6G Celicas Forums

I'm sort of concerned since I've seen posts in this thread that suggest that cars equipped with Super Strut front suspensions can be readily reverted to Mc Pherson type front struts eliminating costly repair work.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<D E A D.......W R O N G>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

6th gen celicas equipped with superstrut front suspension DO NOT share similar parts with mc pherson strut equipped celicas in the following areas. In other words ALL OF THE FOLLOWING MUST BE CHANGED if you are going from super strut to mc pherson and vise versa
1. cradle arms
2. shock and spring combo
3. spindles
4. steering ends

I don't know how no one really emphasized it but there is not one single interchangeable part on the front suspension except maybe the brakes. IT MUST ALL BE CHANGED to do a conversion from one type to the next.
I have never done one myself but i have heard that the ST185 spindle accepts the ST205 brake calipers and rotors without any modification. If this is indeed so then it makes the conversion less stressful but by no means easy.
dollar for dollar I cannot imagine how this conversion is cheaper than replacing worn "figure 8" bushings or worn superstrut dampers.
Currently I'm working on linking with a supplier who may be able to supply a top quality coilover suspension for superstrut equipped cars. Don't hold your breath though. I have a feeling it's another dead end lol.

of course you'd need to change all those things

paul GT4 has a Mcpherson suspension in his GT4

This post has been edited by Rusty: Sep 16, 2009 - 1:16 AM

alright guys so if you were to put up a celica with suspension mods as follows:

-Tien Full Coilovers for Macpherson Strut System USDM Celicas
-Polyurethane Front and Rear Suspension Bushings
- C-One Lower Arm Ball Joints
-Front and Rear 3 point strut Bars
- C-One rear trunk bar
-Falken Azenis RT-615 tires

vs

An Integra Type R. with all the same suspension mods, same tires, both cars weigh the same and have same percentage of weight distribution from front to rear and would also have aftermarket coilovers installed as well. which one would handle better

Now being that usdm celicas have mcpherson suspension and type r integra's have doulbe wishbone suspension. now from my understanding from this reading http://www.team-integra.net/sections/artic...p?ArticleID=526 this is what I got from the advantage that doulbe wishbone has :

the best handling production cars have used MacPherson Struts. All that having MacPherson Struts means is that you will have to spend a little more time planning your suspension upgrades if you want the best possible handling from your car (and you will end up sacrificing a few more things than you would with a Double Wishbone suspension, like tires - you can dial in the amount of negative camber you want in a MacPherson Strut, but you will end up using tires faster). Because of the simplicity of the MacPherson Strut design, it is sometimes easier to modify the suspension to fit your exact needs than it is with a Double Wishbone suspension. Also, with MacPherson Struts you will need to be more aware of your driving techniques (which to me is actually an asset for someone just starting to race, and even for some experienced drivers, but that all depends on your point of view).

any other inputs on this. superstrut vs double wishbone. why did 7th gen celica's come with double wishbone suspension in the rear and mcpherson in the front, same goes with acura rsx? less inexpensive??

This post has been edited by BonzaiCelica: Mar 10, 2010 - 1:40 AM

It would be very close, it would be more upto the driver and if both had a limited slip diff or not.

Macpherson strut is always looked down upon but it is very good system, some of the best handling cars in the world use it in front and back such as Lancia Delta, WRX, Porshe 911 and Clio 172, on the road it wont be noticed which one is wishbone and macpherson strut.

and Yes the 7th gen probably still uses macpherson at the front as its cheaper and still works fairly effectively, I know my dads clio has macpherson at the front and dependent beam axel at the rear it seems, which is pretty outdated but still works brilliantly and on a track to a modded clio there isn't much that can go aswell around corners.

yes that is that the integra type r and ss-III celica both have helical lsd. alright then thx for the reply. so double wishbone might be like an overall 10% more efficient than mcpherson suspension system??

