[lovec1990]

Hi,

I have a question for those who know how adaptive drive works or own a car with it:

i know ARS reduces bodyroll in sport mode, but my question is does it reduce it in comfort and comfort+?

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by lovec1990

Hi,

I have a question for those who know how adaptive drive works or own a car with it:

i know ARS reduces bodyroll in sport mode, but my question is does it reduce it in comfort and comfort+?

There are two base modes for ARS, one works in comfort and comfort+, the other in sport and sport+.

Both are adaptive, and yes when you corner in the comfort modes the bars still firm up and give flat cornering. The harder you work the car in the softer settings the more ARS function is felt. ARS clearly benefits ride comfort in all the settings, as it refines the straight line drive, virtually decoupling the roll bar function. ARS is also adaptive to allow neutral handling balance at slower speeds and moves towards under steer as you drive harder.

I rate Adaptive Drive as one of the best features in my F11.

HighlandPete

[lovec1990]

HighlandPete thank you for explanation

[Jon D]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

I rate Adaptive Drive as one of the best features in my F11.

Completely agree - I had it on my F10 and, in two years of owning the car, I don't think I ever took a drive without toggling the modes to suit road conditions or desired driving style. Considering the complexity and effectiveness of the system it's really good value for money.
I really miss not having it on my F12 (had no choice as it was a 1 year old AUC and £34k off list was too tempting to let the lack of AD stand in my way).
I'm beginning to seriously consider changing to a new F32 in September and AD will be a must-have option.

[ezmaass]

I've commented a number of times here that the DHP and AD were some of my favorite features of my 550. The anti-roll stabilization really works, and it works obviously (not subtle) IMO. It almost feels odd when you take a corner where you're expecting roll and don't get it... I'd liken it to walking down stairs and you think there's on more but you're already at the bottom... just boggles your senses for a bit when you don't get what you're expecting. It's fantastic.

The more I drive the car, the more I love these features. I was so tired of driving passive sport suspensions that would make me cringe on city streets... but at the same time, I couldn't imagine a BMW without one. Until DHP gave me both comfort and sport in the same car. Totally awesome.

[grimlock]

[ezmaass]

Originally Posted by grimlock

Yeah - this is a great example of showing how the system is calibrated and just how dramatic its movements can be to counter forces during cornering. While taking backroads around 40 - 50mph, with some sharp corners, I tend to feel it the most. During very high speed driving, the car is still going to roll (maybe just not as much as it would have otherwise), but in the 40 - 50mph range, my experience has been that the car will remain pretty much flat in some tight corners... pretty impressive. I expect all future BMWs will eventually have this and it won't be a $3500 option forever.

[remmib]

Too bad this is only an option on the larger engined F10s, 530 and up, and not on all the other models, 518 - 528.

[ezmaass]

Originally Posted by remmib

Too bad this is only an option on the larger engined F10s, 530 and up, and not on all the other models, 518 - 528.

I didn't know it wasn't available on the 528... that's odd. As I understand it, many European buyers prefer the smaller engines due to the taxes around the larger engines with higher emissions. Seems like the DHP and ARS would have more to do with compatibility of the chassis versus anything to do with the engine... so I'm wondering why they wouldn't just offer it across the line if they've already had to adapt the technology for the F10 in general. Unless it has something to do with the assembly line setup... are 528's produced on different assembly lines than 530, 535, 550, for instance?

[remmib]

Originally Posted by ezmaass

I didn't know it wasn't available on the 528... that's odd. As I understand it, many European buyers prefer the smaller engines due to the taxes around the larger engines with higher emissions. Seems like the DHP and ARS would have more to do with compatibility of the chassis versus anything to do with the engine... so I'm wondering why they wouldn't just offer it across the line if they've already had to adapt the technology for the F10 in general. Unless it has something to do with the assembly line setup... are 528's produced on different assembly lines than 530, 535, 550, for instance?

I can't imagine the assembly line being the issue.

[grimlock]

As far as new car prices are concerned it's the U.S. (+U.K. excluding running cost) and the rest of the world - being that the U.S. gets everything at the lowest possible price. I want to cry when I found out Mobil 0w40 costs $7/q it costs 2.5times that here and even more in europe I imagine.
It's only availible on 535i+ (not sure 530d?) to get you to get the higher models.

As far as ARS (active roll stabilization), a few contradictions remain:
1. active damper is offered on all models, yet ARS only with higher models
2. M5 only has active damper, no ARS
3. F30/2 only offers active damper, no ARS

->So what does this tell you about the desirability of ARS?
It's somewhat contradictory in absolute terms, however if you consider it in terms of 'sportiness' vs. comfort, ARS is good for comfort in reducing body roll in sweeping turns when soft springs are on the car (for comfort, which unfortunately have increased body roll)
It also brings into question the ability of ARS in more sporty situations, otherwise why would the M5 opt to do without it?

