Nliiitend1
Member
i would think it depends on the lateral loading, for how much negative camber is effective, in the regard to understeer to oversteer. i know that more neg makes the car harder to drive straight, from a little exp. regardless of toe set up. isnt the focus suspension similar to the Mazda3 design in the rear at least?
The Focus suspension is almost exactly like the MS3's.
The rear of these cars gains less positive camber (i.e., it loses less negative camber -in fact, the camber curve for the rear is probably such that it doesn't gain ANY camber under compression- ) than the front does under compression. This fact, coupled with the general rule of running less rear camber than front camber (which was bore out of the principle of the needing the tires that do the actual turning to have more grip than the tires that are sort of "along for the ride") means that you probably want to run less rear negative camber than front negative camber if you want to have less understeer-prone car.
Lateral loading is definitely part of the equation. As a general rule though (at least in my experience), on a car with a MacPherson strut suspension you want to maximize front negative camber (I use the term "maximize" because there's only so much negative camber available on a conventional MacPherson strut setup due to the nature of the design) and then go from there (if you want maximum turning grip).
Last edited: