To: dakota@csclub0.cs.fredonia.edu@INTERNET; hornback@qualcomm.com@INTERNET
From: Clement_D on Thu, Aug 22, 1996 8:11 AM
Subject: RE: torsion bars
From: hornback@qualcomm.com@INTERNET on Wed, Aug 21, 1996 9:57 PM
>I really like the ride of my '95 4x4, but I'm disappointed with the
>aftermarket options available for the front end with torsion bars. Does
>anyone know why Dodge went with this system? What are the pros and cons?
Dave,
With out having been involved in the design concept reviews anything I have
to say is just speculation, but here goes. I would venture to say that using
the torsion bar design afforded CC the most cost effective way of developing
the Dakota series. Looking at the front end, had they gone with a coil or
leaf spring design there would have had to be some major design differences
between the 2wd and 4wd to fit a coil or leaf design in or the truck would
have had an unacceptably high ride hieght. Likely, the early development
started as 2wd and much of the frame body demensions became fixed resulting
in the torsion bar set-up being the natural progression.
For as many people that want to modify there vehicle for improved off road
performance there are at least an order of magnitude more that do not want
to. If they had crammed a leaf or coil design under there, the truck would
have been up in the stratosphere. They would turn off many more potential
customers than they had would have delighted. Also, because the Dakota
design is so different from the Brand X trucks, it would take a significant
design effort on the part of after market companies to come up with parts.
Until the demand for these parts becomes great enough to justify the effort
the after market companies aren't going to put much effort in. It's the
price we pay for not going with the flo.
Dave Clement
89 4x4 LE
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:07:25 EDT