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by grimlock

As far as new car prices are concerned it's the U.S. (+U.K. excluding running cost) and the rest of the world - being that the U.S. gets everything at the lowest possible price. I want to cry when I found out Mobil 0w40 costs $7/q it costs 2.5times that here and even more in europe I imagine.
It's only availible on 535i+ (not sure 530d?) to get you to get the higher models.

As far as ARS (active roll stabilization), a few contradictions remain:
1. active damper is offered on all models, yet ARS only with higher models
2. M5 only has active damper, no ARS
3. F30/2 only offers active damper, no ARS

->So what does this tell you about the desirability of ARS?
It's somewhat contradictory in absolute terms, however if you consider it in terms of 'sportiness' vs. comfort, ARS is good for comfort in reducing body roll in sweeping turns when soft springs are on the car (for comfort, which unfortunately have increased body roll)
It also brings into question the ability of ARS in more sporty situations, otherwise why would the M5 opt to do without it?

I sense a lot of the issue in the UK is based on cost. Makes a big difference in percentage terms when you talk of the cost vs. value, on the more basic cars compared to the upper end models. We can be talking quite a percentage of the cost of a basic 520d. AD is £2,770 over here, easy to see why only VDC is offered.

The take up of VDC appears low, even with on our poor UK roads, still doesn't seen to reflect the feeling that we need better more comfort biased suspensions. Users still opt for big rimmed wheels (and no VDC) which sort of tells us suspension aimed at refinement is not an important priority.

It is interesting to note Alpina offer ARS on the B5.

The optionally available Dynamic Drive reduces body roll in corners, awarding the B5 Bi-Turbo even more agility.

Then we know Alpina aim at a more refined ride and drive than the M-car.

HighlandPete

[ezmaass]

Originally Posted by grimlock

As far as new car prices are concerned it's the U.S. (+U.K. excluding running cost) and the rest of the world - being that the U.S. gets everything at the lowest possible price. I want to cry when I found out Mobil 0w40 costs $7/q it costs 2.5times that here and even more in europe I imagine.
It's only availible on 535i+ (not sure 530d?) to get you to get the higher models.

As far as ARS (active roll stabilization), a few contradictions remain:
1. active damper is offered on all models, yet ARS only with higher models
2. M5 only has active damper, no ARS
3. F30/2 only offers active damper, no ARS

->So what does this tell you about the desirability of ARS?
It's somewhat contradictory in absolute terms, however if you consider it in terms of 'sportiness' vs. comfort, ARS is good for comfort in reducing body roll in sweeping turns when soft springs are on the car (for comfort, which unfortunately have increased body roll)
It also brings into question the ability of ARS in more sporty situations, otherwise why would the M5 opt to do without it?

These are valid questions. Here in the US, you get get both the dynamic dampers and ARS in a single package called the Dynamic Handling Package (DHP). If you select M Sport, however, the adding DHP will also delete the M Sport Suspension. For me, this wasn't ever a concern since the xDrive cars, even with M Sport, still didn't get the M Sport Suspension - so DHP on xDrive is the most sporty suspension option.

On non-xDrive cars, M Sport adds the M Sport Suspension (as of September 2013 builds), so adding DHP would eliminate that suspension. Now, the question is... why? And is it better or worse? This seems to be debated here quite frequently.

The fact that BMW puts dynamic dampers on the M5 is understandable - these are still luxury cars with 4 doors, so most people will likely find themselves in situations where comfort over performance is ideal. The fact that they don't put ARS is interesting, though, I agree. In theory, and from what I've read on active suspensions in general, ARS should be superior to passive sway bars in many respects. There's a company (BWI) that I saw online that shows their active (hydraulic) roll stabilization compared to a passive system with impressive results. I searched for a bit but had a hard time finding any scientific comparison between the two and at what point do they intersect.

My initial hypothesis was similar - that lack of ARS on the M5 meant that a very strong, passive sway system would be superior... after all, why would they not have ARS if that wasn't the case? But then again, I haven't found any information supporting that theory in the little I've searched... only a small amount of evidence to the contrary from BWI, suggesting their active system was superior to passive in lateral acceleration tests. I'm wondering what the operating parameters would be in terms of amount of torque that can be exerted to stabilize the car with ARS compared to the passive resistance of high-end sway bars. The answer must be out there somewhere.

