They moved to IS because it is better. If your priority is taking your car on an obstacle course, obviously, you can have your solid axles front and back.
It is better, for most applications, because most applications are not utility/offroad. I've said this countless times in as many ways as possible for you. However, they solid axles exist in utility/offroad vehicles and will continue to. No obstacle course needed. Again, they continue to roam the roads as well as off-road without issue.
And you wonder why I call you dishonest? It doesn't matter if trucks and lorries are as common as cars (they aren't - especially not on a global basis). That wasn't my claim, nor your claim to begin with. Again trying to move the goal posts. And again with the lies. I quoted you where I talked about cars, and requested a list of cars, and that it should be a list of cars still in production. And that it should be 10. You produced not ten, no cars, and several of the ones on your "list" is not even in production.
1. While cars can often mean "sedans, crossovers, and coupes" here, the terms cars and trucks are also often used interchangeably. They're both used to get a pint, drop the kids off, pick up groceries, etc. SUVs are just as large in volume, and sometimes even heavier. There's no difference in paperwork, taxation, or license to an owner. When someone asks who's "car" they're taking to the game, no one cares if it's got a bed in the back or not.
hmm..
2. We were going back and forth and your first request for cars I thought was kind of stupid, because no cars, as in "sedans, crossovers, and coupes", use solid axles. They shouldn't. I never said they should. It's a dumb question.
3. Later when you said this (I've quoted this before)..
Oh, and I'm still waiting for that list of solid front axle "overlander" vehicles from you.
.. I realized maybe you didn't want a list of "sedans" and this (see above) is what you wanted, so that's exactly what I gave you. There was no stipulation in your statement there about vehicles with beds, or that they still had to be in production.
Lies. Again. I never asked for "cheap cars". I said "even cheap cars have independent suspension", and I said that since solid axles are cheaper, I said sarcastically it should be "easy for you to find lots of them with solid axles", as I knew you would not find any even there.
Oh, and I'm still waiting for that list of solid front axle "overlander" vehicles from you.
Calm down man. What I quoted were your words. It sounded like you wanted such a list.
Not really. Neither here, nor where you are does "Heavy Duty Truck" mean "car" or vice versa.
It does. No one says "lets take your Heavy Duty Truck to the market", they say "let's take your car to the market", and when it happens to be that "your car" is a Heavy Duty Truck, no one cares and you go to the damn market.
It is when you try to argue that unless you have a race car or a super fast car, solid axles is better than IS.
Dishonest. Quote me. I've been saying exactly the opposite consistently. How many times have I told you IS/air is appropriate for Range Rovers, for example? It's got to be nearly a dozen times. No wonder you're so worked up if that's somehow what you're getting out of what I'm saying. I could say "The ball is red", and you'd say "Stop being dishonest! You keep telling me the ball is blue!"
That it is everywhere from cheap slow cars to super cars should tell you something.
Already covered this many times. It tells me they are appropriate for those applications. However, a Defender is not in the category of "cheap slow cars to super cars". It is in the category of utility/offroad, where coincidentally much of its competition still uses solid axles, because they too are in the same niche where solid axles work well.
<--- Disclaimer: This is not arguing "that unless you have a race car or a super fast car, solid axles is better than IS"
you refuse to understand that cutting the axle over an independently suspend each wheel is the only way to solve the problem of the two wheels being connected and the problems that arise from that.
I've stated many times that IS has advantages. That is obviously one of them. However, (I've said the following before many times as well) it is not always necessary. Where a solid axle is used, it is because the issue of coupled wheels and unsprung weight are not a high priority. Those issues are high priorities on most vehicles, but not all.
<--- Disclaimer: This is not arguing "that unless you have a race car or a super fast car, solid axles is better than IS"
I have still to see you come up with even a suggestion as to how to solve the problem of having the two wheels connected, which leads to the problem that whatever the one wheel hits, the other also reacts to
I've told you over, and over... and over, that in the context of improving solid axles, it cannot be changed. You cannot decouple the wheels and keep a solid axle. Proof:
2. You refine a better solution. You cannot decouple the wheels, that compromise will always exist with a solid axle, but you can reduce unsprung weight with material science and engineering, just as LR began to in the P38.
, and the problem of ridiculous amounts of unsprung weight. How DO you solve that without actually separating the two?
But I'm sure you will once again move the goalposts, lie, and be further dishonest in general.
Again, I addressed this directly already. Proof:
2. You refine a better solution. You cannot decouple the wheels, that compromise will always exist with a solid axle, but you can reduce unsprung weight with material science and engineering, just as LR began to in the P38.
Notice, I did not state you could "eliminate" unsprung suspension weight (which IS does not completely do either, although it does decouple), I said you could "reduce" it. Will it be enough of an improvement? That depends on the application. The intended market might not care (trucks and 4x4s), or they might demand further refinement to the point where IS is considered, which is what happened in the L322.
<--- Disclaimer: This is not arguing "that unless you have a race car or a super fast car, solid axles is better than IS"
carbiketech.com
