The Future of " Knee-Action "
Motoring
Two cars I have recently been driving, each a popular model in its own country, England and the United States, have made me and two very experienced enthusiasts in motoring speculate upon the position here of independent front-wheel suspension. In America, where it is neatly called " knee- action," the system has been long established, and there is no doubt at all that these American and Canadian cars that come over on to the British market are most of them very comfortable and pleasant to drive. The initial difficulties and drawbacks of the design have been overcome, and I do not think there is one example in which there is any steerage difficulty or any fortuitous noise. In all important respects, independent front-wheel suspension, as made in America, seems to have reached the same level of reliability as the normal kind.
. In this country very little progress seems to have been made. I do not mean that such firms as do turn out inde- pendently sprung cars are not up to date in their methods, but that the idea does not seem to have caught on. Not more than four makes of British cars—five if you count the Humber separately from the Hillman—have taken it up, while one at least of them, having taken it up, has dropped it. It is difficult, if not impossible, for anybody who drives various kinds of cars, English and American, with and without independent suspension, to make a fair decision which, if either, of the systems is the better. One of the main reasons for this difficulty lies, of course, in the greater weight of the British cars. A heavy car will in seven cases out of ten have a distinct steering feel, not necessarily inferior to that of a lighter car, but different. When, therefore, one is trying to appreciate independent suspension as compared with the normal type, allowance must be made both ways—and one is never sure how far that allowance should go.
The two cars I tried were the 11-h.p. Singer and the 27-h.p. Chevrolet. Last year the Singer had independent suspension and has now reverted to the orthodox type. The more expensive model of the Chevrolet which I described some time ago in The Spectator, has a particularly successful form of independent springing, whereas the model I drove the other day is normally sprung. There is no intention, I
gather, of altering either of these cars, both of them having apparently fully satisfied their designers. What, then, is the position of independent springing in these two cases ?
As an ordinary owner-driver, taking the cars out over a very familiar test run, I could not frankly distinguish very much difference between the behaviour of the four cars on the road. Last year's Singer was certainly a very com- fortable riding car. You could, if you wanted to do anything so idiotic, drive over outcrops of rock and across gullies and other things which you would avoid in saner moments. This year's, which, by the way, is considerably cheaper, is a well-sprung car, not perhaps quite so smooth running over normal surface, but at least as smooth as any car of its type. I should not have said that the difference in comfort was worth the difference in price. Very much the same holds good of the Chevrolet, though in that case the difference over really rough surface was rather more marked. On ordinary surface and in ordinary driving up to the maximum speed of 80 m.p.h. I do not think that anybody could tell whether it was independently sprung or not, but you could certainly drive the more expensive model at higher speeds over badly broken surface. In fact, it is not an exaggeration to say that such broken surface hardly made itself felt. There again you have the question, whether it is worth the extra £60 or £70. And there is yet another point upon which, however, I am not prepared to give a decided opinion. The independent springing " lay-out " adds a considerable amount of weight to the chassis, and that weight has, it seemed to me, made the more luxurious car a little less lively than the cheaper model. Weight is the all-important factor of today, although, unfortunately, the sensible claims of the public for bigger and bigger bodies is making the problem of its reduction more and more difficult. Apart from this question of independent suspension, these two cars struck me as interesting examples of the cheap types in both nationalities. The Singer's overhead-valved 4-cylinder engine has a bore and stroke of 65 x 105, giving a cubic capacity of a little under 1/ litres. A single dry- plate clutch, which has taken the place of last year's hydraulic coupling, carries the drive to a 4-speed gearbox of which the ratios are 5.2, 7.6, 11, and 18.8. The saloon body, which has six windows, is a particularly sensible and pleasant- looking design without any excess of streamline. It is well finished and there is, considering the short wheelbase of 8 ft. 5 in., a surprising amount of room in it. It is well ventilated and the screen allows an unusually wide view of the road. The steering is good and the road-holding excep- tionally so, possibly a shade better than in the independently sprung car. The engine is lively and willing, and although the maximum comfortable speed is not much over 50 m.p.h. on top and 40 on third, you can get along at a useful average speed without tiring. It climbs hills steadily if not bril- liantly, and in general is a good example of a cheap, sensible car. It costs £230 in the de luxe form and £215 in the popular.
The Chevrolet is in most respects identical with the independently sprung model already described. It has a six-cylinder engine of about 31-litres capacity of the familiar General Motors type. The only differences that matter are that the dearer car has a longer wheelbase, slightly larger body, and a synchromesh gearbox. In its cheapest form the normally sprung car costs £265 for the two-door body and £285 for the one I drove, which has four doors and a specially roomy built-in boot for luggage and spare wheel. Making full allowance for the difference in weight of the two cars, I still think that the cheaper one is the more lively, though of course there is no obvious reason for it. It is extremely lively with excellent acceleration, and it runs up to the maximum engine-rate almost without vibration and with less noise than the most reasonable man could expect. On the whole it is not quite so well-sprung as the other, and curiously enough, the steering had a little less caster action, or so it seemed to me. There was no practical difference in the action of the two gear changes, owing probably to the really excellent clutch fitted to the cheaper model,- which very nearly gives one the same results as the synchromesh [Note.—Readers' requests for advice from our Motoring Correspondent on the choice of new cars should be accompanied by a stamped and addressed envelope. The highest price payable must be given, as well as the type of body required. No advice can be given on the purchase, sale or exchange of used cars.]
Previous page
