FSU Decision Matrix

Larger and less stable upright is required which will be challenging to machine. Control arms are relatively simple to make, but to facilitate steering, they must be cut from larger squares of aluminum, leading to leftover material.

New design concepts always lead to more risk in terms of design reliability. Additionally, the long control arms add significant complexity to both the math and simulations required to ensure safety

Much more complicated to design and we would not be able to rely on the double wishbone design research and knowledge of older team members.

There is some talk about the leading arm being more effective due to having longer arms, but it is still not fully confirmed.

Leading arm design would produce some savings in the y-axis, allowing the car to be thinner

Would allow the team to become more experienced in leading arm designs for future vehicle iterations.

New suspension direction would leave additional space in the front of the car that could be used by other subteams.

The leading arm is meant to provide weight improvements, but it is still unlikely that we can access this reduced weight on this design iteration.

Both have pros and cons associated with their assembly.

Inner wheel turns interfere with the leading arm, limiting the car’s steering angle unless the spindle is extended. Also bump steer won't be good

Double wishbone appears to be better