The Ford Explorer now has an independent rear suspension and of course it is RWD. Does Nissan have any plans on offering something like that on the Maxima or are they still keeping costs down for 2002? Too many beams still in stock? C'mon Nissan step up to the plate.

 

Nissan will forever use Beam Axles on all of there cars! BEWARE!!

 

Doesn't that Altima have IRS? I know the new one will but I am pretty sure the current one does.

 

and the Q.
and the upcoming Z.
and the 2003 Maxima will have IRS.

Nissan has seen the light.

 

even my honda odyssey MINIVAN has fully independent double wishbone supension front and back

 

Don't tell me Maxs have a beam rear end?! My 97 Altima doesn't even have that. Maybe you could crawl under there and have another look?

 

If you've ever driven a 2001 or below Explorer, you'll see why they added the IRS. I've rented a ton of SUVs for work and as far as I'm concerned ALL Explorers are flat out dangerous. Their handling and ride is by far the worst I've ever felt in a SUV. The Chevy Blazer comes in at a close 2nd. It blows my mind people pay big bucks for crap like that. IMO, the best driving SUV is the Jeep Grand Cherokee. It has a grat ride, good fit and finish, and good power even with the I6 motor.

The Maxima's rear beam is far more hightech than the any of the SUVs liveaxle setups, beleive me. The Maxima's rear beam is very good in all situations except for large bumps encountered in tight turns which forces the Max to wiggle and come off it's "line". Having a beam rear in a fwd car isn't near as bad as having a live axle in a late model musclecar. My 94 Z28 could easly kick the tail out if you weren't paying attention in a serious turn, especially if there is a bump.

I don't think IRS on a SUV is a good thing at all. The only real advantages are a little better ride, slightly better handling, and more room in the rear. The problems with IRS in a SUV are that the suspension geometry gets thrown off wildly when towing or under heavy loads, more weight is already added to the overweight SUV, and halfshafts on big torque producing V8 will be easily snapped under harse conditions (off roading, hard acceleration). Liveaxle rears on trucks and SUVs is tried and true. Liveaxles can take the abuse, they can tow more, they are simple, and can be setup to handle pretty good with the right equipment.


Dave

 

I just read a review of the new Q45 on Edmunds.com and they said that the new Q will not have IRS. Edmunds said that Nissan reps pointed out that BMW does not have IRS, and Edmunds sarcastic comment was that the Q was no BMW.

 

REAL 4x4s have four wheel IRS.

For ground clearance. Why the Explorer has it is anyone's guess. Certainly not so the soccer moms can go off roading.

 

Nissan dropped IRS in the Maxima starting with the 4th Generation. There are rumors that it will come back with the 6th, but nothing is for certain yet. . . So a lot of us here do have beams.

 

Which BMW doesn't have an independent rear? Ever notice how the rear wheels start to cant inward on all BMWs? Kinda annoying but they always do that. The angles are adjustable.

Though I would agree the 2001 Blazer and Explorer are poor riders. Leaf springs will do that, the rates are not too progressive. Goes back to the days of the stagecoach but quite cheap to produce. One does have to wonder how come in the 60's nobody knew about the Corvair until consumer advocates came along. 2001 nobody knows if the manufacturer is cheaping up or not. Ford argues that taking away rear disc brakes was not to save production costs, nor were Firestones. Like it was mentioned tires are a great place for manufacturers to save money. I saw a 215/50-17 on a Chrysler product today. Probably factory 6.5" rims too.

That's why we must celebrate the past. Nobody's gonna build a "Brooklyn Bridge" ever again. Dang, can you imagine stone towers? What a beauty (not to the ferry co.s). Verrazano was probably the last nice one. Look at the Tappan Zee, what a joke aesthetically. That's the kinda corners car manuf cut too.

 

According to the Nissan site the rear suspension has: "Independent multi-link with stabilizer bar and coil springs (available sport tuned driver selectable suspension mode with active damping)" That sounds like independent rear suspension. Am I wrong?

Also on their press release, "4-wheel independent suspension with revised front suspension geometry and all-new multi-link rear suspension design."


The new Altima has independent multi link as well. (Not the same as multilink beam.)

Edmunds say, "We asked Infiniti engineers why they decided to go with struts rather than a more sophisticated (and expensive) double wishbone configuration; they replied that MacPhersons save space and weight, and, besides, "BMWs use struts."

So it appears to be 4 wheel independent, although not wishbone.

 

TSK TSK TSK, Skyline GT-R, Fair Lady Z, Sylvia and the 200SX never had rear beam. I think I like rear beam. I heard from every alignment shop saying that this setup will have a more stable alignment.

I am not concern about the performance of rear beam, after all all of us get good G's.

 

For the most part the advanced rear beam with multilinks works pretty good. The only time I don't like it is when I hit a rough road and I'm turning or steering hard. Hard lateral steering turns up a little rough.