Nismo or boss ?

Caustic · 05-29-2013, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sh0velMan

Just let it go. Each has its merits and each can be both good or bad depending on what you're doing and how you've set it up. Neither is a magic bullet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuck33079

I was under the impression that a live axle was preferable for drag racing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tazicon

And rock crawling

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sh0velMan

And being cheap, compact and efficient.

Quote:

Originally Posted by StangerGT

The bottom line, which everyone here seems to totally fail at understanding... is...

It. Doesn't. Matter.

Unless everyone here is a race car driver, most aren't capable skill wise to push either car to its controlable limit.

That is what most of the SRA people are saying... SRA's aren't a big deal... and if it is factoring into your forumla on what you plan on buying, you have either maximised the potiential of one in favor of using the other, or you have no idea what you are buying.

The only car that will be of of equal comparison to a 370z is if you stuff a live axle into a 370z...

I guess if it doesn't matter, every sports car in the world should have a live rear axle. And they should all rock climb.

m4a1mustang · 05-29-2013, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caustic

I guess if it doesn't matter, every sports car in the world should have a live rear axle. And they should all rock climb.

There you go again.

Caustic · 05-29-2013, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang

There you go again.

YUP! I went and said it!

Rock climbing for all!

Chuck33079 · 05-29-2013, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caustic

I guess if it doesn't matter, every sports car in the world should have a live rear axle. And they should all rock climb.

I'll agree that the rock crawling comment was pushing it a bit, but drag racing is an activity many people enjoy with sports cars. In that arena, the live axle still outperforms the IRS. I don't think anyone was saying anything close to the hyperbole you just posted. I prefer an IRS, but I can admit that there's at least one form of motorsports that is dominated by live axle vehicles.

Caustic · 05-29-2013, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuck33079

I'll agree that the rock crawling comment was pushing it a bit, but drag racing is an activity many people enjoy with sports cars. In that arena, the live axle still outperforms the IRS. I don't think anyone was saying anything close to the hyperbole you just posted. I prefer an IRS, but I can admit that there's at least one form of motorsports that is dominated by live axle vehicles.

The problem I had is the consistent insistence that a live axle is just as good as an IRS to make a car perform well at a track. And then when that couldn't be argued, the insistence it doesn't matter. Of course it matters. That is why car manufactures spend time and money to develop these systems. That's why the cars in most track racing have it. But the live axle guys have dug their feet in because they can't deal with the fact that their cars are using inferior tech. The Mustang, one of the most recognizable marques around the world, has made forays into IRS (bad or otherwise) just for this very reason. And I'm the one that should let it go? Ford sure isn't, their next gen will offer IRS.

If you start putting other factors in there like good/bad setups, other applications, of course it muddies the whole argument, and avoids the original point.

m4a1mustang · 05-29-2013, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caustic

The problem I had is the consistent insistence that a live axle is just as good as an IRS to make a car perform well at a track. And then when that couldn't be argued, the insistence it doesn't matter. Of course it matters. That is why car manufactures spend time and money to develop these systems. That's why the cars in most track racing have it. But the live axle guys have dug their feet in because they can't deal with the fact that their cars are using inferior tech. The Mustang, one of the most recognizable marques around the world, has made forays into IRS (bad or otherwise) just for this very reason. And I'm the one that should let it go? Ford sure isn't, their next gen will offer IRS.

If you start putting other factors in there like good/bad setups, other applications, of course it muddies the whole argument, and avoids the original point.

You're still missing the point. All this discussion has ever been about is to dispel the notion that the Mustang CAN'T handle because it is equipped with a live axle, when time and time again it has proved it CAN.

No one is trying to argue that the live axle is just as good or better than the IRS. All we're doing is shooting down the uninformed that assume that just because a car has an SRA means it can't handle, and that just because a car has IRS it can (and doesn't need brakes, apparently.)

We have in fact AGREED with you that IRS is a superior design (when done correctly, of course), but for whatever reason you choose to ignore this.

"IRS is the superior design."

