Let's get the fact straight about the "beam axle"
12-12-2001, 02:40 PM
#1
Not DAVEB the parts guy
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 8,555
Let's get the fact straight about the "beam axle"
Constantly I read posts where people say the beam axle setup on the 4th gen and 5th gen is "minvan" like and doesn't handle worth a poop. I'd like to set some things straight. The rear twist beam on the Maxima is actually quite capable of excellent handling and isn't set up like a typical beam axle. The Maxima's beam uses a very thick roll bar that runs through center of the beam, has trailing arms, coil springs, and a lateral link. The lateral link is a major factor is why the beam can handle well. The link always keeps the beam within the right geometry in a turn. Nissan even tuned the beam to have turn-in like a 4-wheel steering system. On smooth roads, the beam will give up NOTHING to a IRS setup. On a bumpy turn, the beam will exhibit it's flaws (rocking, harshness) and may reduce cornering ability marginally. HOWEVER, you must remember this is a front wheel drive car and not rwd therefore spin outs aren't a problem at the limit (unless you set up you RSB to a rediculous rate). RWD cars with a "live axle" are prone to a spin out on a bumpy turn, not a FWD car with a twist beam.
Is the beam axle harsher than a IRS on uneven surfaces? Yes. There's no way around it. The rear tires are connected therefore when one moves, the other will move to. The main point here is that the beam gives up some ride quality, not handling. Remember, VW and Audi are still using the twist beam. The Sentra SE-R V-Spec outhandles the infamous Integra Type R on the track even though the V-Spec isn't outfitted with near "race ready" tires and it runs a twist beam. I think that says a lot about the beam axle. Put a set of lightweight 15s with ITR spec tires on the V-Spec, and the ITR will be much further behind.
BTW, the Corvette still uses leaf springs. Anyone gonna say the C5 handles like crap?
Dave
Is the beam axle harsher than a IRS on uneven surfaces? Yes. There's no way around it. The rear tires are connected therefore when one moves, the other will move to. The main point here is that the beam gives up some ride quality, not handling. Remember, VW and Audi are still using the twist beam. The Sentra SE-R V-Spec outhandles the infamous Integra Type R on the track even though the V-Spec isn't outfitted with near "race ready" tires and it runs a twist beam. I think that says a lot about the beam axle. Put a set of lightweight 15s with ITR spec tires on the V-Spec, and the ITR will be much further behind.
BTW, the Corvette still uses leaf springs. Anyone gonna say the C5 handles like crap?
Dave
12-12-2001, 03:01 PM
#2
Dave,
I appreciate the remarks, but the 4th gen beam flat out feels unsafe to me. The 5th gen is a marked improvement, and one of the things Nissan really improved upon (at least for the 2k1 model I drove). It was much different when turning over rough pavement.
I appreciate the remarks, but the 4th gen beam flat out feels unsafe to me. The 5th gen is a marked improvement, and one of the things Nissan really improved upon (at least for the 2k1 model I drove). It was much different when turning over rough pavement.
12-12-2001, 03:08 PM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,530
Re: Let's get the fact straight about the "beam axle"
Originally posted by Dave B
Constantly I read posts where people say the beam axle setup on the 4th gen and 5th gen is "minvan" like and doesn't handle worth a poop. I'd like to set some things straight. The rear twist beam on the Maxima is actually quite capable of excellent handling and isn't set up like a typical beam axle. The Maxima's beam uses a very thick roll bar that runs through center of the beam, has trailing arms, coil springs, and a lateral link. The lateral link is a major factor is why the beam can handle well. The link always keeps the beam within the right geometry in a turn. Nissan even tuned the beam to have turn-in like a 4-wheel steering system. On smooth roads, the beam will give up NOTHING to a IRS setup. On a bumpy turn, the beam will exhibit it's flaws (rocking, harshness) and may reduce cornering ability marginally. HOWEVER, you must remember this is a front wheel drive car and not rwd therefore spin outs aren't a problem at the limit (unless you set up you RSB to a rediculous rate). RWD cars with a "live axle" are prone to a spin out on a bumpy turn, not a FWD car with a twist beam.
Is the beam axle harsher than a IRS on uneven surfaces? Yes. There's no way around it. The rear tires are connected therefore when one moves, the other will move to. The main point here is that the beam gives up some ride quality, not handling. Remember, VW and Audi are still using the twist beam. The Sentra SE-R V-Spec outhandles the infamous Integra Type R on the track even though the V-Spec isn't outfitted with near "race ready" tires and it runs a twist beam. I think that says a lot about the beam axle. Put a set of lightweight 15s with ITR spec tires on the V-Spec, and the ITR will be much further behind.
