The virtues of double wishbone suspension

In application on road cars, if you ever wondered why the Accords handle so well yet have a very good ride.

Here's a good summary from an article on Auto car about the new Alpine A110 which has adopted all around double wishbones.

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/alpine-a110-first-ride-will-it-be-porsche-718-cayman-beater

Doesn't matter how good the geometry is when the stock springs and dampers are absolute toilet.

A regular accord is not designed for going round corners.

They most certainly are, they are known for their handling. Mine is superb, there not race cars, so dont expect complete flat out handling, but the compromise between great handling and comfort is there.

If you compare it to a Citroen or a Vauxhall perhaps.

I love an accord, but they handle like crap and have very little grip compared to some of the other cars I've owned.

They're better than most, just they're far from the best.

A good set of dampers and springs is worth far more than a fancy double wishbome setup with the stock Honda damper / spring setup.

As standard, the accord is massively under-damped and it shows when pushed. They're floaty and bouncy and don't hold a line very well.
(I've done thousands of miles in 5th, 6th and 7th gens)

What's more, it's more joints that go slack as the car ages, leading to more deterioration in handling. Just look at how often people on here have problems with cars pulling all over the road, with a seemingly good setup.
All that wear adds up.

I'll second that goodluck, nobody wants a slack bush.
I've had a good few hondas and they all suffer in the handling department one way or the other - except my dc2 which was very good indeed.
Obviously you can't compare a boaty old 7thgen to an integra - very different beasts.

A decent rear anti roll bar and set of suspension does wonders apparently.....

The US had a slack bush for 8 years LOL

But yeah the Accord suspension, for all its merits on paper, is OTT for a motorway barge.

What do they have on the integra ?

The Jap market stuff and the EU cars are are world apart as standard.

Proper Japanese spec cars are great to drive like my Spec B (whixh means it's Bilstein equipped) Legacy, and my old imported S14 Silvia.
Had both cars when they were only a couple of years old too, and were initially sub-60k milers which obviously helped.

The dc2's also had double wishbone combined with excellent oem suspension, an lsd and probably the best fwd chassis ever made. Even the engines were ported and polished by hand.
Further chassis/suspension improvements were made for the 98 model year (when they arrived in the U.K. Also)

God I miss the crazy vtec b / h series days, I'm off to nurse a pint and sob over pics of proper hondas I used to own.

Goodluckmonkey said:

If you compare it to a Citroen or a Vauxhall perhaps.

I love an accord, but they handle like ***** and have very little grip compared to some of the other cars I've owned.

They're better than most, just they're far from the best.

A good set of dampers and springs is worth far more than a fancy double wishbome setup with the stock Honda damper / spring setup.

As standard, the accord is massively under-damped and it shows when pushed. They're floaty and bouncy and don't hold a line very well.
(I've done thousands of miles in 5th, 6th and 7th gens)

What's more, it's more joints that go slack as the car ages, leading to more deterioration in handling. Just look at how often people on here have problems with cars pulling all over the road, with a seemingly good setup.
All that wear adds up.

Click to expand...

compare an Accord to a Legacy SpecB, night and day. driving the Legacy around town is almost an insult to its capability. I am going to Ireland in the ferry in a few weeks and dying to take this car on a long spin.......

just need to watch the plod

When people would get in it, they'd always comment on how good it sounded and how good the ride quality was.

(As drivers though, it was always how good the steering rack was, and how the gearbox matched the revvy motor so well)

When I phoned Subaru for replacement bilsteins, they actually offered different shocks dependant on motor, gearbox, and even wheel size, as there were different options all valved specifically for the application.

Slightly different to just having one budget shock for a petrol and one for a diesel, like most manufacturers.

Having owned a 6th and 7th Gen Accord, I can see both sides of this one.

My 6th Gen cornered very well. But my 7th Gen corners like poop.