All of this said, I can say that the system works well from my first hand testing. I'd love to see some testing data comparing BMW's ARS to their passive sway bars in some lateral acceleration tests similar to what BWI showed on their site - I think that would answer the question fully. It may end up being that ARS performance deteriorates at high lateral G forces compared to passive systems but perhaps performs better (and provides more comfort due to its dynamic nature) at lower G forces (more typical of spirited street driving vs. track). Who knows... hopefully someone has some good data to share!

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by ezmaass

...On non-xDrive cars, M Sport adds the M Sport Suspension (as of September 2013 builds), so adding DHP would eliminate that suspension. Now, the question is... why? And is it better or worse? This seems to be debated here quite frequently.

...

All of this said, I can say that the system works well from my first hand testing. I'd love to see some testing data comparing BMW's ARS to their passive sway bars in some lateral acceleration tests similar to what BWI showed on their site - I think that would answer the question fully. It may end up being that ARS performance deteriorates at high lateral G forces compared to passive systems but perhaps performs better (and provides more comfort due to its dynamic nature) at lower G forces (more typical of spirited street driving vs. track). Who knows... hopefully someone has some good data to share!

I agree that more test data would help users assess the suspensions.

On a more elementary level, I see that they are "different" and to be honest I want AD to be different than the M-sport 704 option. I don't want one fixed suspension setting, I also see ARS adding to the comfort level, even in the sport mode, as it appears to be very effective at body frequency (1Hz) enhancing comfort and body stability.

What would be interesting (from my perspective) is the performance comparisons in sport mode against the passive M-sport suspension. Also include the comfort comparisons. I'm minded both will have compromises to get a 'best balance' within each system's limitations.

HighlandPete

[grimlock]

Originally Posted by ezmaass

These are valid questions. Here in the US, you get get both the dynamic dampers and ARS in a single package called the Dynamic Handling Package (DHP). If you select M Sport, however, the adding DHP will also delete the M Sport Suspension. For me, this wasn't ever a concern since the xDrive cars, even with M Sport, still didn't get the M Sport Suspension - so DHP on xDrive is the most sporty suspension option.

On non-xDrive cars, M Sport adds the M Sport Suspension (as of September 2013 builds), so adding DHP would eliminate that suspension. Now, the question is... why? And is it better or worse? This seems to be debated here quite frequently.

The fact that BMW puts dynamic dampers on the M5 is understandable - these are still luxury cars with 4 doors, so most people will likely find themselves in situations where comfort over performance is ideal. The fact that they don't put ARS is interesting, though, I agree. In theory, and from what I've read on active suspensions in general, ARS should be superior to passive sway bars in many respects. There's a company (BWI) that I saw online that shows their active (hydraulic) roll stabilization compared to a passive system with impressive results. I searched for a bit but had a hard time finding any scientific comparison between the two and at what point do they intersect.

My initial hypothesis was similar - that lack of ARS on the M5 meant that a very strong, passive sway system would be superior... after all, why would they not have ARS if that wasn't the case? But then again, I haven't found any information supporting that theory in the little I've searched... only a small amount of evidence to the contrary from BWI, suggesting their active system was superior to passive in lateral acceleration tests. I'm wondering what the operating parameters would be in terms of amount of torque that can be exerted to stabilize the car with ARS compared to the passive resistance of high-end sway bars. The answer must be out there somewhere.

All of this said, I can say that the system works well from my first hand testing. I'd love to see some testing data comparing BMW's ARS to their passive sway bars in some lateral acceleration tests similar to what BWI showed on their site - I think that would answer the question fully. It may end up being that ARS performance deteriorates at high lateral G forces compared to passive systems but perhaps performs better (and provides more comfort due to its dynamic nature) at lower G forces (more typical of spirited street driving vs. track). Who knows... hopefully someone has some good data to share!

I think they went with upgraded passive ARBs for the M5 because:
i. much stiffer springs on M5 mean much reduced bodyroll anyway
ii. for the active ARBs to work with this stiffer setting, would require much greater force parameters on the activer ARBs, perhaps beyond what they were designed for in the 550i with stock springs
iii. cost too much to make a upgraded active ARB that would work well with the M5 stiffer suspension setting
iv. possibly active ARBs do not work as well for rapid shift in direction (as opposed to long sweeping corners) that the M5 would expect to see

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

I agree that more test data would help users assess the suspensions.

On a more elementary level, I see that they are "different" and to be honest I want AD to be different than the M-sport 704 option. I don't want one fixed suspension setting, I also see ARS adding to the comfort level, even in the sport mode, as it appears to be very effective at body frequency (1Hz) enhancing comfort and body stability.

What would be interesting (from my perspective) is the performance comparisons in sport mode against the passive M-sport suspension. Also include the comfort comparisons. I'm minded both will have compromises to get a 'best balance' within each system's limitations.