"I know."

"How dare you say SRA is better! IRS is superior!"

"I know."

"WHAT?!?!! How dare you disagree with me!!!"

StangerGT · 05-29-2013, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caustic

The problem I had is the consistent insistence that a live axle is just as good as an IRS to make a car perform well at a track. And then when that couldn't be argued, the insistence it doesn't matter. Of course it matters. That is why car manufactures spend time and money to develop these systems. That's why the cars in most track racing have it. But the live axle guys have dug their feet in because they can't deal with the fact that their cars are using inferior tech. The Mustang, one of the most recognizable marques around the world, has made forays into IRS (bad or otherwise) just for this very reason. And I'm the one that should let it go? Ford sure isn't, their next gen will offer IRS.

If you start putting other factors in there like good/bad setups, other applications, of course it muddies the whole argument, and avoids the original point.

There is no silver bullet. There are plenty of cars out there with various suspension setups and drivetrain configurations. Hell there are many configurations of a single type of drivetrain... They all do well and they all beat one another.

People put far to much weight into giving a **** about SRA vs IRS...

When most of the people here (myself included) couldnt push either to its potential.

Now is there any other technology that we would like to argue about, which most have no experiance pushing, as justification to say that one car is better then the other?

Spikuh · 05-29-2013, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caustic

The problem I had is the consistent insistence that a live axle is just as good as an IRS to make a car perform well at a track. And then when that couldn't be argued, the insistence it doesn't matter. Of course it matters. That is why car manufactures spend time and money to develop these systems. That's why the cars in most track racing have it. But the live axle guys have dug their feet in because they can't deal with the fact that their cars are using inferior tech. The Mustang, one of the most recognizable marques around the world, has made forays into IRS (bad or otherwise) just for this very reason. And I'm the one that should let it go? Ford sure isn't, their next gen will offer IRS.

If you start putting other factors in there like good/bad setups, other applications, of course it muddies the whole argument, and avoids the original point.

The problem you are actually having is that you are talking about stuff no one even brought up in the manner you seem to think. Your first post into this discussion was:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caustic

The whole live axle vs IRS is a ridiculous debate. Billy Johnson is right from a technical standpoint. But he is also speaking from a professional standpoint, which most of are not.

The main difference between a live (stick, solid, or whatever you want to call it) vs IRS is grip and consistency. When a wheel connected to a live axle hits a bump, both wheels are affected in terrible ways. It completely throws off the handling to all but the best of drivers.

IRS is a benefit when a wheel hits a bump, the opposing wheel is still settled, the handling characteristics on the opposing wheel haven't changed. This creates consistency and predictability for handling in the majority of conditions.

The point being is that when you see Mustangs closing in on M3 lap times, everyone points it out as the Mustang being as fast and as good as the M3. But the reality is these those lap times are close because professional drivers have the ability to correct for the Mustangs weaknesses.

You put weekend warrior track day drivers in those two cars, the driver in the M3 will consistently outperform the Mustang driver by a large amount. The Mustang driver will have their hands full every time they clip an apex and roll over rumble strips.

Live axle technology is good for just one thing, price. If there were little difference between live and IRS, why does every high end race car have IRS?

Right from the start, you immediately bring it up as a debate....which no one did.

M4a, the person who brought up Billy Johnson, even said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang

Let's face it, the Mustang *shouldn't* be live axle. It should have ditched it a decade ago. But they didn't. And it didn't help that for the longest time they handled like crap, so everyone just assumed stick axles can't handle. By the time they actually put together a serious chassis and got the geometry right... that's a hard stigma to shake.

before you ever stepped into the conversation.

It is also crazy funny to me that you like this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuck33079

A properly designed IRS is better than a properly designed solid axle. The Mustang still handles very well with a solid rear. Is it ideal? No. Will it be perfectly fine for the 99.9% of us who don't make our living behind the wheel. Of course. The solid rear isn't the reason I didn't buy a 5.0. It's the interior.

and yet, completely ignore:

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang

Let's face it, the Mustang *shouldn't* be live axle. It should have ditched it a decade ago. But they didn't. And it didn't help that for the longest time they handled like crap, so everyone just assumed stick axles can't handle. By the time they actually put together a serious chassis and got the geometry right... that's a hard stigma to shake.

because you want to argue against Billy Johnson.