BTW, the Corvette still uses leaf springs. Anyone gonna say the C5 handles like crap?
Dave
Constantly I read posts where people say the beam axle setup on the 4th gen and 5th gen is "minvan" like and doesn't handle worth a poop. I'd like to set some things straight. The rear twist beam on the Maxima is actually quite capable of excellent handling and isn't set up like a typical beam axle. The Maxima's beam uses a very thick roll bar that runs through center of the beam, has trailing arms, coil springs, and a lateral link. The lateral link is a major factor is why the beam can handle well. The link always keeps the beam within the right geometry in a turn. Nissan even tuned the beam to have turn-in like a 4-wheel steering system. On smooth roads, the beam will give up NOTHING to a IRS setup. On a bumpy turn, the beam will exhibit it's flaws (rocking, harshness) and may reduce cornering ability marginally. HOWEVER, you must remember this is a front wheel drive car and not rwd therefore spin outs aren't a problem at the limit (unless you set up you RSB to a rediculous rate). RWD cars with a "live axle" are prone to a spin out on a bumpy turn, not a FWD car with a twist beam.
Is the beam axle harsher than a IRS on uneven surfaces? Yes. There's no way around it. The rear tires are connected therefore when one moves, the other will move to. The main point here is that the beam gives up some ride quality, not handling. Remember, VW and Audi are still using the twist beam. The Sentra SE-R V-Spec outhandles the infamous Integra Type R on the track even though the V-Spec isn't outfitted with near "race ready" tires and it runs a twist beam. I think that says a lot about the beam axle. Put a set of lightweight 15s with ITR spec tires on the V-Spec, and the ITR will be much further behind.
BTW, the Corvette still uses leaf springs. Anyone gonna say the C5 handles like crap?
Dave
Yes but I remember one of the major reasons back in 95 when Nissan changed designs to pitch the independent rear was becasue of the cost cutting. This cost cutting is also the result of our cheaply put together cars, with sunroof covers that feel like cardboard, etc etc etc.....
A beam is cheaper then a double wishbone suspension or mcpherson strut setup in the rear. While in some geographical locations this may be acceptable that has smooth roads all the time (I used to live in Miami, the roads were alot better there then where I live now) I have many twisties around in not so great condition. Infact, most of the roads around me are made for horses going 5 MPH, not motorvehicles. And since it ices around here, every year we have potholes. Unless there is something wrong with my car, my aunts car and my friends car (all 4 gens, between 97-98 with SE stock suspension -mine is the only one that has RSB)) all three cars exhibited the same skipping and loose rear end feel going around these certain bumps around my area. Even the stiff chassis/soft suspension Toyota Camry that has IRS makes it feel much more safe without the rear end all skipping around. Too bad when I did the test drives on the maxima I didnt take it around the back roads near me, as this is one of the biggest downfalls to this car.
I'm not saying the beam cannot handle well, I'm saying that it does not handle well around bumpy turns, nor does it add to the refinement feel of the vehicle. Most road courses I know of have excellent track surfaces, so obviously the rear beam will not show its weakness. However, in the real world where the roads are not perfect, the weakness is obvious and apparent.
As for the Corvette comment they use inverted monoleaf springs, but monoleaf springs dont have inherent trade offs for the excuse of cost cutting and poor engineering.
12-12-2001, 03:23 PM
#5
Originally posted by bill99gxe
Dave,
I appreciate the remarks, but the 4th gen beam flat out feels unsafe to me. The 5th gen is a marked improvement, and one of the things Nissan really improved upon (at least for the 2k1 model I drove). It was much different when turning over rough pavement.
Dave,
I appreciate the remarks, but the 4th gen beam flat out feels unsafe to me. The 5th gen is a marked improvement, and one of the things Nissan really improved upon (at least for the 2k1 model I drove). It was much different when turning over rough pavement.
12-12-2001, 03:29 PM
#6
Originally posted by BriGuyMax
funny how the 4th gen and 5th gen rear beam is the EXACT same part. The only difference is that the chassis of the 5th gen is stiffer.
funny how the 4th gen and 5th gen rear beam is the EXACT same part. The only difference is that the chassis of the 5th gen is stiffer.
12-12-2001, 03:35 PM
#7
Originally posted by bill99gxe
I was under the impression Nissan moved a component of the link that kept the rear better planted on turns.....
I was under the impression Nissan moved a component of the link that kept the rear better planted on turns.....