A standard Accord, I agree as above, its not made for corners and more to sit on the motorways as a comfortable car to eat the miles. I had a Vtec Sport and it was quite terrifying taking a corner. Not saying they are unstable and they are better to a point than other saloons of the same year and size and It is defo a better handler than the Honda Logo I had before though lol.... I still like the 6G normal Accords.

ATR on the other hand is totally different, it is every bit amazing in the handling department and has such poise and delivers confidence.LSD and the chassis helps though, Considered one of the best FWD cars made.

Agreed, I qualified my statement on purpose.

Goodluckmonkey said:

A regular accord is not designed for going round corners.

Click to expand...

I also agree that the 6th gen turns in and tracks over the bumps better than a 7th Gen, and wallows less too.

The whole point of my post though, was that it doesn't matter if the overly complicated doible wishbone front suspension (and rear too on the older models) keeps the tyre on the ground more, if the OE dampers make it a rolly, wallowy barge.

Ironically, if the thing has a lot of body roll, the double wishbone setup could provide a less evenly distributed load through the tyre than a traditional McPherson strut, unless of course the geometry is relying on it to handle like a boat.

Most standard cars are a hot mess when it comes to going fast on a B road, and that's where a type R comes in useful instead.

Again, Agree about the 7G bit...

My dads 7G Accord Type-S was less stable than my old Vtec sport lol.

Goodluckmonkey said:

Agreed, I qualified my statement on purpose.


I also agree that the 6th gen turns in and tracks over the bumps better than a 7th Gen, and wallows less too.

The whole point of my post though, was that it doesn't matter if the overly complicated doible wishbone front suspension (and rear too on the older models) keeps the tyre on the ground more, if the OE dampers make it a rolly, wallowy barge.

Click to expand...

The wallowy barge effect is fixed by Honda employing that essential and amazing piece of technology, Vehicle Stability ***ist, and it should handle corners like it is on rails. B)

you been reading the sales blurb again?

Better than that, I've been using it since replacing the ATE60 module and so far I haven't crashed the car. Earlier in the year I had a brick wall jump out at me whilst reversing into a driveway, if only it had been working then I may not have needed the touch up paint..

Have to agree with few points and disagree with few others mentioned here. People are comparing or making comparison with a standard Accord to the sporty spec of models, which wasn't the point. Compared to a Legacy Spec B, ATR, ITR etc a standard Accord of course is going to be wallowy, it has a soft spring & damper setup and sits high, the standard cars are setup as a compromise between comfort and handling. ATR's and Spec B's have stiffer suspension, fatter ARB's so can take corners better.

But the standard Accord can take corners fine, better than most standard cars on the road, my car and my experience of it is testament to that, its a thoroughly enjoyable car to drive, I will post up some videos when I get round to it. You guys make it sound like its either an American car or a Rolls Royce that struggle round corners. The Accord isn't that big nor is it that heavy, nor does it roll in epic proportions, the handling is controlled at most times with a bit of understeer expected from a FWD. From my experience the 6th gen is also a lot better than the 7th gen on stock, so agree on that front, the 7th gen has a more looser feel and the steering isnt anywhere near as good as the 6th gen.

Here's also a video of a stock 6th gen on track. I think it does pretty well with the driver pushing it stupidly hard at times.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jM4ZIEWR92Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZWp3wAnqrc

Also just to add a side note, softer suspension is far better on the road then a super stiff suspension, its much more compliant, super stiff suspension are only useful on a smooth track, on the road, slightest bit of dink on the road unsettles the car. I remember seeing a video of Golf that was really low and had stiff suspension and it just snapped and lost control over a bit of uneven gradient.

My point was that standard dampers are so poor, it doesn't matter of the cars got a fancy double wishbone setup or a McPherson strut.

Anyone that's fitted a good set of cartridge type dampers knows they can both be stiffer and more plush, as they are softer initially for comfort, yet stiffer in the later part of the stroke for better control.

While the geometry on an accord may be better than most cars, the cheap damper-rod shocks are just that, shocking.

