer a "softer ride," as you suggest. It's all about packaging. By combining springs and dampers within a structural member, you save a lot of space, laterally. It's tall, though, so not as suitable for something like an open-wheeled race car, where double A-arms and pushrod suspension is still the norm.
My Mac-strutted Super Beetle handled better than my torsion-armed 69, but it was not as rugged nor as smooth over rough stuff. It's not about the ride quality, at all.
Function before fashion.
'96 Contour SE
"Toss the Contour into a corner, and it's as easy to catch as a softball thrown by a preschooler." -Edmunds, 1998
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,194
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,194 |
Don't the Porsche 911's use Mac struts up front?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867 |
Originally posted by JCSVT:
Don't the Porsche 911's use Mac struts up front?
I don't recall, but the 911 is a perfect example of the absolute wrong design being fast in spite of its basic flaws.
Function before fashion.
'96 Contour SE
"Toss the Contour into a corner, and it's as easy to catch as a softball thrown by a preschooler." -Edmunds, 1998
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,177
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,177 |
Originally posted by JCSVT:
Is it the suspension design? Chassis refinement? Or was it because of its European heritage?
I believe it is a little bit of each.
IIRC the target of the original Mondeo was 'rep-man' ... the sales rep who drive all over the back-roads (usually 100mph+) for 8-12 hours per day during the week, then carts the family around on the weekend. I am sure that I remember reading somewhere that this was the specific target ... not just 'family sedan' or 'sales mobile'.
I may be wrong, as I'm trying to remember what I read during the first couple of years of Mondeo's life, but I think that they specifically reviewed the driving styles and habits of this particular market, as they were trying to steal from the Vauxhall/Opal Cavalier, to create the car to fit. The aim was for a car that could master the road and keep you comfortable for long periods of time.
One of the main things about European roads is that they are twisty, backroads even worse ... and nothing tires you more than fighting with the car through turns. Ford also had a wealth of research and testing that they carried threw from the Ford Sierra to the Mondy, including the sub-frame design (I think).
On top of this, I think it's obvious that they didn't cheap out with the suspension setup. When you compare the three different models of Contour we have, in handling aspects, there isn't a great gap in ability. Even going to the 'next step' in struts such as a BAT kit won't make a 'massive' leap from CSVT stock.
Another bonus point is the seats, comfortable and supporting ... makes a HUGE difference. If as your car rolls, you roll further, you are less responsive, therefore car is less responsive ... out of all the cars I've driven in the last three years the Contour still has the most comfortable seats in my opinion.
1998.5 T-Red on Midnight Blue SVT
Build Number 5320 of 6535
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140 |
Originally posted by RogerB:
Originally posted by JCSVT:
Don't the Porsche 911's use Mac struts up front?
I don't recall, but the 911 is a perfect example of the absolute wrong design being fast in spite of its basic flaws.
Yes, they do. They can get away with because they have very limited travel due to stiff springs. It's light, simple, and strong. Nissans usually handle very well, and they have McStruts up front and a solid rear axle!
It comes down to several factors: The geometry need to be really well figured out. Camber curves help, but they are pretty similar for all cars with this design. Eliminating bump steer is a big one, however, and the Contour isn't bad in this respect. The Contour is also fairly stiffly sprung. Stock Contours are soft, but not Honda-soft. Overall, though, compared to other cars in 1995, there is no huge difference in technology. It's just that Ford took the time (and money) to tweak all the little things that make the big picture. Suspension dynamics is a very complicated field, and there are no magic bullets. Look at the new cars from companies like Mazda that handle very well: no double A-arms or anything fancy, just slow, gentle refinements and tweaks to the strut design.
EDIT: I know the MX-5 has and always has had double a-arms. I mean the 6 and Protoge, etc.
I also agree on the ergonomics: the Contour has a great Driver's position (pedals need some help) and seats.
Last edited by Auto-X Fil; 08/18/05 02:54 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,197
I have no life
|
|
I have no life
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,197 |
The CDW-27 platform was the first car Ford actually engineered to be "fun to drive." Wish I could find the something online about it.
-'96 SE MTX 3L
-'98 SVT 1,173 of 6,535
-'05 Mazda 6s, loaded, g/f's ride
-Need a 96-00 manual on CD? PM or email me
|
|
|
|
|