12-12-2001, 04:06 PM
#8
Originally posted by BriGuyMax
they may have said that they did that...but look at both right next to each other (I have)...and they are IDENTICAL. I'm guessing the reason that the 5th gen seems to stay better planted in turns is because of it's stiffer chassis and springs.
they may have said that they did that...but look at both right next to each other (I have)...and they are IDENTICAL. I'm guessing the reason that the 5th gen seems to stay better planted in turns is because of it's stiffer chassis and springs.
12-12-2001, 04:12 PM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,883
Re: Let's get the fact straight about the "beam axle"
Originally posted by Dave B
BTW, the Corvette still uses leaf springs. Anyone gonna say the C5 handles like crap?
Dave
BTW, the Corvette still uses leaf springs. Anyone gonna say the C5 handles like crap?
Dave
12-12-2001, 04:24 PM
#11
futher more i would like to add... the lowered IRS cars i have raced with (friends and family) seem to exihibit the "dancing rear" around corners at high speed.. where as my 4th gen is planted to the ground and doesn't move.. well i am lowered 2 inches to the ground and i have all suspension mods.. but i also think the rear beam plays a major role also
12-12-2001, 04:38 PM
#12
Are those IRS cars lowered properly? If they are lowered quite a bit, they may have too much neg camber. I ran my 510 at about 3 deg neg for ahwhile and the rear would like to come out too fast becuase I only had about 1/2 of the tread contacting the ground. After I got the rear A-arms custom bent to about 1 deg neg camber, the handling got much better. I remember your friends have nice cars so I assume it was done right. Did these cars have upgraded shocks and rsbs also?
Originally posted by SprintMax
futher more i would like to add... the lowered IRS cars i have raced with (friends and family) seem to exihibit the "dancing rear" around corners at high speed.. where as my 4th gen is planted to the ground and doesn't move.. well i am lowered 2 inches to the ground and i have all suspension mods.. but i also think the rear beam plays a major role also
futher more i would like to add... the lowered IRS cars i have raced with (friends and family) seem to exihibit the "dancing rear" around corners at high speed.. where as my 4th gen is planted to the ground and doesn't move.. well i am lowered 2 inches to the ground and i have all suspension mods.. but i also think the rear beam plays a major role also
12-12-2001, 04:47 PM
#13
GS 400 lowered 1.0/1.2 FSTB, FSB, RSB
IS 300 lowered 3.0/3.0 FSTB, FSB, RSB
GTI VR6 stock suspension
Jetta 2.0 2.0/2.0 FSTB, RSB
Me 2.0/2.0 FSTB, RSTB, RSB
Maxima stock supension, RSB <-- outhandles GS 400
IS 300 lowered 3.0/3.0 FSTB, FSB, RSB
GTI VR6 stock suspension
Jetta 2.0 2.0/2.0 FSTB, RSB
Me 2.0/2.0 FSTB, RSTB, RSB
Maxima stock supension, RSB <-- outhandles GS 400
Originally posted by Jeff92se
Are those IRS cars lowered properly? If they are lowered quite a bit, they may have too much neg camber. I ran my 510 at about 3 deg neg for ahwhile and the rear would like to come out too fast becuase I only had about 1/2 of the tread contacting the ground. After I got the rear A-arms custom bent to about 1 deg neg camber, the handling got much better. I remember your friends have nice cars so I assume it was done right. Did these cars have upgraded shocks and rsbs also?
Are those IRS cars lowered properly? If they are lowered quite a bit, they may have too much neg camber. I ran my 510 at about 3 deg neg for ahwhile and the rear would like to come out too fast becuase I only had about 1/2 of the tread contacting the ground. After I got the rear A-arms custom bent to about 1 deg neg camber, the handling got much better. I remember your friends have nice cars so I assume it was done right. Did these cars have upgraded shocks and rsbs also?
12-12-2001, 05:11 PM
#14
Originally posted by SprintMax
GS 400 lowered 1.0/1.2 FSTB, FSB, RSB
IS 300 lowered 3.0/3.0 FSTB, FSB, RSB
GTI VR6 stock suspension
Jetta 2.0 2.0/2.0 FSTB, RSB
Me 2.0/2.0 FSTB, RSTB, RSB
Maxima stock supension, RSB <-- outhandles GS 400
GS 400 lowered 1.0/1.2 FSTB, FSB, RSB
IS 300 lowered 3.0/3.0 FSTB, FSB, RSB
GTI VR6 stock suspension
Jetta 2.0 2.0/2.0 FSTB, RSB
Me 2.0/2.0 FSTB, RSTB, RSB
Maxima stock supension, RSB <-- outhandles GS 400
My 87 Supra was dropped 2" with corrected camber felt much better in wide sweeping curves with virtually any imperfections than my Maxima... drifted with no fear.
