nippononly I believe Honda's cars are mostly lighter than competing same-size models. That may have been true in the past, not anymore. Honda/Acura vehicles are typically heavy. Compare Accord, Camry, Altima and Mazda6, and guess which is the heaviest. Compare TL, 3-series (or 5-series), G35, A4 etc. and see which is the heaviest.
To my customers what kind of suspension a Honda has. This may surprise some of you, but I really can't even remember when a customer last asked me a question about a Honda's suspension.
They don't care!
newcar31, it would seem you know more than the Honda engineers about what would work best in their cars and what's possible and what is not.
I know I wouldn't want to be making those corporate decisions. Give us more power, but don't hurt fuel economy! Give us more interior room and higher crash test ratings but don't take away the double wishbones!
"You acknowledge that everything isn’t possible, and then go on to say it is!"
I'm saying that having the wishbone front, good crash test scores, and good interior room, isn't having "everything". You don't *need* to trade one for the other. You're trying to make it seem like it would take a miracle for Honda to improve on the crash test results and interior room while keeping the front wishbones. I'm saying it wouldn't take a miracle, just money.
"So, are you suggesting that Honda doesn’t like cost cutting?"
I don't know if they do or not, but that's what they did with the new Civic.
"But the problem with some people here is that they lug around only the inexpensive aspect of struts and don’t want to admit the benefits that it could bring."
Benefits of mac-strut design? They're compact and cheap.
"What seems to be of utmost importance to you, double wishbones, isn't of the slightest importance to the masses.
THAT is what I keep trying to get through to you!"
No need to get that message though to me because I realize that. There are a lot of neato things on Honda vehicles that the "masses" don't care or know about.
Forgot to respond to this one:
"Accord just doesn't do okay in this regard, but the key is size of the cars. Accord is a midsize, and Civic barely got out of sub-compact class into compact with the redesign (without an increase in external dimensions). If Civic were 15 inch longer and 5 inch wider, it would be the size of Accord."
So you're saying that if Honda shrunk the Accord to Civic size, the front wishbone suspension would disappear and a mac-strut type would appear in it's place?
Honda has traditionally been after the masses. But so do most other companies, some succeed and some don’t. Honda gets it reputation from its engineering prowess, while trying to balance a variety of aspects in each offering. And it gets its reputation from doing the little things instead of on-your-face approach.
Lately, AHM is trying to instill something in its Acura lineup that it moved away from in the mid-90s, and that is, balancing sport with comfort.
So it is not a recent trend, it has been the Honda way of doing business.
"And why do you think BMW sticks with Macpherson struts in its cars? Couldn't they afford to use, or design, double wishbones?
Let me see your take on this first."
I honestly don't know why BMW uses mac struts, but it seems like they do it better than Honda. Let me turn this around on you:
And why do you think Honda sticks with front wishbones in the Accord? Couldn't they save money by using mac struts since Honda customers don't care? It's good enough for BMW, why not the Accord?
Was Honda wrong with the previous generation Civics and current and past Accords by using front wishbones?
Oy! They use the type of suspension that works best for the car that it goes in. Often times that means double bones. With other vehicles, the drawbacks to double bones make them undesirable.
The CR-V, Element, Ody, Pilot, MDX, and several other Honda's not sold in the US use struts. Just because Honda has used double bones in the past, does not make them "anti-strut".
Regardless, sales of vehicles like the Ody, Pilot, MDX, and CR-V show that the use of struts ain't the problem (if there even is one).
muffin_man Doesn't matter. I'm questioning the very use of Macpherson struts, not that they are preferred over double wishbone if RWD, or are they? ;-)
newcar31 Are you concerned about tuning of the suspension, or the use of a particular type of suspension?
And Accord is expensive enough, and large enough to safely use wishbones, and needs it more so for the character that Accord is about. I'm sure Honda could have sold as many Accords without it, since Toyota can with its Camry. In fact, it would likely have more room than it does right now, and have larger trunk space to boot (like Camry). See... you give up something to get something. Read: compromise.