With a couple of exceptions, an accord was never any better or worse than anything in its class.

The good news however, is that a good shock/spring combo makes a Honda marginally better than a similarly modded offering from its competitors.

I've just spotted your comment on other makes (Vauxhall and Citroen). Whilst I agree about the former, apart from the ZX, all my previous lemons have been fluid suspension and handled / felt as comfortable as cars some three times the price.

The Accord Tourer additionally has a large diesel lump that appears to be further forward of the axle than the CX estate I drove, though it was a 2litre petrol. The BX Estate was a 1.7 TD though I never could thrash it due to a throttle issue.

Like some of the Honda bikes, the Mk1 s were always the best (thinking of the VF1000FE and the CBR900 Fireblades), with minimal accessories, all variants after the first year gained weight, or had an extended wheelbase to offset the natural instability when riding near/at the limit, in an attempt to excuse the rider failings. I doubt car model evolution is much different.

^ of the cars with hydraulic suspension, the Citroen BX had massive understeer, I only drove a CX once and it wasn't as good as its predecessor the DS (which won the Monte Carlo rally). The front suspension was very strange on the DS, rear was trailing arm, but the track on the rear was noticeably narrower than the front, which made the car prone to oversteer in the wet, very nice on a FWD car if you got used to it, but dodgy the first time it catches you. My father had a GS which I drove many times and that seemed ok. The A-series (2CV and variants) had massive understeer, virtually impossible to spin those.

My impression of the 7th gen is that it's ok all round, however due to the regular failure of bushes and links, it's OTT for what it only just achieves.

Goodluckmonkey said:

My point was that standard dampers are so poor, it doesn't matter of the cars got a fancy double wishbone setup or a McPherson strut.

Anyone that's fitted a good set of cartridge type dampers knows they can both be stiffer and more plush, as they are softer initially for comfort, yet stiffer in the later part of the stroke for better control.

While the geometry on an accord may be better than most cars, the cheap damper-rod shocks are just that, shocking.

With a couple of exceptions, an accord was never any better or worse than anything in its class.

The good news however, is that a good shock/spring combo makes a Honda marginally better than a similarly modded offering from its competitors.

Click to expand...

That's not how it works though and I disagree with the standard dampers being poor, my experience is the opposite. The double wishbones are there to control camber and when turning it keeps the wheel flat for grip, you can feel this when pushing hard, the dampers in a car being soft do not negate that, in macpherson strut they might do, but the whole point of having two arms is it can control the camber travel of the wheel. Otherwise Honda would not have spent so much time and given up on packaging to fit complicated double wishbone in their cars if they didnt serve any purpose or give any advantage and they werent there for marketing as they never advertised their cars based on it as most people wont understand the simple technicalities.

Also body roll doesn't equal bad handling.

Channel Hopper said:

I've just spotted your comment on other makes (Vauxhall and Citroen). Whilst I agree about the former, apart from the ZX, all my previous lemons have been fluid suspension and handled / felt as comfortable as cars some three times the price.

The Accord Tourer additionally has a large diesel lump that appears to be further forward of the axle than the CX estate I drove, though it was a 2litre petrol. The BX Estate was a 1.7 TD though I never could thrash it due to a throttle issue.

Like some of the Honda bikes, the Mk1 s were always the best (thinking of the VF1000FE and the CBR900 Fireblades), with minimal accessories, all variants after the first year gained weight, or had an extended wheelbase to offset the natural instability when riding near/at the limit, in an attempt to excuse the rider failings. I doubt car model evolution is much different.

Click to expand...

The Xantia Activa has the record for carrying the most speed round corners too. It has virtually no roll in cornering and is better than most supercars in this regard.

exec said:

That's not how it works though and I disagree with the standard dampers being poor, my experience is the opposite. The double wishbones are there to control camber and when turning it keeps the wheel flat for grip, you can feel this when pushing hard, the dampers in a car being soft do not negate that, in macpherson strut they might do, but the whole point of having two arms is it can control the camber travel of the wheel. Otherwise Honda would not have spent so much time and given up on packaging to fit complicated double wishbone in their cars if they didnt serve any purpose or give any advantage and they werent there for marketing as they never advertised their cars based on it as most people wont understand the simple technicalities.