12-12-2001, 05:30 PM
#15
There are a few other points to adress when discussing "the beam."
The beam is lighter than IRS overal, yet it has a higher unsprung weight.
The beam has fewer points that attach to the body. Therefore less road noise is transmitted.
The lateral link is not the same as the Panhard Rod used on most beams. It is called the Scott-Russell Link. It has a large bushing where the end attaches to the beam that is laterally compliant, yet vertically stiff. This lets the end of the link "slide along" the beam, providing a virtual pivot point. This lets the beam keep the wheels planted vertiacl to the road, yet avoid the "jacking" motion associated with a Panhard Rod in transient handling situations.
The beam is lighter than IRS overal, yet it has a higher unsprung weight.
The beam has fewer points that attach to the body. Therefore less road noise is transmitted.
The lateral link is not the same as the Panhard Rod used on most beams. It is called the Scott-Russell Link. It has a large bushing where the end attaches to the beam that is laterally compliant, yet vertically stiff. This lets the end of the link "slide along" the beam, providing a virtual pivot point. This lets the beam keep the wheels planted vertiacl to the road, yet avoid the "jacking" motion associated with a Panhard Rod in transient handling situations.
12-12-2001, 05:44 PM
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by BriGuyMax
funny how the 4th gen and 5th gen rear beam is the EXACT same part. The only difference is that the chassis of the 5th gen is stiffer.
funny how the 4th gen and 5th gen rear beam is the EXACT same part. The only difference is that the chassis of the 5th gen is stiffer.
12-12-2001, 05:45 PM
#17
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by Chunger
They relocated the "bar" (russel link?) that connects the body to the beam behind rather than in front of the beam on the 2K+ models...
They relocated the "bar" (russel link?) that connects the body to the beam behind rather than in front of the beam on the 2K+ models...
http://www.5thgenmaximas.com/russmax...sb/rsblast.jpg
Anyone got a 4th gen?
12-12-2001, 07:05 PM
#18
i can settle this, being that i owned a 4th and now a 5th gen. ono the 4th gen the Scott-Russell link is IN FRONT of the beam and on the 5th gen is is BEHIND the beam and gets in the way of the RSB grrrr. settled.
12-12-2001, 10:22 PM
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,530
I used the MaxFAQs and from http://web2.airmail.net/scutchen/max_faq/ I read:
"
Q: What is the deal with the 4th Generation beam axle replacing the fully independent rear suspension of the 3rd generation Maxima?
A: Here's what Motor Trend said about the new multi-link beam suspension when they awarded the 1995 Maxima the Motor Trend Import Car of the year:
The new Maxima benefits from a generous helping of suspension wizardry. MacPherson struts carry over up front, but the rear struts with parallel links have given way to a new Multi-Link Beam configuration with trailing arms. Lighter, more compact,, more space-efficient, and less expensive to produce, the new system also delivers tangible dynamic improvements over the one it replaces. Nissan will use this patented rear-axle design on many of its upcoming front-drive vehicles, including the new Sentra.
The challenge facing Nissan engineers was to devise rear suspension that would deliver a properly compliant ride while preventing unwanted camber change and suspension jacking under cornering and eliminating scuff change (transverse movement of the body relative to the axle) over uneven road surfaces. Both are common problems in a conventional beam-axle design located by a simple Panhard rod. Nissan's variation on the basic theme involves two key modifications. The first substitutes a special oversize lower bushing in the Panhard rod that's stiff vertically but pliant laterally. The second piece in the puzzle is a control link (formally known as a Scott-Russell link) that connects the Panhard rod with the axle to provide additional stability. This combination ensures that the axle will only move up and down, thereby maintaining proper camber in the rear tires at all times. This unique hardware also maintains a more consistent relationship between the vehicle's roll center and its center of gravity, which contributes to a better cornering feel and less body roll, regardless of loading. Since the springs and shock absorbers no longer have to contend with as much lateral force, they can be made smaller and lighter. The result: Both ride and handling are improve. And, as an extra bonus, fewer suspension mounting points result in less noise being transmitted back into the body structure.
Q: So was there a change to this multi-link design for the 2000 model year?
A: Yup! From the June 1999 Road & Track:
The suspension is upgraded as well for 2000. So what's the secret behind the car's improved handling? According to the Maxima's product planning director, John Yukawa, all it took was a slight readjustment to the rear suspension. "By moving the lateral link aft of the rear axle, we found that the front end of the car behaved in a more predictable way because it allowed the rear tires to track better through corners. This also resulted in better steering response and a more stable rear end so the car would not have a tendency to spin if you were to lift [off the throttle] abruptly while turning," he said.
