Consumer Reports Not Kind to Solstice

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

05-14-2006, 01:39 PM

#61

Suzukaboy

Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2005

Posts: 471

Likes: 0

Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by PedalFaster,May 13 2006, 08:16 PM

The Porsche 911's rear engine placement and the Mazda RX-8's Wankel engine would both seem to contradict that assertion.

Note: I'm not slamming the Corvette's use of leaf springs -- like the 911's engine location and the RX-8's lack of pistons, I consider it an interesting engineering exercise, but nothing more.

Your examples actually makes my point. Porsche and Mazda picked a direction that suited their purposes. Like Corvettes rear spring they are all approaches that work but are unlikely to see widespread use.

Someone else commented that the Corvette transverse spring approach could not be licensed. Thats might be true just like putting the engine in the rear or using a pistonless engine can't be licensed. I would be hughly surprised, however if Porsche, Mazda and Chevrolet don't have their specific methods implementations well protected. If you wanted to put a wankel type pistonless, rear engine in a car and use a rear transverse spring suspension there would a forest of patents to wade through to make sure you were not infringing. If that is so nobody is going to invest all the time and money it would take to invent these things independently. Which of course might just be the way Porsche etc., want it.