Mazda CX-5 Touring AWD Alignment Specs

[CX-SV]

Again thanks Robertmazda, very much appreciated.

And I agree the specs that Mazda has carefully designed-in for CX-5 are for good handling and stable high speed tracking plus long tire life (I have 11K miles of experience w/ vehicle) even if specs are not pretty compared to a car used on race track.

 

[CX-SV]

Still not answering the noobs question are these mazda specs or not?

Short answer: Yes ( see post #20)

 

[skeptic]

thank u all very much

 

[apexanimal]

alignments tend based on getting the most tire life possible, heavily bent towards understeer, and have a lot of scrubbing factored in for vast majority of people... it's geared towards "ok" handling...

if you want better handling you will need to change the camber and toe settings - period.

skeptic - those scanned specs will be fine... there's nothing wrong with them, but i'm well over factory specs for myself personally... and after having extensively done autox, road course, and my own alignments, i'm comfortable saying that there are much better numbers for handling...

 

[xtrailman]

So, you would rather use specs that some small garage came up with as being "improved" rather than the factory supplied and tested specs even though there is zero evidence that Mazda somehow came up with sub standard specs?

Hey, it's your money, re-distribute it to whomever convinces you that you need to pay to get "extra good" alignment specifications, lol!

That's not what i said, so stop trying to be clever.

Lots of cars are modified by specialist firms, and sometimes with the blessing of the manufacture, the fact that the mods cost extra money, says to me that the changes from standard spec are worth while.

You don't seriously think a touring car for example has standard spec?

 

[CX-SV]

OP asked about Mazda alignment specs, not track specs. It comes as no surprise that Mazda selected specs for the Mazda CX-5 (being a family-oriented compact crossover/SUV) that are not suitable for racing. Mazda did not select optimal track alignment specs for ultimate handling, they did not want to hear complaints of rapid tire wear, excessive wander at freeway speed, twitchy behavior, etc.

For those that plan to track the CX-5, different alignment specs and tires would be appropriate, or a different Mazda would be ideal (like a Miata).

 

[ColtX-5]

"legit" as in the oem specs? it appears so...

or

"legit" as in good specs? not really...



nearly all oem alignments are blah, meh, and more... the front would benefit from a touch of toe out, the front needs more camber, the rear toe in is a bit much, and the rear camber isn't enough...

Now, that depends on the camber gain built into the suspension.

With 6+ degrees on the front, it will automatically have pretty good camber gain compared to the typical car in the U.S. Mine has 55 series tires on it, so the sidewalls don't flex as much the more common tires on SUVs, meaning they need less camber when cornering. I've tried toe-out on a street car; it's ugly, twitchy, you don't want it on the street. The 3/32nds toe-in is not much, especially considering lots of front drive cars toe-out under acceleration (or used to). If the CX-5 also toes out, it will end up with little toe-in under power. I do tend to agree the rear toe-in is higher than I might like, IF, the rear suspension had no other oddities. However, I also know my Miata had bumpsteer in the rear and if this CX-5 does also, 3/32nds rear toe-in may mitigate its effects some. So, on the first alignment, I'd go straight-up factory specs and maybe try 1/16" on the second try.

One handed stability at 80 MPH is primary in a CX-5, then, crisp, measured turn-in. F-16 response is not wanted.

 

[pinnieleakh]

Thanks a lot !!!