"
So what does that tell me about the 4 gen suspension, admitted by the product planning director? The 4 gen does not track as well thru the corners and the steering response isnt that great, nor is the stability in the rear end as good, and that they improved a tad in the 5 gen. This is a big reason I'm pitching this car. And although I dont have it infront of me, I remember clearly that Consumer Reports when they tested a 4 gen 98 Max, they commented that the suspension exhibited rubbery side to side kicks on bumpy roads.
"
Q: What is the deal with the 4th Generation beam axle replacing the fully independent rear suspension of the 3rd generation Maxima?
A: Here's what Motor Trend said about the new multi-link beam suspension when they awarded the 1995 Maxima the Motor Trend Import Car of the year:
The new Maxima benefits from a generous helping of suspension wizardry. MacPherson struts carry over up front, but the rear struts with parallel links have given way to a new Multi-Link Beam configuration with trailing arms. Lighter, more compact,, more space-efficient, and less expensive to produce, the new system also delivers tangible dynamic improvements over the one it replaces. Nissan will use this patented rear-axle design on many of its upcoming front-drive vehicles, including the new Sentra.
The challenge facing Nissan engineers was to devise rear suspension that would deliver a properly compliant ride while preventing unwanted camber change and suspension jacking under cornering and eliminating scuff change (transverse movement of the body relative to the axle) over uneven road surfaces. Both are common problems in a conventional beam-axle design located by a simple Panhard rod. Nissan's variation on the basic theme involves two key modifications. The first substitutes a special oversize lower bushing in the Panhard rod that's stiff vertically but pliant laterally. The second piece in the puzzle is a control link (formally known as a Scott-Russell link) that connects the Panhard rod with the axle to provide additional stability. This combination ensures that the axle will only move up and down, thereby maintaining proper camber in the rear tires at all times. This unique hardware also maintains a more consistent relationship between the vehicle's roll center and its center of gravity, which contributes to a better cornering feel and less body roll, regardless of loading. Since the springs and shock absorbers no longer have to contend with as much lateral force, they can be made smaller and lighter. The result: Both ride and handling are improve. And, as an extra bonus, fewer suspension mounting points result in less noise being transmitted back into the body structure.
Q: So was there a change to this multi-link design for the 2000 model year?
A: Yup! From the June 1999 Road & Track:
The suspension is upgraded as well for 2000. So what's the secret behind the car's improved handling? According to the Maxima's product planning director, John Yukawa, all it took was a slight readjustment to the rear suspension. "By moving the lateral link aft of the rear axle, we found that the front end of the car behaved in a more predictable way because it allowed the rear tires to track better through corners. This also resulted in better steering response and a more stable rear end so the car would not have a tendency to spin if you were to lift [off the throttle] abruptly while turning," he said.
"
So what does that tell me about the 4 gen suspension, admitted by the product planning director? The 4 gen does not track as well thru the corners and the steering response isnt that great, nor is the stability in the rear end as good, and that they improved a tad in the 5 gen. This is a big reason I'm pitching this car. And although I dont have it infront of me, I remember clearly that Consumer Reports when they tested a 4 gen 98 Max, they commented that the suspension exhibited rubbery side to side kicks on bumpy roads.
12-12-2001, 10:55 PM
#21
if you think about it. the rear beam acts like a giant sway bar.. i mean. those with indept suspension brace the freakin out of them. x brace. sway bars. etx so that the car can act like a single unit.
with my konis on full stiff, sprint springs, and with the sway bar pushed all the way above the axel, i actually break the rear loose all the time on the track .. yes its a bit scary at first but its really one of the faster ways to turn in the car if it gets up on 3 wheels...
i dunno about sprints's max, but i'm always on 3 wheels when i take sharp *** turns..
with my konis on full stiff, sprint springs, and with the sway bar pushed all the way above the axel, i actually break the rear loose all the time on the track .. yes its a bit scary at first but its really one of the faster ways to turn in the car if it gets up on 3 wheels...
i dunno about sprints's max, but i'm always on 3 wheels when i take sharp *** turns..
12-12-2001, 11:19 PM
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 413
I've taken Shadow's car through some serious turns and I can say for a fact the beam axle and the suspension design in general is not as good as it could be. There's no doubt the car can get enough traction though but handling is another matter. Shadow's car was outfitted w/ 235/45ZR17 Yokohama Nexus tires at the time which lasted only a summer w/ a treadlife rating of 100. His car could take turns incredibly hard but slightest bump would upset it. He also had to deal w/ the car pushing through turns when taken past the limit even w/ his RSB set pretty stiff. We did a back to back comparison on the same road w/ a friend's E36 M3 which was running M lightweight springs and Racing Dynamic hollow sway bars. The M3's Michelin Pilots actually lost traction earlier than Shadow's car but it turned into controlled drifts while Shadow's car was more going into the turns w/ the front end out of control. Over hard bumps the car gets outright spooky at speed and even w/ all his suspension mods, I still feel more comfortable at speed in my Prelude. I've also raced a NA '93 Supra through some massive turns near my house and the Max was just scary through them b/c there's bump in one.