Also body roll doesn't equal bad handling.

Click to expand...

The two systems change their geometry dependant on where the wheel is within the suspension stroke, so the amount of body roll is entirely relevant.

You also.have to bear in mind that the angle and position of a McPherson strut can also be tailored to suit, and ultimately most of the gain you get from a twin wishbone setup is in a straight line, and not when cornering.

The stock damper rod shocks offer the exact opposite to what is desired for performance or comfort, but they are standard on most passenger cars because they're dirt cheap and consumers know no better. This is why all regular type saloon cars irrespective of manufacturer are pretty poor at speed on an undulating road, you'll just never know unless you've driven anything that really works well.

Go drive something with a proper set of cartridge type dampers then come back and tell me the honda shocks are any good in comparison.

Read Stevearcade's review on his coilovers. Even a cheaper set that all run the same generic cartridge is an enormous improvement in comfort despite being considerably stiffer.

I've spent years racing motorcycles and virtually all my setup time focuses on suspension. All the same rules apply to things with 4 wheels too, and I went through various caster, camber and toe changes on my Subaru to have an estate care that was comfortable and safe, yet would run rings round virtually anything in the corners (with a McPherson strut front end). The foundation of all that performance is a good set of dampers, and the biggest irony of all of it was that despite being the same weight, the spring rate was far lighter than the accord, and the ride quality infinitely better too.

I don't think any recent car in WRC has used double wishbone, indeed most have used McPherson struts --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Rally_Championship#Champions

Although they're not D-segment cars, it does show that struts can be fine if set up properly, so I'm puzzled why Honda use double wishbone.

Would be nice to have a list of D-segment cars and their suspension for comparison ?

freddofrog said:

^ of the cars with hydraulic suspension, the Citroen BX had massive understeer, I only drove a CX once and it wasn't as good as its predecessor the DS (which won the Monte Carlo rally). The front suspension was very strange on the DS, rear was trailing arm, but the track on the rear was noticeably narrower than the front, which made the car prone to oversteer in the wet, very nice on a FWD car if you got used to it, but dodgy the first time it catches you. My father had a GS which I drove many times and that seemed ok. The A-series (2CV and variants) had massive understeer, virtually impossible to spin those.

My impression of the 7th gen is that it's ok all round, however due to the regular failure of bushes and links, it's OTT for what it only just achieves.

Click to expand...

The Accord has one of the strongest suspension components around. If your bushes and links are going constantly thats because your putting on cheap parts. OEM factory parts tend to last at least 100k in general use from what I have observed. My car is on 88k, apart from front shock, everything is still on original parts from 18 years ago, my brother in laws 7th gen which has 101k has just had an upper balljoint fail, everything else is stock, unfortunately due to cost went for a cheap Moog part which wont last anywhere near the length of the original part or equivalent quality OE.

Your car is also a tourer. which has a different setup to the saloon, it doesnt have the all round double wishbone, rear is a torsion bar from memory.

The tourers have a lateral link setup at the rear which gives the same kind of progression through the stroke as a double wishbone.

It's to try and maintain the geometry at different ride heights because you can load them with lots of stuff.

freddofrog said:

I don't think any recent car in WRC has used double wishbone, indeed most have used McPherson struts --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Rally_Championship#Champions

Although they're not D-segment cars, it does show that struts can be fine if set up properly, so I'm puzzled why Honda use double wishbone.

Would be nice to have a list of D-segment cars and their suspension for comparison ?

Click to expand...