HighlandPete

Yes, I agree active ARBs are meant to be a 'different' option - the 'comfort' option that allows for soft springs by conteract their main negative which is massive body roll.
I see this on my N52 F10 with eibach (for 550i, so even stronger up front) springs - what was previously unacceptable body roll is now very, very sporty, and can finally challenge the relatively narrow 225/255 tires I have on in fast turns, where previously the soft springs meant the car was already at maximum tilt you could never break traction (on dry road).
But you can also feel the main negative of stiffer springs which is the increased road noise. I have found keeping the tires at slightly below recommended pressure (31/33) or less returns the comfort, however at the cost of mileage.
So i think active ARBs are primarily an innovation meant to work with soft springs, which are also a necessity with run flats and help to get better MPG.
Thus it also not as relevant to the M5 because the amount of body roll to be counteracted is much less, not to mention the cost of a much beefier active ARB module.

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by grimlock

So i think active ARBs are primarily an innovation meant to work with soft springs, which are also a necessity with run flats and help to get better MPG.
Thus it also not as relevant to the M5 because the amount of body roll to be counteracted is much less, not to mention the cost of a much beefier active ARB module.

I follow your thinking and after using my F11 for over 10k miles, sense BMW have got it pitched pretty well where it needs to be, for what Adaptive Drive is designed to achieve.

I also feel that those who opt for the M-sport passive suspension and/or M5 users are not exactly putting the subtleties of ride comfort as the key priority, may even prefer the predictability of a simple fixed bar system.

HighlandPete

[grimlock]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

I follow your thinking and after using my F11 for over 10k miles, sense BMW have got it pitched pretty well where it needs to be, for what Adaptive Drive is designed to achieve.

I also feel that those who opt for the M-sport passive suspension and/or M5 users are not exactly putting the subtleties of ride comfort as the key priority, may even prefer the predictability of a simple fixed bar system.

HighlandPete

Either way you go you won't be dissapointed, unless it's with bodyroll on SE springs w/o Adaptive drive.
Adaptive drive definitely does give the better ride, but if you want more sportiness and do not appreciate the comfort setting, then you would opt for M-suspension or aftermarket upgrades.

I consider my ride with only Eibach springs upgraded to be 'sport' but the dampers on permanent comfort setting - fine with me, the occasional floatiness is not excessive and just refil my tires a bit more frequently at their underfilled level

[mlai]

Originally Posted by grimlock

Either way you go you won't be dissapointed, unless it's with bodyroll on SE springs w/o Adaptive drive.
Adaptive drive definitely does give the better ride, but if you want more sportiness and do not appreciate the comfort setting, then you would opt for M-suspension or aftermarket upgrades.

I consider my ride with only Eibach springs upgraded to be 'sport' but the dampers on permanent comfort setting - fine with me, the occasional floatiness is not excessive and just refil my tires a bit more frequently at their underfilled level

Grimlock, I can tell you are still up very late..... Or should I say very early in the morning

Nice Eibach 550 springs

Back to the topic. Now that I had the 650i GC for a while, I think the AD is better executed on the F06 chasis than the F10. I actually make use of the Comfort+ more on a daily basis. And Sport mode is real taunt! I only use Sport if I am the only one in the F06.

[grimlock]

Originally Posted by mlai

Grimlock, I can tell you are still up very late..... Or should I say very early in the morning

Nice Eibach 550 springs

Back to the topic. Now that I had the 650i GC for a while, I think the AD is better executed on the F06 chasis than the F10. I actually make use of the Comfort+ more on a daily basis. And Sport mode is real taunt! I only use Sport if I am the only one in the F06.

Haha yes cannot tell if I am late or early

Well, you should be proud I have finally managed to put them on .. after 3 yrs? haha i did it myself one corner at a time when visiting my brother on the weekends
The ride is amazing, although for some reason when i have passengers I can feel it is a little bumpy.. but by myself it is like heaven

How is the body roll on the F06 compared to F10 with adaptive? Do you feel the need to change springs or not? Perfect enough already?

[mlai]

Originally Posted by grimlock

Haha yes cannot tell if I am late or early

Well, you should be proud I have finally managed to put them on .. after 3 yrs? haha i did it myself one corner at a time when visiting my brother on the weekends
The ride is amazing, although for some reason when i have passengers I can feel it is a little bumpy.. but by myself it is like heaven

How is the body roll on the F06 compared to F10 with adaptive? Do you feel the need to change springs or not? Perfect enough already?

Believe it or not, I have not done ANY PERFORMANCE MOD to the F06 (except changing to m-sport exhaust). The F06 is practically perfect in the handling department. Miles better than the F10. F06 is what the F10 should have been, handling-wise

I have not even changed brake pads! Brakes way more responsive than the F10, even though F06 using the same brakes!