No car in the Civic's class is without compromise. The Corolla has a beam suspension, the Jetta is crap and a torsion bar, the Sentra has an axle, and the Cavalier/Neon aren't any where near the Civic's level when it comes to quality, refinement, and safety.
So if you want an independent suspension all the way around, good gas mileage, good crash tests, and above average reliability you are left with the Civic and the Mazda3. I'd take the Civic. Nothing glaringly wrong with the 3, it's just not my cup of tea.
"Are you concerned about tuning of the suspension, or the use of a particular type of suspension?"
I don't know why my brother's Civic rides the way it does, all I know is that my 92' Integra which is TEN YEARS OLDER rode better and it had front wishbones. Is it because of the wishbones in my Integra or is it because Honda can't tune the mac struts right on the Civic?
"And Accord is expensive enough, and large enough to safely use wishbones, and needs it more so for the character that Accord is about."
So the previous Civic was too small to safely use front wishbones? What *exactly* is it about the Accord's character that necesitates the use of front wishbones?
"In fact, it would likely have more room than it does right now, and have larger trunk space to boot (like Camry). See... you give up something to get something. Read: compromise."
Mac-struts in the rear would give you LESS trunk space because they would intrude into the trunk. The mac strut design is bigger vertically, the wishbone design is bigger horizontally, which is why you usually see the mac-struts in front. Check out the trunk on the Mazda6, it's HUGE because the rear suspension is tucked horizontally under the car.
You conveniently avoided answering my question... Is your concern regarding the choice of a particular type of suspension, or tuning of the suspension?
That said, Macpherson struts is a space (and weight) efficient design, and allows more space anywhere it is placed, front or rear, compared to double wishbones.
I found it interesting to note that Accord's 5-link rear suspension is mentioned in a different sense than a typical double wishbone, and rightfully so (Honda calls it a modified/Watt-link double wishbone). This layout was first implemented in Acura TL (1997) and was introduced into Accord with 1998 redesign (1989-1997 Accords had 4-link set up).
I thought I answered it in post 485, but I guess not. As long as a car has a good handling/ride balance, (which is easier to do with wishbones and IMO the current Civic does not have) it doesn't matter.
"That said, Macpherson struts is a space (and weight) efficient design, and allows more space anywhere it is placed, front or rear, compared to double wishbones."
One design may have more *usable* space than the other in certain situations. Like I said before, mac-struts aren't as space efficient in the rear because by design, they intrude vertically into the trunk.
Now it's your turn to answer the questions that you conveniently avoided:
So the previous Civic was too small to safely use front wishbones? What *exactly* is it about the Accord's character that necesitates the use of front wishbones?
Good! And all along I thought you had issue with Honda replacing Double Wishbones from the front with MacPherson Struts. :-)
One design may have more *usable* space than the other in certain situations. Like I said before, mac-struts aren't as space efficient in the rear because by design, they intrude vertically into the trunk. May not be as space efficient as beam axle/semi-independent suspensions, but better than double wishbones.
So the previous Civic was too small to safely use front wishbones? What *exactly* is it about the Accord's character that necesitates the use of front wishbones?
Nothing necessitates double wishbones in Accord. Most automakers get away with MacPherson struts (Nissan Maxima/Altima, Subaru Legacy and Toyota Camry/Avalon are good examples). Some avoid double wishbones and come up with their own designs (VW/Audi Quadra-link). Honda could too.
Honda can afford to put double wishbone front suspension in Accord because cost is not as restrictive, and size of the car is definitely now. They could afford two additional links in the rear suspension as well (compared to Civic’s 3-link double wishbone in the rear).
Double wishbone would be the ideal choice, but then compromises strike in. Wouldn’t that be a reason for BMW to choose MacPherson struts for the front suspension? Or do they do it for the sake of it? Let me know what you think about this.
"The new Civic, alas, has struts, just like nearly every other car in that price range and that has had me in a full-blown geek tizzy for quite a while now."
A quote from Carlisimo's link above...
That's hilarious... seems like we see a little of that happening in this forum as well.
