Mazda 6 Forums banner
21 - 40 of 70 Posts
Joined
·
351 Posts
Discussion Starter · #21 · (Edited)
Eh, for <$1K, try it out. I agree with @Drizzoh though, a better or more effective suspension setup would be a better spend of money.
But lower and stiffer suspension set up will NOT aid structural stiffness, and will not reduce - the opposite, it will increase - structure quivering, shuddering, groaning and moaning because less energy will be absorbed by the suspension, and more will transfer into the strut tower to which suspension is mounted!!! I want to reduce those, not increase them. Stiffening suspension will achieve the opposite of what I want!:)
 
Joined
·
351 Posts
Discussion Starter · #23 ·
I wonder how air runner suspension and these braces would work together. smooth ride but stiff chassis
Cadillac's Magnetorheological dumpers are 100 times better!!! Even Ferrari sources this tech from Cadillac for its $150k++++ cars!
 
Joined
·
351 Posts
Discussion Starter · #24 ·
Point taken..But $775 for chassis braces?! The practical and "value" side of me says..no.

But then sometime this year...I'll be taking a much needed vacation to the "Old Country", near Japan where orig JDM mods, for any Japanese brand can be had (with some reasonable haggling, much cheaper) rather easily. We have AutoExe on these places where my dad and I used to buy auto accessories/mods to "soup-up" your ride. I'd gladly hand carry these back to the US...For now, no rush. :D
Well, $775 for 3 braces (front strut, rear brace, + floor bar), considering they are shipped from Japan seems okay, overpriced - yes, but given that they are of a high quality grade, it's really just $200-300 extra than what would constitute a "reasonable" price. $200-300 is not the end of the world.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
186 Posts
Cadillac's Magnetorheological dumpers are 100 times better!!! Even Ferrari sources this tech from Cadillac for its $150k++++ cars!
Yeah but whats the availability magnetic suspension for the 6, and once you answer that you know you are in big money game. For all that I would have just bought a CTS-V.

Air runners and braces are already available.
 
Joined
·
351 Posts
Discussion Starter · #26 ·
Yeah but whats the availability magnetic suspension for the 6, and once you answer that you know you are in big money game. For all that I would have just bought a CTS-V.

Air runners and braces are already available.
CTS-Vee. I second that!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
Am i the only one here who feels the new mazda6 has excellent torsional rigidity as it. This is one of the 6's main strenghts. The chassis in my opinion is plenty stiff for its front wheel drive, 184hp intentions...noticably stiffer than its main competitor the Honda Accord.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,422 Posts
Am i the only one here who feels the new mazda6 has excellent torsional rigidity as it. This is one of the 6's main strenghts. The chassis in my opinion is plenty stiff for its front wheel drive, 184hp intentions...noticably stiffer than its main competitor the Honda Accord.
No, you're not.

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 
Joined
·
351 Posts
Discussion Starter · #29 ·
Am i the only one here who feels the new mazda6 has excellent tors inal rigidity as it. This is one of the 6's main strenghts. The chassis in my opinion is plenty stiff for its front wheel drive, 184hp intentions...noticably stiffer than its main competitor the Honda Accord.
You are wrong.

First of all there are no figures out there on what the torsional stiffness of mazda 6 and accord is, so we don't know the difference between them. I'd think the two cars are stepping on each other heels.

Second of all, the stiffness of the chassis and the structure is definitely "adequate". But by no means it is excellent. My car is 8 month old, has 8.5k miles on the odo, and is not driven particularly hard, but a lot of road impacts reverberate through doors, quarter panels, dashboard, and even the floor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
You are wrong.

First of all there are no figures out there on what the torsional stiffness of mazda 6 and accord is, so we don't know the difference between them. I'd think the two cars are stepping on each other heels.

Second of all, the stiffness of the chassis and the structure is definitely "adequate". But by no means it is excellent. My car is 8 month old, has 8.5k miles on the odo, and is not driven particularly hard, but a lot of road impacts reverberate through doors, quarter panels, dashboard, and even the floor.

I know the difference between the two cars by driving them back to back, and on the same roads. I dont need a spec sheet to tell me what I can feel and perceive. If you are feeling alot of road impacts shaking up your car, maybe you should try to slow down and avoid those big pot holes. This stiff chassis is likely the Mazda 6's main selling point.
 
Joined
·
351 Posts
Discussion Starter · #31 · (Edited)
Am i the only one here who feels the new mazda6 has excellent torsional rigidity as it. This is one of the 6's main strenghts. The chassis in my opinion is plenty stiff for its front wheel drive, 184hp intentions...noticably stiffer than its main competitor the Honda Accord.
I've watched a 40 min presentation of a Mazda's engineer in Japanese language about then new 2012 Mazda 3 with skyactiv. Most of the talk was related to efficiency, but at certain moment he mentioned 2 or 5% increase of torsional stiffness because they changed geometrical shape of a small squre plate that braces frame rails underneath the car. And to my eyes both, before and after design of the plate looked not that much different and definitely measly. Why they could not do a better design of the primitive looking plate right away, is, I assume, simple cost cutting, and they aim at "adequacy" and not "excellence" of every conceivable part.

The other engineer on Mazda's skyactiv website that was responsible for our mazda 6 said this "we achieved excellent balance between structural stiffness and low weight". Balance??? To me it means that surely another 40lb of reinforcements will yield a stronger structure
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,422 Posts
Eh, the structure is fine for me. The suspension leaves some on the table, but I understand that completely and will be changing it to suit my tastes and needs.

@Torsional_Stiffness, if you're so concerned with the chassis's rigidity, why didn't you buy a stiffer car? I'm interested to see your results if for no other reason than that there will be a relatively heavily-modified 6 running around.
 