Caustic · 05-29-2013, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spikuh

The problem you are actually having is that you are talking about stuff no one even brought up in the manner you seem to think. Your first post into this discussion was:

Right from the start, you immediately bring it up as a debate....which no one did.

M4a, the person who brought up Billy Johnson, even said:

before you ever stepped into the conversation.

It is also crazy funny to me that you like this:

and yet, completely ignore:

because you want to argue against Billy Johnson.

Maybe you are the one that is talking about stuff no one even brought up in the manner you seem to think. First off, I am not arguing against Billy in the slightest. Billy owns an NSX, is an active member of NSXPrime, and has contributed to our community immensely. He is a great source of information because he is so connected to the car community.

I was pointing out in the quote that m4a1mustang used from Billy about live axle, that Billy was speaking from a professional perspective. I went further to say that for the rest of us, a difference between the two systems (SRA, IRS) is consistency. A professional driver masks the weaknesses of the live axle, where people like us have to fight against it.

I'm sorry if you can't figure out what happened from there.

m4a1mustang · 05-29-2013, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caustic

Maybe you are the one that is talking about stuff no one even brought up in the manner you seem to think. First off, I am not arguing against Billy in the slightest. Billy owns an NSX, is an active member of NSXPrime, and has contributed to our community immensely. He is a great source of information because he is so connected to the car community.

I was pointing out in the quote that m4a1mustang used from Billy about live axle, that Billy was speaking from a professional perspective. I went further to say that for the rest of us, a difference between the two systems (SRA, IRS) is consistency. A professional driver masks the weaknesses of the live axle, where people like us have to fight against it.

I'm sorry if you can't figure out what happened from there.

I've never had to fight against a live axle. Not sure where you are getting that from.

StangerGT · 05-29-2013, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caustic

Maybe you are the one that is talking about stuff no one even brought up in the manner you seem to think. First off, I am not arguing against Billy in the slightest. Billy owns an NSX, is an active member of NSXPrime, and has contributed to our community immensely. He is a great source of information because he is so connected to the car community.

I was pointing out in the quote that m4a1mustang used from Billy about live axle, that Billy was speaking from a professional perspective. I went further to say that for the rest of us, a difference between the two systems (SRA, IRS) is consistency. A professional driver masks the weaknesses of the live axle, where people like us have to fight against it.
I'm sorry if you can't figure out what happened from there.

I dont have issues with mine...

I think you are drinking the cool-aid on the whole concept that a live axle being hard to pilot.

m4a1mustang · 05-29-2013, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StangerGT

I dont have issues with mine...

I think you are drinking the cool-aid on the whole concept that a live axle being hard to pilot.

It's quite easy. The only thing to be aware of is on panhard equipped live axles the rear end will move in a slight arc as the rear suspension compresses. This can potentially create the feeling of the rear end stepping out ever so slightly.

All you do in this situation is... nothing. Keep the throttle down and the wheel turned.

Spikuh · 05-29-2013, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caustic

Maybe you are the one that is talking about stuff no one even brought up in the manner you seem to think. First off, I am not arguing against Billy in the slightest. Billy owns an NSX, is an active member of NSXPrime, and has contributed to our community immensely. He is a great source of information because he is so connected to the car community.

Cool story bro, thanks for the monologue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caustic

I was pointing out in the quote that m4a1mustang used from Billy about live axle, that Billy was speaking from a professional perspective. I went further to say that for the rest of us, a difference between the two systems (SRA, IRS) is consistency. A professional driver masks the weaknesses of the live axle, where people like us have to fight against it.

This is a correct statement to an extent and I do not disagree with you here, nor in your first post. Professional drivers can bring out the most of any vehicle because they have the skill level to do so.