Shadow's car also makes loud thunking sounds now that he's lowered almost 4". The Max suspension design was meant for comfort and not that much beyond it. It has nowhere near enough travel, nor is the beam design conductive to fast transistions. It stays planted and unless you have some crazy driving style of dumping the car sharply into turns, it has very little ability to rotate controllably. W/ my Prelude, I can lift throttle in a turn and the car will tuck into a 4 wheel drift that I can pull out of w/o too much trouble.
Shadow's car also makes loud thunking sounds now that he's lowered almost 4". The Max suspension design was meant for comfort and not that much beyond it. It has nowhere near enough travel, nor is the beam design conductive to fast transistions. It stays planted and unless you have some crazy driving style of dumping the car sharply into turns, it has very little ability to rotate controllably. W/ my Prelude, I can lift throttle in a turn and the car will tuck into a 4 wheel drift that I can pull out of w/o too much trouble.
12-13-2001, 01:15 AM
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,835
Whether the 4th gen's beam axle gives it a handling advantage on smooth roads isn't really the issue here.
The issue is that, as a daily driver, whether the 4th gen's rear beam suspension is a good compromise between performance and comfort. It isn't. Theoretically it handles better, but how many SMOOTH roads do you drive on each day. I drove on pothole infested bumpy roads everyday and while I like how my lowered Maxima (H&R/Tok) handles, I cannot stand the harsh ride, especially during cornering, where it feels like I am about to lose control if I hit a bump on the road too hard. It's not that I am losing grip, it's just that the bumps are taken so harshly that it is almost unsettling.
I have never gotten the "out of control" feeling driving an Accord or Camry in unmodified form, and can only attribute this unique aspect of my Maxima's handling to the rear beam setup.
The issue is that, as a daily driver, whether the 4th gen's rear beam suspension is a good compromise between performance and comfort. It isn't. Theoretically it handles better, but how many SMOOTH roads do you drive on each day. I drove on pothole infested bumpy roads everyday and while I like how my lowered Maxima (H&R/Tok) handles, I cannot stand the harsh ride, especially during cornering, where it feels like I am about to lose control if I hit a bump on the road too hard. It's not that I am losing grip, it's just that the bumps are taken so harshly that it is almost unsettling.
I have never gotten the "out of control" feeling driving an Accord or Camry in unmodified form, and can only attribute this unique aspect of my Maxima's handling to the rear beam setup.
12-13-2001, 05:48 AM
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,117
The rear beam axle >>
The difference between the 4th and 5th gens is that Watts linkage in the 5Gen was moved aft of the beam. This combined with a 2" longer wheelbase is what give the 5th Gen more stability. There are no other differences between the parts...I believe that the geometry of the links remain the same too.
12-13-2001, 05:59 AM
#25
Re: Let's get the fact straight about the "beam axle"
Totally. I kind of love my beam, because it gives the Max character, especially when I blo by those bimmers and GS300s etc, all with IRSs, and they think that they are all that.
By the way, Dave, another reason I should add, the the rear beam on the Max is quite good is because of its very little un-sprung weight. People always compare it to a Mustang or Camaro beam axle. I always have to correct them and tell them how the rears of Mustangs/Camaros are quit e bit heavier than the Max's beam because they gotta handle all that twisting torque coming thru the driveline, too. The max doesn't have that issue.
DW
By the way, Dave, another reason I should add, the the rear beam on the Max is quite good is because of its very little un-sprung weight. People always compare it to a Mustang or Camaro beam axle. I always have to correct them and tell them how the rears of Mustangs/Camaros are quit e bit heavier than the Max's beam because they gotta handle all that twisting torque coming thru the driveline, too. The max doesn't have that issue.
