What Have You Done To Your Stagea Lately?

[Reaperblitz]

So there was a write up to the changes to the stagea model and the reasons behind why they relocated the springs the way they have.

It went something along the lines that the ability to separate springs to the shocks was to allow the cargo compartment not to be hindered by higher strut towers and the ability to displace the load under stress. I may be wrong in my understanding but would it also mean the design of a shock and spring system wouldn't allow enough rebound or loading of the compartment?

[Philr32]

When I bought my MCA I thought (incorrectly) that all M35 coilover kits converted the rear to a proper coilover and also that MCA is a well know/respected brand that make quality products and wouldn't sell something dangerous and/or of inferior quality. Along with reaperblitz I thought the change in suspension was to make room for larger compartment not due to load sharing, after all OEM springs are generally quite a lot larger in diameter than aftermarket coilovers hence would require a large shock tower which would take space away from the rear compartment.

[datmoo]

Been trying to find all these failed shock mounts on MCA equiped M35's. No luck yet. I did find this though: http://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/440310-coilover-issue/Both ARX, one with stock suspension, one with aftermarket, both look like the bolts pulled out rather than a problem with compression forces. One due to incorrect adjustment of the shock and one due to loose mounting nuts by the sound of it. You can also see the damper adjuster in one pic exposed to the elements and covered in road grime. If you pull away the interior trim you will see a very strong, reinforced, well engineered C pillar which by chance is what the shock mount forces are applied to. I'll go with an expert, say like someone who builds suspension for a living rather than speculation of what might happen. I'm sure Mr Nissan knew what he was doing but if they got it right from the factory then why would we bother modifying our cars at all. On another note you can specify what springs you want at no extra cost with MCA and don't have to change the large spring again which is a PITA. If you are happy with your BCs, awesome but don't bash the MCAs just because you reckon.

[Daleo]

Been trying to find all these failed shock mounts on MCA equiped M35's. No luck yet. I did find this though: http://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/440310-coilover-issue/Both ARX, one with stock suspension, one with aftermarket, both look like the bolts pulled out rather than a problem with compression forces. One due to incorrect adjustment of the shock and one due to loose mounting nuts by the sound of it. You can also see the damper adjuster in one pic exposed to the elements and covered in road grime. If you pull away the interior trim you will see a very strong, reinforced, well engineered C pillar which by chance is what the shock mount forces are applied to. I'll go with an expert, say like someone who builds suspension for a living rather than speculation of what might happen. I'm sure Mr Nissan knew what he was doing but if they got it right from the factory then why would we bother modifying our cars at all. On another note you can specify what springs you want at no extra cost with MCA and don't have to change the large spring again which is a PITA. If you are happy with your BCs, awesome but don't bash the MCAs just because you reckon.

Not bashing at all; there's no question about Josh's product, nor his knowledge.

However; regardless of how well reinforced you might think the shock mount is; I don't believe it was ever designed to support the entire corner of the car on that tiny little sheetmetal cup bolted to the bodywork.

Not speculation; fact.

[datmoo]

Not bashing at all; there's no question about Josh's product, nor his knowledge.

However; regardless of how well reinforced you might think the shock mount is; I don't believe it was ever designed to support the entire corner of the car on that tiny little sheetmetal cup bolted to the bodywork.

Not speculation; fact.

"I don't believe" = fact? Interesting.

Show me the evidence.

[Reaperblitz]

Just out of clarity (until I can find the actual reason/ information) m35 rwd is different suspension than the m35 4wd yes?

But the chassis is pretty much the same minus the subframe?

[stripey]

"I don't believe" = fact? Interesting.

Show me the evidence.

A shock mount is not designed to hold weight its sole purpose is to control the spring. The spring on the other hand does hold the weight of the corner of car

I think i quoted wrong person anyhoo

Edited February 2, 2016 by stripey

[Daleo]

"I don't believe" = fact? Interesting.

Show me the evidence.

Yeah, semantics; wrote it in a hurry, and thought about it later.

Still not fit for purpose; otherwise Nissan would've just put the whole lot there.

Every strut top I've ever seen or worked with has a hell of a lot more surface area to distribute the load; this arrangement does nothing of the sort. Instead, it localises the entire corner weight of the vehicle on a tiny unsupported piece of sheetmetal spotwelded over a void in the body.

There is absolutely no benefit or performance advantage in combining the spring and shock into one position in this instance; and avoiding using the specifically designed and reinforced spring perch is just an exercise in simplifying his parts bin because he now doesn't need to have custom wound mini-block springs as per OEM.

He can just use his off the shelf small diameter coilover spec springs to maximise his profit.

I stand by my comment, but you are free to do whatever you choose.

[Daleo]

Just out of clarity (until I can find the actual reason/ information) m35 rwd is different suspension than the m35 4wd yes?

But the chassis is pretty much the same minus the subframe?