Joined
·
351 Posts
Discussion Starter · #33 · (Edited)
I know the difference between the two cars by driving them back to back, and on the same roads. I dont need a spec sheet to tell me what I can feel and perceive. If you are feeling alot of road impacts shaking up your car, maybe you should try to slow down and avoid those big pot holes. This stiff chassis is likely the Mazda 6's main selling point.
Is this thing on??? "I know the difference" - yeah right. I know the earth is flat because when I look around me it's flat. I don't need a "spec sheet" to tell me its round when I can feel and perceive it's flat.

Good luck in life with this attitude.

P.S. notice that Accord did better in small offset crash test than the Mazda6. But yeah, f the spec sheet
 
Joined
·
351 Posts
Discussion Starter · #34 ·
Eh, the structure is fine for me. The suspension leaves some on the table, but I understand that completely and will be changing it to suit my tastes and needs.

@Torsional_Stiffness, if you're so concerned with the chassis's rigidity, why didn't you buy a stiffer car? I'm interested to see your results if for no other reason than that there will be a relatively heavily-modified 6 running around.
Structure is fine. in relative comparison: as good or better than other vehicles in this class. But with 40-50lbs of additional bracing here and there can be made better. There reason it is not right away on the car, is because engineers have achieved their target for stiffness, and making it any stiffer above that target is not required of them!!! Target achieved - period, no discussion of going the extra mile, we've got a business here, not a charity!! That's the mindset.

Regarding suspension mods, as I've said before, they will only worsen structural stiffness of the car, because a stiffer suspension will "absorb" less energy, and transmit more of it into the strut tower, which will pass it on to uni-body, which will make interior trim rattle, etc. That is why I am not considering any suspension modifications. Maybe nicer than OEM shocks later in car's life, but that's that
 
Joined
·
351 Posts
Discussion Starter · #35 ·
@Torsional_Stiffness, if you're so concerned with the chassis's rigidity, why didn't you buy a stiffer car? I'm interested to see your results if for no other reason than that there will be a relatively heavily-modified 6 running around.
Stiffer cars are more expensive cars: Mercedes E class and such and above. That's why that E class with a measly 302hp engine, no leather, no nav, no xenon, etc starts at $50K+. It has a very sophisticated structure/fundamentals.

Mazda 6 starts at $22k.

I am interested in the results myself. Even marginal , 10-15% perceived improvement will make me happy
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,422 Posts
Structure is fine. in relative comparison: as good or better than other vehicles in this class. But with 40-50lbs of additional bracing here and there can be made better. There reason it is not right away on the car, is because engineers have achieved their target for stiffness, and making it any stiffer above that target is not required of them!!! Target achieved - period, no discussion of going the extra mile, we've got a business here, not a charity!! That's the mindset.

Regarding suspension mods, as I've said before, they will only worsen structural stiffness of the car, because a stiffer suspension will "absorb" less energy, and transmit more of it into the strut tower, which will pass it on to uni-body, which will make interior trim rattle, etc. That is why I am not considering any suspension modifications. Maybe nicer than OEM shocks later in car's life, but that's that
I gotcha, bro. I know what you mean, I just can't figure what you're after.

Stiffer cars are more expensive cars: Mercedes E class and such and above. That's why that E class with a measly 302hp engine, no leather, no nav, no xenon, etc starts at $50K+. It has a very sophisticated structure/fundamentals.

Mazda 6 starts at $22k.

I am interested in the results myself. Even marginal , 10-15% perceived improvement will make me happy
LOL! In that case, you have to be a bit more creative. My M45 (Y34) is one of the stiffest chassis I've ever experienced outside of a dedicated sports car, even with frameless windows it still feels like it hewn from a solid block of granite over the bumps. It actually comes stock with FSTB that ties to the firewall as well. $10K, 345HP, leather, nav, xenon, etc etc.
 
Joined
·
351 Posts
Discussion Starter · #37 ·
I gotcha, bro. I know what you mean, I just can't figure what you're after.
Structural stiffness, and chassis stiffness are two separate concepts. Chassis bolts to the structure. One can have a stiff chassis on weak structure, or soft chassis on a very strong structure!
 
Joined
·
351 Posts
Discussion Starter · #39 ·
Right, I know that, but is there any reason you're wanting to do all this other than to increase the stiffness of the structure?
no, no other reason, but a stronger structure so road impacts do not reverberate through the whole body, and interior trim rattles are less pronounced. I guess the feeling of solidity is a nice feeling too!
 
Joined
·
351 Posts
Discussion Starter · #40 ·
LOL! In that case, you have to be a bit more creative. My M45 (Y34) is one of the stiffest chassis I've ever experienced outside of a dedicated sports car, even with frameless windows it still feels like it hewn from a solid block of granite over the bumps. It actually comes stock with FSTB that ties to the firewall as well. $10K, 345HP, leather, nav, xenon, etc etc.
Yeah, this is a vehicle that is in the same class as Merc E-class, Audi A6, I'd think it would have a somewhat higher torsional stiffness then the Mazada 6, even though Mazda is newer.

However, M45 is about 500lbs heavier then the Mazda, but back then they used less high-strength steel in the design. So even though Mazda is lighter, because it has higher ratio of a high-strength steel in its body it is probably very close to structural stiffness of Infinity.

Possible reasons your car may feel more solid to you then the Mazda is because it's 1) heavier, so perceivably it feels more solid, but twisting-wise it might not be much stiffer (maybe even at all) than the Mazda. 2) Infinity DEFINATELY has more sound insulations, which masks moans and groans of the structure
 
21 - 40 of 70 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top