DW
Originally posted by Dave B
Constantly I read posts where people say the beam axle setup on the 4th gen and 5th gen is "minvan" like and doesn't handle worth a poop. I'd like to set some things straight. The rear twist beam on the Maxima is actually quite capable of excellent handling and isn't set up like a typical beam axle. The Maxima's beam uses a very thick roll bar that runs through center of the beam, has trailing arms, coil springs, and a lateral link. The lateral link is a major factor is why the beam can handle well. The link always keeps the beam within the right geometry in a turn. Nissan even tuned the beam to have turn-in like a 4-wheel steering system. On smooth roads, the beam will give up NOTHING to a IRS setup. On a bumpy turn, the beam will exhibit it's flaws (rocking, harshness) and may reduce cornering ability marginally. HOWEVER, you must remember this is a front wheel drive car and not rwd therefore spin outs aren't a problem at the limit (unless you set up you RSB to a rediculous rate). RWD cars with a "live axle" are prone to a spin out on a bumpy turn, not a FWD car with a twist beam.
Is the beam axle harsher than a IRS on uneven surfaces? Yes. There's no way around it. The rear tires are connected therefore when one moves, the other will move to. The main point here is that the beam gives up some ride quality, not handling. Remember, VW and Audi are still using the twist beam. The Sentra SE-R V-Spec outhandles the infamous Integra Type R on the track even though the V-Spec isn't outfitted with near "race ready" tires and it runs a twist beam. I think that says a lot about the beam axle. Put a set of lightweight 15s with ITR spec tires on the V-Spec, and the ITR will be much further behind.
BTW, the Corvette still uses leaf springs. Anyone gonna say the C5 handles like crap?
Dave
Constantly I read posts where people say the beam axle setup on the 4th gen and 5th gen is "minvan" like and doesn't handle worth a poop. I'd like to set some things straight. The rear twist beam on the Maxima is actually quite capable of excellent handling and isn't set up like a typical beam axle. The Maxima's beam uses a very thick roll bar that runs through center of the beam, has trailing arms, coil springs, and a lateral link. The lateral link is a major factor is why the beam can handle well. The link always keeps the beam within the right geometry in a turn. Nissan even tuned the beam to have turn-in like a 4-wheel steering system. On smooth roads, the beam will give up NOTHING to a IRS setup. On a bumpy turn, the beam will exhibit it's flaws (rocking, harshness) and may reduce cornering ability marginally. HOWEVER, you must remember this is a front wheel drive car and not rwd therefore spin outs aren't a problem at the limit (unless you set up you RSB to a rediculous rate). RWD cars with a "live axle" are prone to a spin out on a bumpy turn, not a FWD car with a twist beam.
Is the beam axle harsher than a IRS on uneven surfaces? Yes. There's no way around it. The rear tires are connected therefore when one moves, the other will move to. The main point here is that the beam gives up some ride quality, not handling. Remember, VW and Audi are still using the twist beam. The Sentra SE-R V-Spec outhandles the infamous Integra Type R on the track even though the V-Spec isn't outfitted with near "race ready" tires and it runs a twist beam. I think that says a lot about the beam axle. Put a set of lightweight 15s with ITR spec tires on the V-Spec, and the ITR will be much further behind.
BTW, the Corvette still uses leaf springs. Anyone gonna say the C5 handles like crap?
Dave
12-13-2001, 06:04 AM
#26
Re: The rear beam axle >>
Originally posted by Albertt
The difference between the 4th and 5th gens is that Watts linkage in the 5Gen was moved aft of the beam. This combined with a 2" longer wheelbase is what give the 5th Gen more stability. There are no other differences between the parts...I believe that the geometry of the links remain the same too.
The difference between the 4th and 5th gens is that Watts linkage in the 5Gen was moved aft of the beam. This combined with a 2" longer wheelbase is what give the 5th Gen more stability. There are no other differences between the parts...I believe that the geometry of the links remain the same too.
12-13-2001, 06:12 AM
#27
its going to be a huge diffrence in how a driver makes turns with an Auto and 5spd.. ie.. Jeff's car vs My Car..
i down shift in turns.. Auto guys don't do that.. its a totally different story
i down shift in turns.. Auto guys don't do that.. its a totally different story
Originally posted by Mishap
I've taken Shadow's car through some serious turns and I can say for a fact the beam axle and the suspension design in general is not as good as it could be. There's no doubt the car can get enough traction though but handling is another matter. Shadow's car was outfitted w/ 235/45ZR17 Yokohama Nexus tires at the time which lasted only a summer w/ a treadlife rating of 100. His car could take turns incredibly hard but slightest bump would upset it. He also had to deal w/ the car pushing through turns when taken past the limit even w/ his RSB set pretty stiff. We did a back to back comparison on the same road w/ a friend's E36 M3 which was running M lightweight springs and Racing Dynamic hollow sway bars. The M3's Michelin Pilots actually lost traction earlier than Shadow's car but it turned into controlled drifts while Shadow's car was more going into the turns w/ the front end out of control. Over hard bumps the car gets outright spooky at speed and even w/ all his suspension mods, I still feel more comfortable at speed in my Prelude. I've also raced a NA '93 Supra through some massive turns near my house and the Max was just scary through them b/c there's bump in one.