"Good! And all along I thought you had issue with Honda replacing Double Wishbones from the front with MacPherson Struts."
It doesn't matter as long as ride/handling balance isn't compromised, which it was with the new Civic. Go take the new Civic and a front wishbone Civic around a bumpy cloverleaf and then come back here and tell me that there's no difference between the two.
"May not be as space efficient as beam axle/semi-independent suspensions, but better than double wishbones."
No, mac-struts are not always more space efficient than wishbones because the wishbone design can be flattened out so as not to intrude into the trunk. The wishbone design may take up more space underneath the car where tons of space isn't needed on a FWD car, but not as much in the trunk because there is no need for vertical strut towers.
"Wouldn’t that be a reason for BMW to choose MacPherson struts for the front suspension? Or do they do it for the sake of it? Let me know what you think about this."
I already told you that I don't know why BMW uses mac struts in the front. Maybe you can tell me why?
exhaustive discussion I have ever seen for what was a relatively minor cost-cutting change. All the cars in the class have been cheapened significantly in the last five years, so give Honda a little credit for at least waiting until '01 to do it.
Oh yeah, high cowls and beltlines suck.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
It's probably only important to autocrossers and those who lower their cars (for different reasons, obviosly), but people who don't drag race complain about slow cars so complaining about this change isn't far fetched.
Officially, the reason I've heard for the change was to give enough space for the new electric steering thingy. I don't remember the details, but they wanted electric steering more than they wanted the wishbones. I can't imagine why.
From driving the Saturn Vue with the electrogoofy steering, I can't either. Or maybe Honda's unit works much better...... Keeping the Vue straight on the road reminded me of herding cats.....
I test drove a Saturn Ion with the electric power steering...it was pretty bad. It made me wonder why GM bothered to replace conventional power steering with this unit.
Interestingly, with all of the talk about suspensions and driving fun, supposedly safety is Honda's next big push. The company has an indoor crash-test facility that is only equalled by Volvo's, from what I've read.
Actually, they have two. There's one in Japan that is the largest in the industry and (prior to the one built by volvo) supposedly the most sophisticated. Recently, they completed another in Ohio that allows for unique tests, such as pitching the vehicles prior to impacts.
electrogoofy steering is the wave of the future, dontcha' know. In five years the cars that DON'T have it will be in the minority.
Oh yeah, and in choosing between the Civic SI and the RSX I eventually bought, electric steering definitely played a role. That electric steering in the SI is dead - no feel, and the wheels don't center themselves if you let go of the steering wheel. The RSX still has regular ol' hydraulic power steering which I like a lot more - good feel, perfectly boosted (which is to say, nice and heavy the way I like it).
Electric steering boosts fuel economy, which is why everyone wants it. Not to mention it is probably more durable and certainly can't leak as all hydraulic systems inevitably do in the end.
Can't blame Civic for the high beltline thing though - every car out there is getting those.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
On struts... Its amazing how people will "protect" BMW by all means.
On Electric Power Steering... Civic Si, Civic Hybrid and Insight have been using it. S2000 and NSX have it as well. A version of S2000 (Type-V) has an EPS with variable gear ratio (the steering gear ratio changes with vehicle speed).
EPS supposedly reduces powertrain losses, and no powersteering pump is needed.
"On struts... Its amazing how people will "protect" BMW by all means."
Same goes for Honda. When the Civic still had the front wishbones, they were considered Honda's gift to the economy car world according to Hondaphiles. At the same time, when Honda got rid of the wishbones on the Civic, it's no big deal, and if anyone complains about it, they're blowing things way out of proportion.
Maybe if the Civic rode and handled like 3 series, nobody would've complained about the struts.
"Maybe if the 3 series could be had for the price of a civic, nobody would complain about the struts in 3 series either."
