Well, although I am firm believer that a beam suspension should not be offered in this day and age, between the Cruze/Corolla/Elantra and I am sure there are some others, it has not made a difference in their sales as people still buy them. I believe if configured correctly, a Corolla will still be cheaper from at the MSRP and based on matching features. But you do get a slightly larger engine, and IRS, and a 6 speed auto. But not everyone cares to go fast and drive spirited.

 

Its not about driving in a spirited way, every aspect of driving is better. Ride is better, more refined, more premium feeling, quieter, sharper.

 

The reason the Corolla isn't any more state of the art and has cheap parts like drum brakes, rear beam suspension, aneimic 1.8 liter engine, 4 speed automatic, etc, etc, etc is that Toyota sells this same car in 3rd world countries like Mexico, Indonesia, India, etc. They have to keep costs down in order to compete in those markets as well.

 

Interesting enough, some cars in Europe have multilink vs torsion beam depending on engine. For instance - Golf and Auris. Pretty much in every single review reviewers said that they cant notice the difference between the two which I found interesting since before if vehicle doesnt have multilink, it was automatically deemed poor. As soon as Golf went back to torsion beam to save weight and cost in lower range, torsion beam went back to being fine once again.

 

I don't agree with that at all, I think it's as you implied a little bit of "if VW does it they must be fine" going on there.

 

Well, kind of - US gets its own Corolla version. 4AT is only for fleet model, rest have "7 speed" CVT. Other equipment is really advanced, there is no reason to think of Corolla as if it does no thave cool stuff, it does... it is really well equipped now if you pay for it and it is a stark difference from previous Corollas where it was always barebones.

 

The current gen was pretty meh when it was introduced the refresh doesn't do much. We won't see significant upgrades until it is built on the new platform where the cost savings can translate to better features and powertrains.

 

Among compact sedans, it's hard to get quieter or more refined than a Verano, even with a beam-axle...on many road surfaces, it is the closest thing to a tomb that you'll get in that class, though of course not to LS levels. And the handling, by traditional Buick standards, is quite responsive, though not quite on a level with the sport-sedan Regal GS. Beam axles also have the advantage of (usually) not having to do 4-wheel alignments unless the rear suspension is damaged, saving a little on service.

However, I do understand the advantages of IRS during cornering on bumpy roads, where it is much superior to a beam.

 

Good lord, enough about the Verano. This discussion has nothing to do with the Verano, Buick, or whatever. The Verano doesn't even compete with the Corolla, its 25% more expensive.

No advantages to a beam axle for a passenger car. Thats why no premium vehicles have them.

 

I only used it as an example of a quiet beam axle. (I also agree the two vehicles don't directly compete). But OK, back to topic.

Well, there ARE advantages, but not necessarily in the ride/handling department. I outlined some, like 2-wheel instead of 4-wheel alignments. That is something that perhaps we will just continue to disagree on...but I respect your view. Also, many of the premium vehicles you speak of tend to be driven at higher speeds.

 

The torsion beam axle has a number of advantages, and has been discussed before.

1. It is a very simple (yet elegant) design, with fewer parts than an independent rear suspension, taking less time to produce, making it less expensive to produce. That makes it very suitable for inexpensive cars, especially inexpensive cars for sale in the USA (which is known to be a very price-sensitive market for compact-size and smaller cars). Small cars for sale in the USA that are "loaded" with features, including an independent rear suspension, have very, very likely cut costs elsewhere in the design or build.
2. It is a very compact design, which, again, makes it suitable for smaller cars. The VW Rabbit / Golf had always had a torsion beam axle, even the hot-hatch GTI model. It was not until Ford proved -- on the original Ford Focus -- that an independent rear suspension could be designed to be very compact (taking up very little vertical space), did VW go with a multi-link IRS (that some people believe was designed by engineers VW hired away from Ford).
3. It is not as good as a multi-link or double-wishbone (independent) rear suspension at locating the wheels laterally (preventing side-to-side movement) but this can be largely corrected with a simple Watt's linkage, which is what the Buick Verano offers.

 

Sulu, you make some good points. I seriously doubt a Mazda 3 will last as long a Toyota Corolla and provide Toyota durability. ,So I could see costs being cut in other places. Also, the Mazda 3 feature for feature will cost more than a Corolla, so I expect the car to perform somewhat better.

 

Not everyone buying in specific class wants a car that is as quiet as a tomb. What works for one buyer might be different than for another buyer.

 

If there are all of these benefits to torsion beam suspensions why don't premium cars have them? Why only economy cars and lower trim levels of cars? I don't really have an issue with the Corolla having a torsion beam suspension because it's not marketed as a premium car, my point was the edgy styling is selling an experience the car doesn't deliver, the lack of an independent rear is just an example of that.

As for the Mazda, Mazdas are plenty reliable. My cousin has an 09 Mazda 3 with 170,000 miles, he has had nothing but routine maintenance done to it. Still has the original rear brakes.

 

There are still a bunch of 90's Miatas out there with over 200k miles on them, original engine and transmission, still tearing it up on the auto-x and track. They get driven hard and have proven extremely durable and reliable.