Shadow's car also makes loud thunking sounds now that he's lowered almost 4". The Max suspension design was meant for comfort and not that much beyond it. It has nowhere near enough travel, nor is the beam design conductive to fast transistions. It stays planted and unless you have some crazy driving style of dumping the car sharply into turns, it has very little ability to rotate controllably. W/ my Prelude, I can lift throttle in a turn and the car will tuck into a 4 wheel drift that I can pull out of w/o too much trouble.
I've taken Shadow's car through some serious turns and I can say for a fact the beam axle and the suspension design in general is not as good as it could be. There's no doubt the car can get enough traction though but handling is another matter. Shadow's car was outfitted w/ 235/45ZR17 Yokohama Nexus tires at the time which lasted only a summer w/ a treadlife rating of 100. His car could take turns incredibly hard but slightest bump would upset it. He also had to deal w/ the car pushing through turns when taken past the limit even w/ his RSB set pretty stiff. We did a back to back comparison on the same road w/ a friend's E36 M3 which was running M lightweight springs and Racing Dynamic hollow sway bars. The M3's Michelin Pilots actually lost traction earlier than Shadow's car but it turned into controlled drifts while Shadow's car was more going into the turns w/ the front end out of control. Over hard bumps the car gets outright spooky at speed and even w/ all his suspension mods, I still feel more comfortable at speed in my Prelude. I've also raced a NA '93 Supra through some massive turns near my house and the Max was just scary through them b/c there's bump in one.
Shadow's car also makes loud thunking sounds now that he's lowered almost 4". The Max suspension design was meant for comfort and not that much beyond it. It has nowhere near enough travel, nor is the beam design conductive to fast transistions. It stays planted and unless you have some crazy driving style of dumping the car sharply into turns, it has very little ability to rotate controllably. W/ my Prelude, I can lift throttle in a turn and the car will tuck into a 4 wheel drift that I can pull out of w/o too much trouble.
12-13-2001, 06:49 AM
#29
No problem, enjoy your IRS, with good cabin materials etc while you watch my taillights disappear somewhere out front! Just like the commercial, I'll be bringing the sun back from the horizon!
DW
DW
Originally posted by bill99gxe
Face it: 3rd gens rule.
I just thought I would contribute that.
Face it: 3rd gens rule.
I just thought I would contribute that.
12-13-2001, 07:18 AM
#30
Originally posted by dwapenyi
No problem, enjoy your IRS, with good cabin materials etc while you watch my taillights disappear somewhere out front! Just like the commercial, I'll be bringing the sun back from the horizon!
DW
No problem, enjoy your IRS, with good cabin materials etc while you watch my taillights disappear somewhere out front! Just like the commercial, I'll be bringing the sun back from the horizon!
DW
Once Jeff92se helps me with the Q45 engine and 300Z rear end swap, then I'll be out front......
and, of course, there's a full write-up and procedure on 3rd - 5th gen engine swaps.....
12-13-2001, 10:13 AM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 468
You know I'm not a car knowledgeable person, and I don't race, or push my car to its limit. Sometimes I just drive a little faster for fun, and probably that's all. I have 94 Altima GXE to compare with my 96 Maxima GXE. I can tell some difference only if I take turn to drive both of them, one right after another. Otherwise I can hardly tell which car is noticeably better in terms of independent or beam ... From time to time I drive Maxima to beach through some winding road for like 15 minutes or so, and I don't feel anything bad at all. To those who races hard it may matter, however to me, an average daily driver with a family to carry, I'd definately trade a little handling and performance for increased room, because only once in a while I may or may not feel Max's beam not so good, but EVERYDAY I have much more room back there.
12-13-2001, 03:13 PM
#39
Originally posted by dwapenyi
No problem, enjoy your IRS, with good cabin materials etc while you watch my taillights disappear somewhere out front! Just like the commercial, I'll be bringing the sun back from the horizon!
DW
No problem, enjoy your IRS, with good cabin materials etc while you watch my taillights disappear somewhere out front! Just like the commercial, I'll be bringing the sun back from the horizon!
DW
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
James92SE
3rd Generation Maxima (1989-1994)
142
01-02-2024 09:23 AM
AaronL
5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003)
15
11-15-2020 11:52 AM
doctorpullit
8th Generation Maxima (2016-)
60
12-12-2015 09:39 AM
DC_Juggernaut
7th Generation Maxima (2009-2015)
4
09-28-2015 04:07 PM