I didn't know there were lots of people complaining about the struts in the 3 series. People keep bringing up BMW when talking about the Civic's new mac-strut front end, but the Civic ride/handling balance is nowhere near any BMW, and I don't expect it to be....so lets stop equating the Civic's front suspension with that of BMWs.
about the old pre-strut Civics, and Accords, was the ultra-low cowl that the design afforded. Gave great visibility and an open, airy feeling, that would make the car feel bigger inside than it really was.
just styling - a trend that responds to the rapidly increasing popularity of SUVs, in which people feel "wrapped in their vehicles" - gives them an illusion of safety. Car designers are trying to match this feeling of being "wrapped in the car" by eliminating all the greenhouse glass...
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
There is a big push in Eroupe for pedestrian safety at the moment, and I think the Civic is one of the only if not the only car to achieve 3 out of 5 stars for pedestrian safety. This could cause some styling changes?
"You started the comparison...I just wanted to point out how ridiculous that was."
Actually, I brought it up after someone mentioned BMW uses macpherson struts, implying that if they're good enough for BMW, they're good enough for the Civic.
than just a McPherson strut to make the difference between a car that handles and a car that doesn't. After all, didn't Escorts and Pintos have McPhersons?
Comments
I believe Honda's cars are mostly lighter than competing same-size models.
That may have been true in the past, not anymore. Honda/Acura vehicles are typically heavy. Compare Accord, Camry, Altima and Mazda6, and guess which is the heaviest. Compare TL, 3-series (or 5-series), G35, A4 etc. and see which is the heaviest.
They don't care!
newcar31, it would seem you know more than the Honda engineers about what would work best in their cars and what's possible and what is not.
I know I wouldn't want to be making those corporate decisions. Give us more power, but don't hurt fuel economy! Give us more interior room and higher crash test ratings but don't take away the double wishbones!
Oh...and whatever you do, don't raise the prices!
Then they have the shareholders to keep happy!
I'm saying that having the wishbone front, good crash test scores, and good interior room, isn't having "everything". You don't *need* to trade one for the other. You're trying to make it seem like it would take a miracle for Honda to improve on the crash test results and interior room while keeping the front wishbones. I'm saying it wouldn't take a miracle, just money.
"So, are you suggesting that Honda doesn’t like cost cutting?"
I don't know if they do or not, but that's what they did with the new Civic.
"But the problem with some people here is that they lug around only the inexpensive aspect of struts and don’t want to admit the benefits that it could bring."
Benefits of mac-strut design? They're compact and cheap.
No matter how many times you keep saying that it is, it IS NOT either/or.
THAT is what I keep trying to get through to you!
THAT is what I keep trying to get through to you!"
No need to get that message though to me because I realize that. There are a lot of neato things on Honda vehicles that the "masses" don't care or know about.
Forgot to respond to this one:
"Accord just doesn't do okay in this regard, but the key is size of the cars. Accord is a midsize, and Civic barely got out of sub-compact class into compact with the redesign (without an increase in external dimensions). If Civic were 15 inch longer and 5 inch wider, it would be the size of Accord."
So you're saying that if Honda shrunk the Accord to Civic size, the front wishbone suspension would disappear and a mac-strut type would appear in it's place?
But...I don't have the foggiest idea what Honda would do, if they shrunk the Accord to the size of a Civic. Like that's gonna happen!
And, I like most of my customers, wouldn't care.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
"Benefits of mac-strut design? They're compact and cheap"
You've already answered your question.
And why do you think BMW sticks with Macpherson struts in its cars? Couldn't they afford to use, or design, double wishbones?
Let me see your take on this first.
Lately, AHM is trying to instill something in its Acura lineup that it moved away from in the mid-90s, and that is, balancing sport with comfort.
So it is not a recent trend, it has been the Honda way of doing business.
Let me see your take on this first."
I honestly don't know why BMW uses mac struts, but it seems like they do it better than Honda. Let me turn this around on you:
And why do you think Honda sticks with front wishbones in the Accord? Couldn't they save money by using mac struts since Honda customers don't care? It's good enough for BMW, why not the Accord?
Was Honda wrong with the previous generation Civics and current and past Accords by using front wishbones?
The CR-V, Element, Ody, Pilot, MDX, and several other Honda's not sold in the US use struts. Just because Honda has used double bones in the past, does not make them "anti-strut".
