Mutli-link is the better system but if the car is never driven to (or near) it's potential it will not be missed too.
I'm sure that multi-link is better but I would argue that a well implemented bean axle has advantages that mean it can also be very good, in a different way.
I've owned two Nissan Primera cars. One was a P10 with independent rear suspension and the other was a P11 with a beam rear axle. They called it something clever but it was a glorified torsion-beam. The front suspension was identical on both cars, a very clever double-wishbone set-up designed to keep the wheels parallel to the ground virtually all the time.
Both cars were great to drive, but different. I preferred the P10 with the independent rear suspension, it felt more 'alive', but the P11 was more 'planted'. You could predict what the P10 was going to do but you could feel what the P11 was doing, so much so that you could slide the back end at will, pushing the car right to the limit. I haven't owned another car that gave that amount of feedback.
I'm also reminded of a conversation I had years ago with a friend who was a sales rep. He'd had a Peugeot estate and then the same car but a saloon. He thought the saloon was more comfortable but couldn't understand why the estate felt more stable when things got spirited. Then he realised the estate has a beam rear end while the saloon was independent.
I'm not saying that independent rear suspension is worse. What I am saying is that it's not as simple as saying that it's always better.
LINK
