The Moderately Low (Not Slammed) and Functional Thread
- Thread starter THE Phen
- Start date
whiteMPRO5
Member
- :
- MSP swapped P5
mud flaps on there Mbrace? looks pretty dope. i like how there not bulging out, they sit pretty flush with the fenders
thanks, might be lower pretty soon.
it is, my girl friend liked the way it looked.
yes sir. theyre not completely flush, but yeah i dont really like the bulge either, they still do their job.
Suspension question: How much negative camber is good for daily driving and occasion track use?
I asked the shop to setup my camber to -1.8f and -.8r but it my camber plates are still at TDC on the fronts of the BC coilovers. When I asked for the print out of the specs for my car they said the printer was down. I'm beginning to think all they did was adjust my toe. Can I adjust the camber myself without throwing off the alignment too much where I would chew up my new tires?
I asked the shop to setup my camber to -1.8f and -.8r but it my camber plates are still at TDC on the fronts of the BC coilovers. When I asked for the print out of the specs for my car they said the printer was down. I'm beginning to think all they did was adjust my toe. Can I adjust the camber myself without throwing off the alignment too much where I would chew up my new tires?
- :
- 2002 Honda S2000
^^ don't know the details for a P5, but i'm sure -1.8/-.8 are well within spec. you really have to go crazy with the camber to get uneven wear on the tires.
edit: forgot the "."
edit: forgot the "."
Last edited:
AJ got it right. It's the toe that kills tires. I had a wicked toe problem for a little bit on my P5 and it destroyed the tires in 3 months.
-1.8 degrees in the front is rather safe, and a good compromise for street and track. That's what the Civic was for a little while.
-1.8 degrees in the front is rather safe, and a good compromise for street and track. That's what the Civic was for a little while.
if you think about it, going in a straight line with 0 toe, you only have tire wear from one direction, and that is from rolling straight. if you have toe, you slightly add lateral wear to the equation. it might not look to be much toe on your car, but the toe will start wearing it from an angle, not just from head on.
if im not saying what im thinking, just read it here. ------------> http://hondacivicblog.com/archives/understanding-camber-toe
if im not saying what im thinking, just read it here. ------------> http://hondacivicblog.com/archives/understanding-camber-toe
Wagonbacker9
Member
- :
- 2004 'Hoe
while your statement is accurate, 0 toe is not preferable for good driving characteristics. you just need to keep it reasonable.
Yeah, I know all about toe in/out chewing up tires. I was talking about negative camber. Looking at my car head on the front does have a bit more negative camber than the rear so I'm hoping they did set it correctly. I've just seen a lot of coilovers with the camber plates completely bottomed out for full negative camber. And while looking at the cars in the Modified Mazgazone shootout, they all look pretty even and flush. But those BTCC cars have like -5 degrees of camber. Haha! Just on my drive home around a few safe corners it does feel a lot better after the alignment. I'm just curious as to why some race cars have so much -camber and some not as much.
disclaimer- I'm not talking about setting up my car as a race car since it's daily driven and rarely see track time. And I'm not talking about those silly FF trailer queen cars with stretched tires and tons of negative camber because of looks and trends.
disclaimer- I'm not talking about setting up my car as a race car since it's daily driven and rarely see track time. And I'm not talking about those silly FF trailer queen cars with stretched tires and tons of negative camber because of looks and trends.
Wagonbacker9
Member
- :
- 2004 'Hoe
if you've got a bubble level you can get a basic idea... an angle finder and a strait edge will give you a better number.
lets not compare ourselves to hellaflush cars in modified mag please... my personal opinion, they run -5 camber because it "looks cool".
A true discussion of why to run negative camber would best be led by someone like tigermack.
lets not compare ourselves to hellaflush cars in modified mag please... my personal opinion, they run -5 camber because it "looks cool".
A true discussion of why to run negative camber would best be led by someone like tigermack.
justanothermp5
Banned
- :
- Rust Bucket
Just fyi...in case you guys didnt know. Adjusting camber, effects toe. So if you want to add camber, you need to dial the toe out a little to compensate.
Most track cars run camber because it helps with grip when cornering. The idea is that whenever you go into a corner, the outside tire/wheels lean out, if you run negative camber, the wheel will lean out and you will be using the whole contact patch on the outside 2 tires. If you run no camber, it will lean out and you'll be riding on the outside edge of the tire, which isnt good for grip, or tire wear.
Most track cars run camber because it helps with grip when cornering. The idea is that whenever you go into a corner, the outside tire/wheels lean out, if you run negative camber, the wheel will lean out and you will be using the whole contact patch on the outside 2 tires. If you run no camber, it will lean out and you'll be riding on the outside edge of the tire, which isnt good for grip, or tire wear.
Wagonbacker, I was refering to the tuner challenge in Modified Mazgazine. All track cars and no hellaflush cars.
Simon, thanks man. I know the point of negative camber for the corners and all I was mostly asking what determines the amount of negative camber on the vehicle. For example, should an auto-cross car run more -camber since the turns are tighter and the speeds slower than say a track car with higher speeds and longer corners?
I think I need to be more specific with my questions, sorry for any confusion guys. Maybe I should just stop cluttering this thread with suspension geometry questions. If Tigermack or the other racers have any info, awesome. Otherwise I'll just shut up.
Simon, thanks man. I know the point of negative camber for the corners and all I was mostly asking what determines the amount of negative camber on the vehicle. For example, should an auto-cross car run more -camber since the turns are tighter and the speeds slower than say a track car with higher speeds and longer corners?
I think I need to be more specific with my questions, sorry for any confusion guys. Maybe I should just stop cluttering this thread with suspension geometry questions. If Tigermack or the other racers have any info, awesome. Otherwise I'll just shut up.
The negative camber a car requires for optimum handling is mostly determined by the roll stiffness of the suspension set-up, the suspension design, the tires being used and the how the car will be used. On my car, the camber is set based on the tire temperatures after some hot laps on the track. I am somewhere around -3.5 in front and probably about -1.5 to -2 in the rear. Not sure though. A strut car will always have more negative camber than a car with a good double a-arm or multi link suspension because those cars compensate for the lean of the car where a strut car translates the lean directly to the tire. Generally a race tire requires more camber than a street tire, and a high performance tire more than a standard all season, because the amount of loading the tire will take before it breaks away is higher and therefore the more heat is generated towards the outside of the tire. If you look at pictures of race cars around mid corner when the suspension is loaded up, they will usually have about -0.5 to -1 camber on the outside front wheel depending on the type of tire. Tires work best when they maintain some negative camber with the car carrying as much cornering load as possible because then the weight of the car is pressing the whole tire into the road surface. If the wheel goes straight up and down or even worse to positive camber, then you are only using a small portion of the tire. If you look at the same well set up race car sitting still, only the inside of the front tire will be touching because it is set up for the cornering performance of the tire.
For a street car though, -1.2 to -1.7 will give you good handling with no detrimental tire wear.
Not the greatest pictures, but if you look closely you can see that the outside wheels still have a small amount of camber and the tire rubber is flush to the ground and the inside tires have just a small inside area of the tire touching the ground because of the lean of the car.
For a street car though, -1.2 to -1.7 will give you good handling with no detrimental tire wear.
Not the greatest pictures, but if you look closely you can see that the outside wheels still have a small amount of camber and the tire rubber is flush to the ground and the inside tires have just a small inside area of the tire touching the ground because of the lean of the car.
Last edited:
Wagonbacker9
Member
- :
- 2004 'Hoe
Wagonbacker, I was refering to the tuner challenge in Modified Mazgazine. All track cars and no hellaflush cars.
I think I need to be more specific with my questions, sorry for any confusion guys. Maybe I should just stop cluttering this thread with suspension geometry questions. If Tigermack or the other racers have any info, awesome. Otherwise I'll just shut up.
I was mostly just being a smartass. Suspension geometry is infinitely complex and since most in here are about making the car work, I don't think anyone will complain about the discussion.
it all really depends on the set up youre running. i know you are runnning bc's but what sway bars do you have?
here are a couple of my autocrossing pictures that will show you the difference between suspension set ups and camber. in both pictures i am running the same camber . 2.5ish in the front and 2.0 in the rear.
in this first picture i am running akmost blown stock monroe struts with tein s tech springs.
in this picture i am running stagg struts and teins in the front and blues with rbs in the rear. you can see there is less roll and the wheels have therefore rolled less and remained flatter. it will even be flatter with the msp front sway.
and it all depends on the racing you want to do more of. there will be sharper corners where your momentum will quickly be shifted from side to side and therefore changing your patch contact. on a track the flow of the momentum shift will be smoother. so if you want to do a bit of both while staying drivable i would say 2.0 front and 1.8 rear is a safe bet.
here are a couple of my autocrossing pictures that will show you the difference between suspension set ups and camber. in both pictures i am running the same camber . 2.5ish in the front and 2.0 in the rear.
in this first picture i am running akmost blown stock monroe struts with tein s tech springs.
in this picture i am running stagg struts and teins in the front and blues with rbs in the rear. you can see there is less roll and the wheels have therefore rolled less and remained flatter. it will even be flatter with the msp front sway.
and it all depends on the racing you want to do more of. there will be sharper corners where your momentum will quickly be shifted from side to side and therefore changing your patch contact. on a track the flow of the momentum shift will be smoother. so if you want to do a bit of both while staying drivable i would say 2.0 front and 1.8 rear is a safe bet.
justanothermp5
Banned
- :
- Rust Bucket
Oh, sorry lol mis-interpreted your question.
if it helps any, Mini's run -1.6 in front and -1.8 in the rear, and they handle like there on rails. But the camber wear on those cars is ridiculous. The 7 series and 5 series BMW's run up to -2.0 in the rear, and they dont have any camber wear. So it really depends on the car and the tire your running.
for your setup i would agree with AJ, should be the best of both performance and the least camber wear
if it helps any, Mini's run -1.6 in front and -1.8 in the rear, and they handle like there on rails. But the camber wear on those cars is ridiculous. The 7 series and 5 series BMW's run up to -2.0 in the rear, and they dont have any camber wear. So it really depends on the car and the tire your running.
for your setup i would agree with AJ, should be the best of both performance and the least camber wear