Regardless, sales of vehicles like the Ody, Pilot, MDX, and CR-V show that the use of struts ain't the problem (if there even is one).
Nuff said!
Doesn't matter. I'm questioning the very use of Macpherson struts, not that they are preferred over double wishbone if RWD, or are they? ;-)
newcar31
Are you concerned about tuning of the suspension, or the use of a particular type of suspension?
And Accord is expensive enough, and large enough to safely use wishbones, and needs it more so for the character that Accord is about. I'm sure Honda could have sold as many Accords without it, since Toyota can with its Camry. In fact, it would likely have more room than it does right now, and have larger trunk space to boot (like Camry). See... you give up something to get something. Read: compromise.
So if you want an independent suspension all the way around, good gas mileage, good crash tests, and above average reliability you are left with the Civic and the Mazda3. I'd take the Civic. Nothing glaringly wrong with the 3, it's just not my cup of tea.
I don't know why my brother's Civic rides the way it does, all I know is that my 92' Integra which is TEN YEARS OLDER rode better and it had front wishbones. Is it because of the wishbones in my Integra or is it because Honda can't tune the mac struts right on the Civic?
"And Accord is expensive enough, and large enough to safely use wishbones, and needs it more so for the character that Accord is about."
So the previous Civic was too small to safely use front wishbones? What *exactly* is it about the Accord's character that necesitates the use of front wishbones?
"In fact, it would likely have more room than it does right now, and have larger trunk space to boot (like Camry). See... you give up something to get something. Read: compromise."
Mac-struts in the rear would give you LESS trunk space because they would intrude into the trunk. The mac strut design is bigger vertically, the wishbone design is bigger horizontally, which is why you usually see the mac-struts in front. Check out the trunk on the Mazda6, it's HUGE because the rear suspension is tucked horizontally under the car.
Is your concern regarding the choice of a particular type of suspension, or tuning of the suspension?
That said, Macpherson struts is a space (and weight) efficient design, and allows more space anywhere it is placed, front or rear, compared to double wishbones.
I found it interesting to note that Accord's 5-link rear suspension is mentioned in a different sense than a typical double wishbone, and rightfully so (Honda calls it a modified/Watt-link double wishbone). This layout was first implemented in Acura TL (1997) and was introduced into Accord with 1998 redesign (1989-1997 Accords had 4-link set up).
*edit* Just saw Robert's link. This SCC one isn't as comprehensive but those of you who want to get into details will like it.
Also, the Civic's old suspension had more travel and was easier to lower. Which may explain its popularity...
I thought I answered it in post 485, but I guess not. As long as a car has a good handling/ride balance, (which is easier to do with wishbones and IMO the current Civic does not have) it doesn't matter.
"That said, Macpherson struts is a space (and weight) efficient design, and allows more space anywhere it is placed, front or rear, compared to double wishbones."
One design may have more *usable* space than the other in certain situations. Like I said before, mac-struts aren't as space efficient in the rear because by design, they intrude vertically into the trunk.
Now it's your turn to answer the questions that you conveniently avoided:
So the previous Civic was too small to safely use front wishbones? What *exactly* is it about the Accord's character that necesitates the use of front wishbones?
Good! And all along I thought you had issue with Honda replacing Double Wishbones from the front with MacPherson Struts. :-)
One design may have more *usable* space than the other in certain situations. Like I said before, mac-struts aren't as space efficient in the rear because by design, they intrude vertically into the trunk.
May not be as space efficient as beam axle/semi-independent suspensions, but better than double wishbones.
So the previous Civic was too small to safely use front wishbones? What *exactly* is it about the Accord's character that necesitates the use of front wishbones?
Nothing necessitates double wishbones in Accord. Most automakers get away with MacPherson struts (Nissan Maxima/Altima, Subaru Legacy and Toyota Camry/Avalon are good examples). Some avoid double wishbones and come up with their own designs (VW/Audi Quadra-link). Honda could too.
Honda can afford to put double wishbone front suspension in Accord because cost is not as restrictive, and size of the car is definitely now. They could afford two additional links in the rear suspension as well (compared to Civic’s 3-link double wishbone in the rear).