^^ unless you have a SS-II 7gen celica +Z package (has superstrut) then you have superstrut in the front and double wishbone in the back.

also is there a diffrence between your ST204 and our ST202 tein coilovers?

I agree with Euphoria, it would be up to the drivers.

This post has been edited by Rusty: Mar 11, 2010 - 1:30 AM

yes ss-II 7th gen celicas do have double wishbone in the rear and superstrut in the front. Double wishbone would never be accessible on the 6th gen celica right, how about on the 7afe ST celica, the engine is pretty small right?

only difference in the tein coilover set between the ST204 vs ST202 is the front superstrut suspension right??

This post has been edited by BonzaiCelica: Mar 11, 2010 - 12:28 AM

the best thing about superstrut, and what is missed from every conversation about it, is that its an offset steering axis design, in a front driver this is such a huge benefit, as it gets rid of torque steer, reduces scrub radius and so on, generally gets round the problems that a mac strut design brings, this brings big advantages on tarmac as you can get the power down exiting corners much earlier, it even helps just launching because it gets rid of torque steer and wheel hop, meaning your tyre is just gripping rather than scrabbling around.

oh really hmm now I kind of wish I had on my celica oh well...

yeah its a really beautifull system, for sure ford and renault have offset steering axis designs aswell now in the new focus rs (300bhp) and megane rs (260bhp) we have in the uk, both of which put there power down really really well for front drivers, but both are nowhere near the complexity of superstrut, as it does so much more than just sorting out the steering axis, the geometry is quite mind boggling but it really works, i guess this complexity is superstruts downfall aswell as it brings a lot of expense to the design, although i am very confused as to why there are no aftermarket replacements around for these parts, there is a huge market for it i reckon if someone could get the costs down. Rumour suggests it was someone at TTE that designed the superstrut, so its roots are in motorsport, but its no real advantage on gravel hence why the rally cars stopped using it. generally i see a lot of people poo pooing it but its obvious they have absolutly no idea what it is!

I guess someone had done coke on the toyota and then designed the superstrut. If it gave advantage on the tarmac but not on gravel, there wuoldnt been a reason to change it. But it was too fragile, as many have noticed later, so TTE decided not to use it..

you misenterprit, it may have given some speed advantage on gravel i dont know, the fact is rally cars run on a variety of surfaces including tarmac, maybe it gained time here and lost it there for whatever reason, its all very complicated, but as i understand it the advantages were outweighed by the wear issues because service times etc are important in rallying, i do not know the details though. regardless it shouldnt be seen as a reason not to use it because in some scenarios it has big advantages.

This post has been edited by Edophus: Mar 12, 2010 - 9:05 AM

kinda bummed out that we don't have superstrut suspension on usdm celica's over here. And im even more bummed out that our celica didnt come with the fancy double wishbone suspension that civics and integra's came with.....

Dredging an old topic here, most of you guys are right on the money especially Edophus.

From a driver experience standpoint, I stand by superstrut.

I'm not entirely sure how much the LSD is responsible for this and how much can be credited to the Superstrut but lets just say I could be pinging off the 7000 limiter of the SS-III around a negative cambered 90 degree corner in either 1st or 2nd gears with my foot flat and not once feel like the car is about to lose traction or get out of control.

The underpowered SS-I can't do this, not even the SS-II and I've tried both. I've even tried with lowered versions of these cars, still they go straight off the road.

However there IS a limit to this endless grip effect which comes into play if you've done anything to add a few extra HP to the already potent 3S-GE motor.

Now don't get me started on the GT-Four it's a very different kettle of fish to the SS-III in terms of handling, a whole new ball game.

might have more to do with the lsd??

could be good to test out on a one of the many trackday's this year.

SS-II vs SS-III (beams if we can find one) and GT4 vs GT-Four


I think it could be quite interesting

Yeah LSD has a massive difference for putting power down in corners, especially in the lower gears.