But making blanket statements like IRS > SRA or:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caustic

Or just go for a car with with an IRS suspension which everyone in this thread has already admitted is the superior solution.

is categorically wrong no matter how you try massage the message. Don't believe me? Go back to picture story where I talked about a 20+ year old IRS design and both the IRS design of the 370z and the SRA design of the Boss 302. The IRS design of the 240sx is less capable than both the 370z and the Boss 302. Period. There is no disputing that. I even explicitly stated the point of the picture just because you can't leave stuff like that to chance and rogue interpretations.

Here is another example. Take the old Mustang IRS setup. It was bad. So they abandoned it and went back to the SRA setup. Lots of reasons for it being bad, but doesn't change the fact that it was bad. Does that make SRA > IRS? For that instance, on that car, on that chasis, considering the car as a whole...absolutely. Does that make SRA > IRS in general, as a blanket statement or rule? Nope. Just as Red mentioned:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red__Zed

IRS is a superior framework that allows for superior designs...it doesn't guarantee them.

Notice the caveat. It is important.

If people want to make blanket statements about suspensions it should at least be:

IRS should be better than SRA assuming it was well developed. If people were making THAT point, then there is nothing left to say really.

But they aren't, which is the problem. And because they aren't, it is misinformation.

Caustic · 05-29-2013, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spikuh

Cool story bro, thanks for the monologue.

This is a correct statement to an extent and I do not disagree with you here, nor in your first post. Professional drivers can bring out the most of any vehicle because they have the skill level to do so.

But making blanket statements like IRS > SRA or:

is categorically wrong no matter how you try massage the message. Don't believe me? Go back to picture story where I talked about a 20+ year old IRS design and both the IRS design of the 370z and the SRA design of the Boss 302. The IRS design of the 240sx is less capable than both the 370z and the Boss 302. Period. There is no disputing that. I even explicitly stated the point of the picture just because you can't leave stuff like that to chance and rogue interpretations.

Here is another example. Take the old Mustang IRS setup. It was bad. So they abandoned it and went back to the SRA setup. Lots of reasons for it being bad, but doesn't change the fact that it was bad. Does that make SRA > IRS? For that instance, on that car, on that chasis, considering the car as a whole...absolutely. Does that make SRA > IRS in general, as a blanket statement or rule? Nope. Just as Red mentioned:

Notice the caveat. It is important.

If people want to make blanket statements about suspensions it should at least be:

IRS should be better than SRA assuming it was well developed. If people were making THAT point, then there is nothing left to say really.

But they aren't, which is the problem. And because they aren't, it is misinformation.

LOL, at your beginning sarcastic comment.

Saying IRS is better than live axle in a general track setting is not categorically wrong. Physics and engineering says it is better.

Saying a badly setup IRS vs a well setup live axle is whole different argument, and also a useless one.

StangerGT · 05-29-2013, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caustic

I guess if it doesn't matter, every sports car in the world should have a live rear axle. And they should all rock climb.

I saw a stock rental Corolla and an old stock GTI at the HDPE event... they were mopping the floor with everyone...

Now tell me thats because they packed an IRS... or had a sports car... or had gobbs of power... or awesome wheels/tires... or maybe a great suspension?

nope... all driver mod.

No one is saying an IRS is inferior... but lets shift the convo... front vs mid vs rear mount engine... i think a porsche can win because the engine is out back... therefor, all sports cars should have the motor aft of the driver.

If not its old and crappy and no one wants it...

oh and the corvette also runs leaf springs... anyone wanna say something about that?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Crashing like a boss	ChrisSlicks	Other Vehicles	16	07-12-2012 04:33 PM
How to procrastinate like a boss	jaedub	Nissan 370Z Photos / Spyshots / Video / Media Gallery	21	09-10-2011 07:52 PM
My wife is the boss.....	o0javi0o	Nissan 370Z General Discussions	27	06-02-2011 09:52 AM
Who's the Boss	cfweber	Other Vehicles	34	04-07-2011 06:56 PM