Double wishbone would be the ideal choice, but then compromises strike in. Wouldn’t that be a reason for BMW to choose MacPherson struts for the front suspension? Or do they do it for the sake of it? Let me know what you think about this.
A quote from Carlisimo's link above...
That's hilarious... seems like we see a little of that happening in this forum as well.
It doesn't matter as long as ride/handling balance isn't compromised, which it was with the new Civic. Go take the new Civic and a front wishbone Civic around a bumpy cloverleaf and then come back here and tell me that there's no difference between the two.
"May not be as space efficient as beam axle/semi-independent suspensions, but better than double wishbones."
No, mac-struts are not always more space efficient than wishbones because the wishbone design can be flattened out so as not to intrude into the trunk. The wishbone design may take up more space underneath the car where tons of space isn't needed on a FWD car, but not as much in the trunk because there is no need for vertical strut towers.
"Wouldn’t that be a reason for BMW to choose MacPherson struts for the front suspension? Or do they do it for the sake of it? Let me know what you think about this."
I already told you that I don't know why BMW uses mac struts in the front. Maybe you can tell me why?
1. Extra space for the tight front engine, rwd format.
2. Less complicated to tune. Allowing BMW to save engineering costs when it goes from the fairly compliant base models to the aggressive M format.
I am with Newcar on this. Economy car struts are not BMW struts. The double wishbone made the Civic special.
Oh yeah, high cowls and beltlines suck.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Officially, the reason I've heard for the change was to give enough space for the new electric steering thingy. I don't remember the details, but they wanted electric steering more than they wanted the wishbones. I can't imagine why.
Interestingly, with all of the talk about suspensions and driving fun, supposedly safety is Honda's next big push. The company has an indoor crash-test facility that is only equalled by Volvo's, from what I've read.
http://hondanews.com/CatID1003?mid=2003102935673&mime=asc&- ;archives=t
http://hondanews.com/CatID1003?mid=2003091048547&mime=asc&- ;archives=t
Oh yeah, and in choosing between the Civic SI and the RSX I eventually bought, electric steering definitely played a role. That electric steering in the SI is dead - no feel, and the wheels don't center themselves if you let go of the steering wheel. The RSX still has regular ol' hydraulic power steering which I like a lot more - good feel, perfectly boosted (which is to say, nice and heavy the way I like it).
Electric steering boosts fuel economy, which is why everyone wants it. Not to mention it is probably more durable and certainly can't leak as all hydraulic systems inevitably do in the end.
Can't blame Civic for the high beltline thing though - every car out there is getting those.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Its amazing how people will "protect" BMW by all means.
On Electric Power Steering...
Civic Si, Civic Hybrid and Insight have been using it. S2000 and NSX have it as well. A version of S2000 (Type-V) has an EPS with variable gear ratio (the steering gear ratio changes with vehicle speed).
EPS supposedly reduces powertrain losses, and no powersteering pump is needed.
I've heard others make the very same observation about Honda fans...
Not a dig, since I am one (Honda fan, that is...)
Its amazing how people will "protect" BMW by all means."
Same goes for Honda. When the Civic still had the front wishbones, they were considered Honda's gift to the economy car world according to Hondaphiles. At the same time, when Honda got rid of the wishbones on the Civic, it's no big deal, and if anyone complains about it, they're blowing things way out of proportion.
Maybe if the Civic rode and handled like 3 series, nobody would've complained about the struts.
Maybe if the 3 series could be had for the price of a civic, nobody would complain about the struts in 3 series either.
I didn't know there were lots of people complaining about the struts in the 3 series. People keep bringing up BMW when talking about the Civic's new mac-strut front end, but the Civic ride/handling balance is nowhere near any BMW, and I don't expect it to be....so lets stop equating the Civic's front suspension with that of BMWs.
You started the comparison...I just wanted to point out how ridiculous that was. No more on the subject from me.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Actually, I brought it up after someone mentioned BMW uses macpherson struts, implying that if they're good enough for BMW, they're good enough for the Civic.