WRC use McPherson because of the nature of the sport. They need longer travel and they need a simple design for ease of maintenance. Only rally car I can think of that used double wishbones was the Lancia 037. Some rally cars in their stock form use different setups, for example the Lancer Evo road car uses multi links, the rally car uses mchperson struts. This is what Mitsubishi have to say on the matter: "The car uses MacPherson strut suspension all round. It is a robust system and to make servicing straightforward, components are often interchangeable not only front and rear, but left to right as well. Most suspension components will be made of steel, to ensure reliability. "

Most other race series such as Formula One and Touring cars all use double wishbones as its offers superior control. McPherson struts are archaic and basic compared, thats not to say they cant offer great handling when tuned properly.

As for why Honda use double wishbones, it was born out of their F1 development, they didn't just fit double wishbones on the Accord, they put them in every model, the Civic too, for a good part of two decades, it was trademark feature and the reason they used it is simply because it offers superior handling and ride combination compared to struts. Ask any engineer and they will pretty much say the same thing. Before I bought my Accord, I tried few other cars, the only other car that was as good as the Accord was the P11 Primera which has great multi link suspension, it had great handling and compliant ride.

Goodluckmonkey said:

The two systems change their geometry dependant on where the wheel is within the suspension stroke, so the amount of body roll is entirely relevant.

You also.have to bear in mind that the angle and position of a McPherson strut can also be tailored to suit, and ultimately most of the gain you get from a twin wishbone setup is in a straight line, and not when cornering.

The stock damper rod shocks offer the exact opposite to what is desired for performance or comfort, but they are standard on most passenger cars because they're dirt cheap and consumers know no better. This is why all regular type saloon cars irrespective of manufacturer are pretty poor at speed on an undulating road, you'll just never know unless you've driven anything that really works well.

Go drive something with a proper set of cartridge type dampers then come back and tell me the honda shocks are any good in comparison.

Read Stevearcade's review on his coilovers. Even a cheaper set that all run the same generic cartridge is an enormous improvement in comfort despite being considerably stiffer.

I've spent years racing motorcycles and virtually all my setup time focuses on suspension. All the same rules apply to things with 4 wheels too, and I went through various caster, camber and toe changes on my Subaru to have an estate care that was comfortable and safe, yet would run rings round virtually anything in the corners (with a McPherson strut front end). The foundation of all that performance is a good set of dampers, and the biggest irony of all of it was that despite being the same weight, the spring rate was far lighter than the accord, and the ride quality infinitely better too.

Click to expand...

I saw body roll is irrelevant because the double wishbone setup allows for the two arms, particularity in the short arm setup to keep the side the eight is on to keep negative camber so the wheels are always flat and in contact with the road whilst keeping the other side also in contact. In standard McPherson that doesn't happen and it doesn't give you the control, hence why double wishbones are chosen in many applications on the road and is also the main choice in racing. Double wishbones give no gain in straight line, thats not even their purpose, the whole point of the two arms is to control camber, which happens when cornering and the load put on either side.

Watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsEmK1M87VQ

As for stock dampers, they are a compromise between handling and comfort depending on application. I've never seen any reviewer or engineer discredit or criticise a car because of it. A standard XE10 Lexus IS200 has all round double wishbones with 'standard' dampers, it handles great and is known for it, the e46 3 series had mcpherson setup, standard shocks, known for being really good handling cars. Sure expensive aftermarket coilovers can improve the car in certain areas, but manufacturers have to make a compromise between application and costs, it doesnt make much business sense to fit super expensive coilovers, when cheaper less fancier dampers meet the design spec and requirements. These are afterall standard road cars and not performance or race cars.

I remember also watching an episode of Best Motoring when they reviewed and compared the DC5 which took a divergence from the double wishbone setup Honda became renowned for and came with McPherson struts, with the CL7 Euro R which had double wishbones, the DC5 out of the box handled brilliantly, the CL7 had a soft damper setup which was criticised, but the team concluded the CL7 has overall superior suspension setup that has much more tuning potential as you can do more with a DW setup.