# MULTI LINK BEAM SUSPENSION



## wyeechen (Oct 16, 2005)

I am new in this topic, interested to know more about the muli link beam suspension. Is this an independent suspension? I wonder how it could be independent if the two rear wheels are connected by a beam. How is it compare with other suspension system like torsion beam or multi link suspension?
Thanks.


----------



## WoLfFaNgZ (Nov 8, 2004)

http://www.chris-longhurst.com/carbibles/suspension_bible.html 

this site may help ya out a bit.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

wyeechen said:


> I am new in this topic, interested to know more about the muli link beam suspension. Is this an independent suspension? I wonder how it could be independent if the two rear wheels are connected by a beam. How is it compare with other suspension system like torsion beam or multi link suspension?
> Thanks.



it says beam, it's a beam, not independent. So, what would make you think it's independent if you know it's connected by a beam?

It's considered a multi-link suspension in its own right. Very capable for handling but not very adjustable in terms of camber/toe.


----------



## wyeechen (Oct 16, 2005)

I was confused by the term "multi link beam suspension" with those independent suspension system called "multi link suspension". I thought Nissan shall use independent rear suspension for a better drive experience. It is so surprise Nissan still adopt beam as the rear suspension. 
Anyone could tell me why Nissan prefer this old-age-technology, or what is the advantage over independent suspension by Nissan's Multi-Link Beam Suspension?


----------



## ReVerm (Jan 13, 2003)

wyeechen said:


> I was confused by the term "multi link beam suspension" with those independent suspension system called "multi link suspension". I thought Nissan shall use independent rear suspension for a better drive experience. It is so surprise Nissan still adopt beam as the rear suspension.
> Anyone could tell me why Nissan prefer this old-age-technology, or what is the advantage over independent suspension by Nissan's Multi-Link Beam Suspension?


It's because it's relatively easy to design a decent linked rear suspension system for a production car without spending a whole lot of money. That and the fact that building a low-cost independant rear suspension system that isn't utter garbage is surprisingly difficult.

Check out this article from the November '98 issue of SCC (hosted by SE-R.net):
http://www.se-r.net/about/g20/scc/oct98/tb.html

They explain how the multi-link beam works and why Nissan is still using it today in their production cars.


----------



## SE-R happy (Feb 24, 2006)

So if you hit a bump with your right side rear wheel will it lift the left one up a bit as well even if there is no bump on that side?


----------



## ReVerm (Jan 13, 2003)

SE-R happy said:


> So if you hit a bump with your right side rear wheel will it lift the left one up a bit as well even if there is no bump on that side?


Yeah. At the very least, the inside edge of the left rear tyre will.


----------



## DrivingZen (Apr 13, 2011)

but didnt they use the scott-russel linkage to amend this problem without the crazy heavy watts thingy? i thought that was the whole point of calling it the multi link beam, because they were using the least amount of extra linkage as possible without minimizing to the plain beam in the back with that rediculous panhard.

i have to go get under my car now and check it out...


----------

