Multilink rear suspension

[xman]

Which model variants have the multi link rear suspension?

[BoxerBoy]

All the ones listed in the brochure?

[flybynite]

Everything OVER 150 bhp (the TDi150 gets torsion) and ALL 4x4 cars

[TheOctaviator]

41 minutes ago, BoxerBoy said:

All the ones listed in the brochure?

Don't believe everything you read in the brochure! 

[stever750]

The ones that aren't buried backwards into the hedge? 

[juan27]

In UK isn't it basically the VRS and 4x4s? Can you get a 2WD Non VRS with more than 150bhp?

[ahenners]

7 minutes ago, juan27 said:

In UK isn't it basically the VRS and 4x4s? Can you get a 2WD Non VRS with more than 150bhp?

 

There was an L & K with the 1.8 TSI 180 though I doubt many were sold here. Of the current model line up you are correct.

[fabdavrav]

L&K has it , vrs & AWD versions....

 

why I went VW golf estate as 1.4 GT is multilink...

 

MK5 golf platform cost VAG loads of money as all were multilink...so they developed the two interchangeable systems which fit the same body...& Skoda doesn't get the kitchen sink thrown at as in the early years of VW money with new models (cira 2000).....as the brand is now well established

Edited 16 November, 2017 by fabdavrav

[nidza]

Is the body really _exactly_ the same?

 

Multilink body versions have 6mm shorter distance between axles. 

 

1.8 TSI also features Multlink and should have exactly the same dimension numbers as vRS. Trim and ground clearance should be only notable difference. Even engine is nearly the same as 2.0 TSI, with slightly shorter piston stroke length. 

[fabdavrav]

48 minutes ago, nidza said:

Is the body really _exactly_ the same?

 

Multilink body versions have 6mm shorter distance between axles. 

 

1.8 TSI also features Multlink and should have exactly the same dimension numbers as vRS. Trim and ground clearance should be only notable difference. Even engine is nearly the same as 2.0 TSI, with slightly shorter piston stroke length. 

 

Yes the body shell is the same..only reason for diff wheel base is the suspension type....that's why the rear wheel arches are wider than height & not perfect radius...so can accommodate different wheel bases ( a few mm here or there) due to suspension variation...

[Gerrycan]

1 hour ago, nidza said:

Is the body really _exactly_ the same?

 

Multilink body versions have 6mm shorter distance between axles. 

 

As Fab says, definitely the same. Look underneath the torsion beam versions and there is an enormous void above it used by the multi-link and AWD bits. There are even the unused bolt points, presumably for them so it should be relatively easy to upgrade to multi-link if one had suitable donor parts (vRS, Golf?)

It is remarkable how versatile modern chassis design has to be. In the Octavia case it is light enough to run a 1.0tsi but strong enough to take uprated 2.0tsi and running gear without any apparent structural changes.

[fabdavrav]

12 minutes ago, Gerrycan said:

As Fab says, definitely the same. Look underneath the torsion beam versions and there is an enormous void above it used by the multi-link and AWD bits. There are even the unused bolt points, presumably for them so it should be relatively easy to upgrade to multi-link if one had suitable donor parts (vRS, Golf?)

It is remarkable how versatile modern chassis design has to be. In the Octavia case it is light enough to run a 1.0tsi but strong enough to take uprated 2.0tsi and running gear without any apparent structural changes.

 

Correct that's the advantage of the MQB platform...& the estates in MK7 Golf & all the Octavia all use the same body shell for all variants...Golf hatch has a different body shell for AWD because of the boot floor is higher up to allow room for AWD ....spare wheel well on hatch is in the way....just look at how close the rear end is to rear axle..

 

This is why I almost bought a crashed "R" manual & swapped over the drivetrain to my car....R estate is DSG only..& the car was going cheap...

 

You can easy swap over the rear suspension....

Edited 16 November, 2017 by fabdavrav

[nidza]

12 minutes ago, Gerrycan said:

As Fab says, definitely the same. Look underneath the torsion beam versions and there is an enormous void above it used by the multi-link and AWD bits.

 

Interesting.

 

Is this empty space a resonator responsible for this topic?

 

 

[fabdavrav]

this is why I fitted the rear axle tray from the Passat (previous gen) as it has the same subframe points....

 

this covers over the void & stops air getting up in this void  which causes the car to lift in certain situation.....fitting the cover, quieter & no more lift..

[cosmic]

Guys if I spec the DCC on the new 1.5 tsi,  do I still have to live with the McPherson rear suspension??

[nidza]

If a DCC upgrade costs the same for your car, as for a multilink version, I guess you have your answer. 

 

 

[flybynite]

9 hours ago, cosmic said:

Guys if I spec the DCC on the new 1.5 tsi,  do I still have to live with the McPherson rear suspension??

 

The DCC only changes the damping rates of the shock absorbers. It does not really matter whether it is controlling the shock absorbers on a multilink or torsion-beam suspension. Specifying DCC will not change the type of suspension you have, only what controls the damping

 

Whether you have a torsion-beam or multilink rear suspension, you will still have a McPhearson strut at the front. There is no McPhearson strut at the rear on either setup they have separate springs and shock absorbers.

