Quote:
Originally Posted by HighlandPete
How do we define improvement?
Isn't a bit of comfort "in a road car" what a lot of users are after. The ability to change the suspension characteristics to suit the need. Carrying passengers, road quality, daily drive choice, etc.
I fully understand some users want one setting, looking for what they term best performance and will compromise the comfort level. That doesn't mean 'improve' the chassis for some users. In fact it could mean the exact opposite, even unusable. Therefore adaptive is a definite improvement (maybe a compromise) compared to the standard passive Sport suspension for those users.
It is good there are now three suspensions to choose from, without even considering any aftermarket options.
|
You are absolutely correct - performance means different things to different people. That's what makes this debate interesting.
To me - the suspension performance in an M or M performance car - is ability to sustain road holding/ traction at the limit.
I tried several M 3/4 cars on the track with adaptive and passive suspensions.
Adaptive - is a comfort compromise and does not consistently hold the at the limit.
I found comfort to be - too leany/floaty. and in Sport/sport + it is skipping. - so mid corner bumps, apex curbs tend to upset the car and the rear steps out. So i left the car in comfort on the track preferring to deal with lean over skipping.
The regular M sport suspension does not exhibit this behavior. But at slow speeds in town on broken roads - it is more bumpy - i can live with that - some choose not to.