Also tyres have a MASSIVE difference, some of the cars could of had average tyres and some could of had awsome tyres.

Although I only have 100kw to put down but with my recent tyres its definitely possible to be flat in 2nd gear around corner without traction issues, 1st gear ofc struggles but its still good grip, with my other tyres I would of been off the road.

would it of been possible for toyota to put double wishbone an all 6th gen celica except for the GT-4's? I kinda envy the fact that civic and integras have double wishbone and we dont. Shoot stupid toyota still didnt decide to put double wishbone on the 7th gen as well.

would it of been a convenient thing for toyota to put superstrut on the rear suspension, or double wishbone on the rear would of been a better choice for the 6th gen's

superstrut is essentially double wishbone in effect, i dont think the fact that the gen 6 is just a trailing arm at the rear is to much of a problem really it will have more bearing on tyre wear than much else i would think, it still has toe control etc through the bushes so isnt that crude, also this is why i'd never poly bush the rear end, a gen 7 with superstrut has the equivelant of double wishbone all round . For superstrut on the rear i dont really see much benefit because the biggest benefits of superstrut come from things like the reduced scrub radius, although it would give better camber control. For what its worth i much prefered the front end on my ss3 with superstrut to the honda's i've driven, the hondas didnt feel as tight and solid as the celica did, the honda maybe felt a bit more nimble in the slow stuff, but the celica was sooooo stable through the high speed stuff, both felt different but one wasnt better than the other.

never one to miss an oppertunity heres a couple pics that illustrate how composed a superstrut car is in the corners, first is behind a teg who was holding me up for a few laps, similar tyres but unsure of the rest of there setup but i could have pushed up the inside of a him, but we were not allowed to overtake except for the straights , the celica looks a bit more composed than the teg here, obviously different setups etc and drivers make it a loose comparison at best but shows there really isnt all that much between them. The second pic just shows how happy the back end was to sit just out a little, the front end had immense levels of grip, zero understeer and just a nice angle with the rear drifting just a little.




This post has been edited by Edophus: Mar 19, 2010 - 8:32 AM

Very good illustration there, and a Celica with regular MacPherson would definitely not have been able to hold that apex as well as you have and be forced to decelerate and follow you on the outside.

On a side note, SS-III has different parts in the rear suspension setup to the regular SS-II, USDM GT, etc.

Btw Edophus aren't you from Australia? How did you get a real SS-III there? Since importing cars is a PITA there, wouldn't it be more logical to import a GT4 instead?? 98 SS-III holds a higher value than the 96 GT-Four.


EDIT: I just noticed someone said the SS-III has Helical LSD. It does NOT! No Celica comes factory with a Helical LSD, the closest is the ST205 GT4 which has a TORSEN rear diff.

All Superstrut equipped FWD Celica models also come equipped with Viscous LSD! And for that matter so does the Superstrut equipped GT-Apex, GT-Z, BZ-R Toyota Levin/Trueno models.

Unless equipped with the _AFTERMARKET_ TRD Helical LSD, you do not have it from factory.

Why is this? Because when a Helical LSD fails, the entire insides shatter and the car becomes undrivable either resulting in 1WD or a complete lockup of the wheels which cant rotate at all. Very dangerous to have happen to you while driving, and if you survive it's also very expensive to replace.

On the flipside, when a Viscous LSD fails, the diff simply acts like a regular open diff and the car can still be driven out the rest of it's lifetime.

The FWD Celica was never intended to be the flagship sports car for Toyota so the production cost and final showroom price could not be justified.

This post has been edited by delusionz: Mar 19, 2010 - 3:44 PM

^ nope hes in UK, or there abouts (theres another in aussie with a similar name to him)

as far as I can see, they(SS-II & SS-III) have the same parts in there rear (if they don't please show me )

I dont really want to into the whole lsd discussion again

and I stand by my previous statment


oh and Edophus, we demand more pictures