 

[sopskysalat]

On 19/11/2017 at 01:03, flybynite said:

 

The DCC only changes the damping rates of the shock absorbers. It does not really matter whether it is controlling the shock absorbers on a multilink or torsion-beam suspension. Specifying DCC will not change the type of suspension you have, only what controls the damping

 

Whether you have a torsion-beam or multilink rear suspension, you will still have a McPhearson strut at the front. There is no McPhearson strut at the rear on either setup they have separate springs and shock absorbers.

 

I drive 1.0tsi Golf and having this idea of retrofitting from torsion beam to ML rear suspension. I reckon it can be 1:1 swap based on VW Self Study Program notes. Complete set of ML parts can be purchased from China at “cheaper” cost. Am I crazy for independent suspension or is it worth going for it? I reviewed DCC document and it seems to me DCC can only be retrofitted to cars with ML rear suspension and supplier from China says do too. The rear height lever sensor needs to attach to wishbone of rear suspension and torsion beam does not have it. What do you guys think?

[Gerrycan]

1 hour ago, sopskysalat said:

I drive 1.0tsi Golf and having this idea of retrofitting from torsion beam to ML rear suspension. I reckon it can be 1:1 swap based on VW Self Study Program notes. Complete set of ML parts can be purchased from China at “cheaper” cost. Am I crazy for independent suspension or is it worth going for it? I reviewed DCC document and it seems to me DCC can only be retrofitted to cars with ML rear suspension and supplier from China says do too. The rear height lever sensor needs to attach to wishbone of rear suspension and torsion beam does not have it. What do you guys think?

I'm always suspicious with Chinese parts, a lottery as to whether they provide the correct items and their quality. I'd be looking around breaker yards first and see what is available there.

I presume that the rear height sensor is only required for vehicles fitted with headlights upgraded from standard halogen? Or is it a braking thing?

 

Have you actually test driven an IRS equipped version to determine whether it is worth the work and expense?

It is something I have considered in my idle moments but probably only because it is possible rather than from a real need as, unlike some, I am generally content with the ride on tarmac at the sort of pace I'm prepared to push to.

[sopskysalat]

Gerrycan, firstly first, the parts are for China VW, not local produce parts, thus VW-local partner should have QA/QC to relevant standard. Moving beyond this, you are right to comment if it is worth doing so, needs or wants on my part? Unless same tyre size, same route, it is probably harder to find discernible ride quality. What you think? Even one of the most driver's car Mazda3 is moving into torsion beam most likely for cost sake.

 

For rear height sensor, if car fitted with ACC or LED/Xenon headlight, it probably fit the need for DCC use. 

[flybynite]

8 hours ago, sopskysalat said:

I drive 1.0tsi Golf and having this idea of retrofitting from torsion beam to ML rear suspension. I reckon it can be 1:1 swap based on VW Self Study Program notes. Complete set of ML parts can be purchased from China at “cheaper” cost. Am I crazy for independent suspension or is it worth going for it? I reviewed DCC document and it seems to me DCC can only be retrofitted to cars with ML rear suspension and supplier from China says do too. The rear height lever sensor needs to attach to wishbone of rear suspension and torsion beam does not have it. What do you guys think?

 

Anything is possible  However to retrofit ML rear end and DCC is a major undertaking and not straightforward. It needs more skill and knowledge than found in the "VW Self Study Program notes".

 

A lot will affect it like the age of car and nav fit, do you have Discover Pro?

 

You are nearly always better getting the parts from a breaker car as you can see how it goes together and you know you have all the small parts. You may need to change more than you think, Exhaust? Brakes? 

 

Unless a car with ML/DCC cannot be bought for some reason then you will be far better off selling your car and buying one with the things you want. You may have to buy a 1.4 but would that be a problem?

 

[TonisT]

It is mk6. However work is quite similar to golf mk7 / octavia mk3 so you can see what is involved when switching from beam to multilink.

https://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?7877985-THE-IRS-SWAP-A-complete-guide-to-the-independent-rear-suspension-conversion-for-the-MK6-Jetta

[vRS19TD]

Sorry to revive this thread but i thought it best to ask here instead of starting a new thread:

 

Am i right in thinking that if i’ve got an SE Technology 2.0TDi with 150BHP, i’ll have independent rear suspension??

 

*Should add, just in case, i don’t have DCC fitted.

Edited 16 June, 2020 by vRS19TD

[ChoonDoode]

13 minutes ago, vRS19TD said:

Sorry to revive this thread but i thought it best to ask here instead of starting a new thread:

 

Am i right in thinking that if i’ve got an SE Technology 2.0TDi with 150BHP, i’ll have independent rear suspension??

 

*Should add, just in case, i don’t have DCC fitted.

 

IIRC 150hp and up is IRS and sub 150hp is a torsion beam

[Gerrycan]

With mk3 only the vRS models and those with awd had independant rear suspension.

Yours will be torsion beam