i admit this is kind of an obvious suggestion but since i havent seen it anywhere yet i thought id bring it up for discussion

the first part of this suggestion should be fairly easy to implement with the current physics engine of lfs as we already have fully simulated double wishbone suspensions and altering their geometry a little in the setup would be an interesting addition (always thought it was a thing only rc cars had but looking at rbr apparently real cars have that setup option too)

and the second part is something that would most probably require a lot of work (my guess is its already on scawens list anyway) but since lots of race cars use multilink suspension and judging by the look of the formulas suspensions we already have at least two multilink-suspension cars in lfs a proper simulation of that suspension type would be appreciated

Quote from Shotglass :

the first part of this suggestion should be fairly easy to implement with the current physics engine of lfs as we already have fully simulated double wishbone suspensions and altering their geometry a little in the setup would be an interesting addition (always thought it was a thing only rc cars had but looking at rbr apparently real cars have that setup option too)

I would imagine that this adjustment is more to do with the design of the car than the setup, but I could be wrong.

Quote :

and the second part is something that would most probably require a lot of work (my guess is its already on scawens list anyway) but since lots of race cars use multilink suspension and judging by the look of the formulas suspensions we already have at least two multilink-suspension cars in lfs a proper simulation of that suspension type would be appreciated

I don't really understand this. The suspension models in LFS are pretty much what you'd expect for each of the cars. Here's what they use:

UF 1000, XF GTi, FXO Turbo, XF GTR, UF GTR: McPherson Strut front, trailing arm rear.
XR GT, XR GT Turbo, RB4: McPherson Strut front and rear.
FZ50: McPherson Strut front, double wishbone rear.
All others: double wishbone front and rear.

What's missing from this model?

Most cars, even racing cars, do not have multiple mounting points for wishbones. Rally cars do tend to be exceptions, such as the Lancia Stratos, but as no car in LFS is a "Rally Car" it's not needed.

Modern shopping cars, such as the Ford Focus, use 'Multilink' rear suspensions. From what I can gather it makes the ride harsher, costs more, but improves the handling (as if a shopping car needs good handling). I think more manufacturers should stick with simple solutions personally...

Quote from StewartFisher :

All others: double wishbone front and rear.

What's missing from this model?

some touring cars (the gtrs in lfs) have multilink-suspensions and i cant say for sure but just guessing from the sheer amount and geometry of the wishbones formula cars use these days i assume those are multilink-suspensions too

Quote from tristancliffe :

Most cars, even racing cars, do not have multiple mounting points for wishbones. Rally cars do tend to be exceptions, such as the Lancia Stratos, but as no car in LFS is a "Rally Car" it's not needed.

hmmm so i guess it was a bad idea to draw conclusions from the setup options in rbr after all
it still would be a nice addition ... lfs has a histroy of offering setup options you dont have irl

Quote from Shotglass :

some touring cars (the gtrs in lfs) have multilink-suspensions and i cant say for sure but just guessing from the sheer amount and geometry of the wishbones formula cars use these days i assume those are multilink-suspensions too

There must be something I'm not understanding here...are double-wishbone suspensions not classed as 'multi-link'?

Quote from Shotglass :

hmmm so i guess it was a bad idea to draw conclusions from the setup options in rbr after all
it still would be a nice addition ... lfs has a histroy of offering setup options you dont have irl

But in its recent history it tries to avoid exactly what you said; setup options that you don't have in RL™ (for that car class).

No, wishbones (single with a MacPherson strut, or double [equal or unequal length]) are not generally classed as 'Multilink'. Multilink is when you have a much more complex suspension arrangment, using a combination of trailing arm like structures, wishbone like structures, and interacting pivots as well. They are good for road cars because you can end up with good wheel control (and hence good handling) without using much space (more luggage room).

Of course, in the quest for handling you lose compliance, which is why modern shopping cars are not as nice to be in over bumpy roads as they were before the general public got so excited about their Nissan Micra's going round corners.

Quote :

are double-wishbone suspensions not classed as 'multi-link'?

No , double-wishbone has solid upper and lower wishbones. In a Multilink suspension each 'arm' of the wisbones is a seperate unit. They have complex pivot systems and are almost infinitely adjustable.

Ah, I see...makes sense. I got confused because the only diagram I could find supposedly showing multi-link suspension looked suspiciously like double-wishbones to me!

Quote from StewartFisher :

SNIP

UF 1000, XF GTi, FXO Turbo, XF GTR, UF GTR: McPherson Strut front, trailing arm rear.

SNIP

At the moment the trailing arm is not a true trailing arm but just the old LFS suspension model. While it is almost the same there is one major difference.

The current system under braking will cause the rear of the car to lift upwards while a true trailing arm will cause the rear of the car to dive due to the geometry and the effects on it when the rear wheels have braking forces applied to them.

Quote from Woz :

At the moment the trailing arm is not a true trailing arm but just the old LFS suspension model. While it is almost the same there is one major difference.

The current system under braking will cause the rear of the car to lift upwards while a true trailing arm will cause the rear of the car to dive due to the geometry and the effects on it when the rear wheels have braking forces applied to them.

oh right ... i forgot about that ... i guess as soon as we have properly modeled longitudinal arms the move to mutilink-suspensions isnt a big one anymore

Quote :

while a true trailing arm will cause the rear of the car to dive due to the geometry and the effects on it when the rear wheels have braking forces applied to them

True, but not only for trailing arm. In this vid of an e36 doing a brake, you can clearly see its diving at the rear end. The suspension type is a developed form of the multi-link rear suspension.

Quote from M.Mos :

True, but not only for trailing arm. In this vid of an e36 doing a brake, you can clearly see its diving at the rear end. The suspension type is a developed form of the multi-link rear suspension.

which in very basic terms happens because a multilink is somwhere between the behaviour of a longitudinal arm (trainling arm) and a transverse arm (wishbone) and by moving the mouting point of one of the multiple arms of a multilink you can create almost any suspension behaviour you want

the bahaviour is also known as anti-dive (a little confusing with the post quoted but its refering to the car (not) diving at the front)
the inverse behaviour (letting the car not dive in the rear during acceleration) is known as anti-squat and can also be achieved by using a multilink-suspension

Yep , it has one longitudinal arm and two wishbones. E36 isn't a very good example but E39(5 series)is. It has double wishbone rear suspension without a longitudinal arm (trailing arm) but has anti-dive and anti squat. By looking at the lower wishbone (which looks like a A-arm) you can image why it has anti-dive.

Quote from StewartFisher :

What's missing from this model?

Solid rear axle.

Actually, Solid rear axle with a torque arm and panhard bar would be my preference.