strad, I just read back through. I was talking to the design team for the Cobra IRS as it was being designed simultaneously with our first Falcon IRS. At the time I was working on NVH and driveline so I was not much involved with the ride and handling side, but inevitably i did hear what they were doing. This is what we were designing at he same time as them, hopefully apart from the subframe the similarities are obvious
http://i1257.photobucket.com/albums/ii5 ... Ute135.jpg
In particular FNA are great fans of using wishbones with inboard mounts displaced in both Y and Z from their natural positions. They also did that to the Lincoln LS IRS which they designed just before the cobra. I am not a fan of weird wishbone angles, but then I think double wishbone back ends are not a great move anyway, if you've got serious power.
Since then we designed another one, and it looks nothing like the Cobra,
http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor. ... 940029A285
The somewhat odd subframe architecture of both of these is because they had to fit in the exact same space as our excellent beam axle.
Surely the reason that a good track car is not a civilised road car is that fundamentally a race car is 70% critically damped, whereas a road car is 30% (says Milliken, from memory).
A change of 10% in the damping force is subjectively significant, so a factor of more than two is going to be a huge step in the wrong direction.