M35 shares its front suspension with the Z33 and V35; the rear suspension and subframe is identical between NM35 and M35

[Reaperblitz]

Thanks for clearing that up Daleo. Slightly off topic. Why would they sell different kits to cater for the 4wd compared to the rwd? Added weight of attEsa system?

[Reaperblitz]

http://www.nissan-global.com/EN/NEWS/2001/_STORY/011016-01.html

Suspension: Featuring a new multi-link rear suspension designed specifically for wagon application

The new Stagea employs four wheel multi-link suspension and realizes superior handling, stability and ride comfort.

Its rear suspension is a newly developed multi-link rear suspension that has the coil springs mounted separately from the shock absorbers and lowers the upper attachment position of the shock absorbers by 270 mm compared with the suspension on the previous model. As a result, this dedicated wagon suspension minimizes intrusions into the luggage area.

Ripple-control shock absorbers are used to isolate the transmission of minute vibrations from the road surface for improved tire-road contact.

*Still can't find the type of multi link system explanation

http://nissan.epcdata.ru/stagea/nm35/6839-vq25det/trans/431/

Edited February 2, 2016 by Reaperblitz

[Lakes101]

Thanks for clearing that up Daleo. Slightly off topic. Why would they sell different kits to cater for the 4wd compared to the rwd? Added weight of attEsa system?

they sell different kit as the front suspension is slightly different in the front ie the way the coil over is mounted and its style as it has the front drive shafts in the way of where the lower mounts are

[datmoo]

Yeah, semantics; wrote it in a hurry, and thought about it later.

Still not fit for purpose; otherwise Nissan would've just put the whole lot there.

Every strut top I've ever seen or worked with has a hell of a lot more surface area to distribute the load; this arrangement does nothing of the sort. Instead, it localises the entire corner weight of the vehicle on a tiny unsupported piece of sheetmetal spotwelded over a void in the body.

There is absolutely no benefit or performance advantage in combining the spring and shock into one position in this instance; and avoiding using the specifically designed and reinforced spring perch is just an exercise in simplifying his parts bin because he now doesn't need to have custom wound mini-block springs as per OEM.

He can just use his off the shelf small diameter coilover spec springs to maximise his profit.

I stand by my comment, but you are free to do whatever you choose.

Fair enough. Only time will tell. Just trying to support local and hoping that people don't confuse opinion with fact when deciding on their purchase. All good.

[Daleo]

Fair enough. Only time will tell. Just trying to support local and hoping that people don't confuse opinion with fact when deciding on their purchase. All good.

I've only heard fantastic things about his product; everyone raves about them, and also Josh's product support and knowledge. I have absolutely no axe to grind with MCA at all.

That's why I'm completely mystified by the choice to mount them this way.

TBH; I hope they never have any kind of failure, no customer deserves that, and Josh certainly doesn't either.

[joshm35]

This is more than just here mate. This was all mentioned to josh on facebook with concerns and links to the fail as he was developing. Not taking away what he offers what so ever as his profuct has been proven in time attack for years. Im this application this is a big weak point unless the m35 owner sends his/her car to an engineer to strengthen the area in question. 99% of owners wont as this cost plus suspension cost will outweigh other products on the market. And this is not from someone against his product as numerous times i have said i will be keen on MCA blues once i wait to see if current owners running MCAs have this mount cracking/failing in which it eventually will as it has happrned running the BC coilovers set up.

[Trex]

Agree. The shock mount is not designed to take the full weight of the rear.

Different car and setup; In my trucking days there were plenty of people using coilovers on the standard Shock mounts in conjunction with 4 links. Some swore it was fine, but seeing a few fail showed me otherwise.

[datmoo]

G35 and 350z with purdy adjustable arms and a Datto 1600 all deleting the factory spring to run a true coilover and they all run more of a shock tower rather than having the mount incorporated into the base of the c pillar. Just sayin'. I wish I had found these damper adjuster extensions (so you don't need to remove the trim) earlier in my research so I could have got away with a smaller access hole in the already weak, flimsy mount.

[Reaperblitz]

Spring bucket comparison

Edited February 3, 2016 by Reaperblitz

[Reaperblitz]

Just looked at the difference. The spring sits on the platform that attaches to the rear end of the brake hub. The modified version uses an adjustable brace? Wouldn't that need to be certified as you're changing the design engineering of the suspension? I.e there's no downward support for where it used to sit?

Just curious- Please entertain the thought process in this

[datmoo]

Just looked at the difference. The spring sits on the platform that attaches to the rear end of the brake hub. The modified version uses an adjustable brace? Wouldn't that need to be certified as you're changing the design engineering of the suspension? I.e there's no downward support for where it used to sit?

Just curious- Please entertain the thought process in this

Gives more accurate toe adjustment rather than slotting the subframe.

Thought this was pretty cool if you want to keep the separate spring and shock.