>Subject: Re: De Dion...Diffs...and IRS

[RonHorowitz <RonHorowitz@domain.elided>]

Message text written by INTERNET:alfa@domain.elided
>Subject: Re: De Dion...Diffs...and IRS

> IRS is what it
>says it is...namely... a system where either wheel suspension can operate
>entirely without any influence from another wheel. On this standard a De
dion
>does not qualify.

Well, not _entirely_ without any influence. By this definition, a rear
suspension with an anti-sway bar doesn't qualify, either, not that I'd call
a dead axle an IRS whether powered or not, so no, a deDion isn't an IRS,
and neither are the dead axles used on front drive cars (Lancia Fulvia, et
al.)

>but I would say these
>are the honourable exceptions that prove the rule.

Curiouslly enough, this is an old saying, which originally meant that the
exception tested the rule, as in a proof was required to show that the rule
wasn't faulty. I think a  better definition might be that an independant
suspension is one where the wheels are not directly connected via rigid
links, compliant links being allowed. Not sure if this is the definition
currently sanctioned by the SAE, but it works for me.
--
to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided