Are FD struts different from FC struts? If so, what's different?

Thanks.

 

The FC and FD use vastly different suspension designs and no parts are interchangable. The FD is FAR better and more sophisticated. The FD uses double wishbones all around while the FC uses MacPherson struts in front and a semi trailing arm arrangement. The FD does not use struts, it has shock absorbers and the FC uses struts in front and shocks in back as far as I know. The advantage of double wishbones is camber control through the travel of the suspension.

 

I'm clear on the rest, but could you define the differences between shock and strut? I thought shocks and struts were similar except struts had cartridges. In the context of my question I would have used the terms interchangably.

 

A shock is just that, a shock absorber with (usually) a bolt connection at each end. A strut is the main vertical suspension member that has a shock absorber built in, plus the spring platforms attached. Some struts use replacable cartridges, some are seales are replaced as a unit.

 

ok, then an fc has struts in the rear

 

ok, then an fc has struts in the rear

 

nope, greg is right... the FC has struts in the front and shocks in the rear. another advantage of the FD is that a lot of suspension components are forged aluminum which means they are light in weight but very strong, this is how mazda tried to keep the weight down. yes the FD is more advanced, but from what many RX-7 owners (who have had FC's and FD's) tell me, the FC is a more capable handler when modified. I cannot support this as I've never driven an FD But, hey I won't argue hehe

 

all of the FCs suspension components are forged aluminum

 

FC more capable when modified? Dunno... the 93 R1 spec did .98G bone stock... what did the FC do? I wonder what my FC does with the k2rd suspension kit when I'm running on the khumo R tires...

 

On the FC, only the front A arms and hubs are forged aluminum. The rear trailing arms and all other suspension parts are steel.

 

i think they focused more on 'ride quality' more then fantastic handeling in the stock FC suspension. Remeber, us Americans love that cadillac ride... From what i hear, the car is a handeling beast with a mild suspension tune. Though, i feel a chassis stiffining device is going to be needed for anything over mild.

 

Related Question: You know how you have to modify the koni's to macpherson format on FCs? Would it be possible to do this with something from a FD?

 

yes, you can get koni's for the fc. No, the FD shocks will not work on the FC, the are very different.

 

Sorry for being pedantic, but I want to clear up the definition of McPherson strut... (and I reaslise this is not a strict technical definition, but is a lot closer than anyone has managed so far!).

A Strut is a shock absorbed that also locates the wheel.

In a McP strut suspension system, if you remove the shock absorber part, the wheel will no longer be located securely. In any shock absorber system, the shock can be removed, and the wheel will still be located fore and aft.

Don't be confused by the way that some shock absorbers have coil springs that wrap aorund the shock - this is purely a packaging issue, and has nothing to do with whether a system is strut or shock.

Cheers.

 

I'll be a bit more pedantic...

What you've described is a conventional strut. A McPherson strut is one where the anti-roll bar is attached in such a away that it controls the longitudinal location of the strut (i.e. stops it moving back and forth). On the FC the A-arms take care of this.