Not the springs and shocks, but the front suspension geometry and design itself. Which is better, thirdgen or fourth gen, and could you tell me why or point me to a link? I need it for some research. Thanks!

 

The 3rdgens incorporate a modified Macpherson strut front ends with lower A arms and inboard springs. The 3rd gens use the centerlink while the 4th gens have rack and pinion steering and coil over type struts. This is all from memory so don't take any of it for fact until A)someone backs me or B)you find it out on the web somewhere.

Some problems are that both of there geometry produce camber changes during vertical suspension movement and body roll that adversely affect handling. The 4thgen is worse though. Also, the strut towers prevent designers from lowering the car's profile. Lowering the ride height with aftermarket springs can cause the control arms to angle upward. This has a negative effect on front suspension performance. It reduces the range of strut and control arm compression travel. It changes the alignment of the sway bar with the lower control arm. And it changes the alignment of the tie rod with the lower control arm. If the car is lowered much more than 1.5", this misalignment may produce bumpsteer, which occurs when the tie rod pulls the steering arm left or right as you go over a bump.

Here is a post I had saved talking about the handling characteristics of the two cars.

 

The only reason they converted the front suspension for 4th gens is because of ride comfort. That should pretty much tell you everything.

 

Yup, the one of the primary capabilities of the 4thGen front suspension is to provide a better ride quality with wide, low profile tires, like 245/50R16. Ever ridden in a WS6 Thirdgen on a bumpy road? It's brutal.

Among racers, the Thirdgen is considered to be the better handling car. I've driven, but not raced both, and I consider the thirdgen to have the better road feel. The 4thGens felt less connected, and during high load cornering (off-ramp) it felt like the front left tire was trying to tuck under the car. Don't get me wrong, the ThirdGens have monster understeer, too, but it feels like the wheels stay flatter to the pavement.

The unsprung weight of the 4thGen is also higher, due to the larger kingpins, and additional linkages.

Oh, yeah, and all the stuff NO4Junk said would happen if you lower it too much will happen on any car with any suspension, not just F-bodies.

 

To a point. There are ways of getting around that but they require not half-assing the suspension.

 

Couldn't you avoid this by dropping the car with spindles as opposed to springs?

 

Yes exactly, but that still leaves a camber problem you have to deal with. It also throws off your Included angle measurement as well. That probably wouldn't be too much of a problem though.

 

Actually the 4th gen is a superior suspenion on the race track . the reason is the front strut does not have to deal with all the stress . They found in the modfied x design suspension (3rd gen ) that the struts where being stressed and bending or flexing in hard corners . Causeing the suspension geo. to change .

 

Breadfan is the closest here. A double wishbone or short/long arm suspension system is superior to struts because camber can be held more uniformly (notice I said *can be*--first gens have a short/long arm system and the geometry can be much improved.) throughout the range of wheel travel. The nature of the linkage with a short/long system affords better control. GM's $$$motive$$$ for going with struts was partly cost (cheaper to use), though simpler/lighter packaging factored in. I think one aspect of the suspension of a 4th gen is the source of the idea that its set up to be more 'comfortable'--the lower control arm's rear joint is a 'ball' type joint that offers reduced harshness. In any case, both generations handle awful good.