k wright

I wonder what impact on marketing carbon fiber leaf springs would have?

Very light weight, low position in the chassis and durable.

jvp

A neat idea, but you'd have to think through that one a bit. Firstly, what's the cost difference between the current composite leaf and one made of carbon fiber? I'm betting the difference is pretty high, but I could be wrong.

Secondly, removing any and all weight is generally a good idea. But: in the case of the leafs, you're removing it from a low position on the car. Meaning you'll be shifting the CoG ever so slightly upward. That's rarely a good idea.

I'm guessing the costs would outweigh the benefits of the idea, pretty dramatically.

jas

k wright

It would can all the low tech complaints. Used very effectively on aircraft landing gear.

jvp

I'm not sure I follow your point. And who cares, really, if it's used on aircraft landing gear? The applications aren't even remotely similar.

For something that important to the car's handling and ride, there would have to be significant benefits to the proposal before GM would consider it. Coffee table or bar room discussion points aren't what GM engineers to.

jas

Daekwan06

I think a cost benefit analysis would show this isnt ideal. Would the performance difference be that great.

CF can work wonders on the car in other places, but to replace the leaf springs it just does not seem like the ideal material.

HurricaneRN

Look up "fatigue endurance limit" as it relates to carbon fiber. Not good for cyclic loading applications, esp critical ones like a passenger car leaf spring.

Jinx

This would very slightly alter the rate at which Jeremy Clarkson rolls his eyes when he mentions that the C7 uses "the same suspension as an ox cart."

Actually, they'd probably make fun of the fact that GM would apply such a high-tech material to such a "low-tech" suspension design. I'm pretty sure they'd whip out "gilding the lily" as they laugh at the wrongheadedness of the Americans.

Sadly, some people actually get their car knowledge from these entertainers and have no filter for distinguishing genuine information from winks and nudges.

Honestly, I consider the transverse leaf springs a car intelligence test, and anyone who makes fun of Corvette's immediately goes onto my "clueless tool" list.

.Jinx

dmporter31

Clarkson cracks me up when he says that. It's a proven solution, cost effective, helps eliminate a rear sway bar on the non-Z51 model and apparently works well enough that the engineers have seen fit to continue its use in the C7 application. Ultimate track tech? No, but I could care less for street use.

SaberD

then i suggest you never fly in a 787 or a350 as they are completely carbon fiber. Maybe the lives of 300 people isn't critical lol.

LS1LT1

Those complaints/cries of these transverse composite leaf springs being "low tech" are usually only from those who are totally misinformed on the car's entire design/system (space limitations, aerodynamics, center of gravity, weight savings etc.) and what actually drives the engineers to retain the use of these springs of course.






Exactly. It's not like they couldn't have gone a different route if they saw fit to.
As far back as the 'clean sheet' C5, they easily could've chosen another path. The springs aren't being used because they "don't have the knowledge/technology for coils/coilovers" or because "they want to cut costs".
They use them because THEY WORK and help the car achieve a wide range of criteria/goals.

Indy

They should have called them something else besides transferse leaf springs....marketing should have been smarter.....makes people who are not familiar with the technology think Corvettes are cheap and low tech. Clarkson makes fun of this and many people think that it is the same suspension as on oldtimers.

Raitzi

Leaf springs are fine if the dampeners are not cheap GM ****. We are lucky to get bilsteins this time even for base car.

SaberD

leaf spring advantages over coil overs:
-Less unsprung weight in moving parts of the suspension
-lower center of gravity
-overall weight savings
-longevity
-corrosion resistance
-more flexibility for suspension geometry and placement of shocks
-higher load capacity
-no coil bind
-less expensive
-less wear parts

coil over advantages over leaf springs:
-adjustable spring rate
-slightly smoother ride


Maybe the GM engineers knew what they were doing after all. For those who mock the design, I get to laugh at how dumb they are.

CitationZ06@yahoo

Carbon Fiber is light and strong but it does not "spring", it may flex, but that is not the same.

HurricaneRN

They are half (50% & 53%) carbon fiber, and the a350 has a traditional flex structure in the wing not CF.

As for the 787 I suggest no one gets on one.
Google it, 787 engineers fired for voicing concerns, planes grounded, wings trying to rip off etc...

Bad things happen when dying companies throw Hail Marys.

SaberD

I make software to program the machines manufacturing the composite parts for these planes. I know more about the structure of these aircraft probably more than anyone on this forum. They haven't "grounded" any of the planes as they aren't even commercially available yet. Structurally, they are far superior to an aluminum aircraft in every way.

Dave@Ciocca

Bad idea simply because of the weight. Lowering the weight down low is a bad idea unless you have a way of removing an upper weight and not raising the center of gravity.

Dave

HurricaneRN

So you're not biased then.

Jinx

Biased with knowledge, sounds like.

CPhelps

Agreed. I would even go so far as to say the smoother ride is more in the dampers than the spring. When people make the upgrade to coil overs, it seems they often install high performance dampers, then compare that new system to the stock system, and blame the leafs outright.

He was talking about the 787 which has indeed been grounded for the battery issue. Numerous airlines have indeed been doing revenue flights as well.