What are your alignment specs?

[Silentnoise713]

Do share your alignment number if you have them.
-What were your goals in your setup?
-How long have you been running this and what trade-offs have you notice in term of stability, steering feel, and tire wear?
-What other suspension mods do you have?


Anyone know what the stock specs are? If so, do update it below.
http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/show...a5-Maintenance-and-Quick-Reference-Spec-Sheet

 

[MR6]

Did you get my PM? Still need that?

 

[sac02]

Here are Mazda Specs from the service manual.

 

[loosenut]

Here is my alignment after installing Megan Racing Lowering Springs, adjustable rear camber links and the Tri-Point Engineering rear sway bar. I have only put approx 1000 miles on it since. I am happy with this set-up. I set the rear measurements to attempt to minimize rear tire wear and retain rear handling characteristics.

 

[sac02]

I'm running 2.0mm toe out in the front and 0.5mm toe out in the rear. I do not have adjustable camber plates (front) or arms (rear). There is a bit of adjustment (maybe 0.3 or so?) in the stock front strut mounts, I have them pushed all the way inboard for -1.2deg left and -0.8 right. Not sure why the difference side-to-side, just variation in the vehicle I guess. The rear is -0.9deg both sides.

Turn-in yaw rate, and road holding are very good with these settings. I would definitely prefer about -2.0deg camber in the front, or even more for autocross. I'm only autocrossing the vehicle for fun at the moment, once I install the turbo, I actually think I will stop autocrossing this vehicle and go back to my toy/project car e30. At that point, I may ease off the alignment somewhat, something like 1.0mm toe out front, and 0 toe rear. Because the primary role of the vehicle is DD, I'm not interested in camber plates for the front to get more camber - I may slot the mounting holes one or two mm to get an extra half degree. Or not.

I set this alignment about 3k miles ago and have been keeping a very close eye on tire wear, but really I see nothing yet (inner edges are not starting to smooth, square, or feather for example). If I start to see accelerated tire wear, I will back off ( to the 1.0 / 0.0 FR/RR mentioned above)

The car is *slightly* more reactive to heavy crosswinds. Surprisingly there is no wandering at highway speeds. With the VSC on, I have no concerns about the aggressive alignment being a safety issue - the VSC steps in and arrests any yaw quickly. Driving with VSC off, making a panic stop, in wet conditions, with an untrained driver - *may* be unsafe theoretically with a bit of rear toe out. But I'm the only driver, I live in dry San Antonio, and I rarely turn off the VSC when DD'ing. So I honestly do not foresee any potential issue.

 

[sac02]

MR6,

What was the condition of the car when you got that cornerweight? How much gas? Did you already have the big brakes, or was this prior to the install? What wheels/tires? Anything else that would affect weight? (Spare removed, carseat(s) installed, crap in the trunk, etc.)

I'm a bit surprised to see the 57/43 split, I really thought it would be a bit better. But the 3446 weight is promising. With the 34lb savings of my suspension and wheels/tires (compared to stock 16"), and removal of the spare, I might be below 3400 curb weight, that would be pretty decent.

 

[MR6]

ms3 brakes, rsb and wheels were on for the corner weighing. I made sure she was empty. I have no clue where the gas was.

I expected the weight to match from left to right but as you can see, it's bias is to the left. is that normal? also, note the difference in caster. I would assume that should be within a tenth if not matching. I brought it up to them and they shrugged it off saying it was normal.

 

[sac02]

ms3 brakes, rsb and wheels were on for the corner weighing. I made sure she was empty. I have no clue where the gas was.

I expected the weight to match from left to right but as you can see, it's bias is to the left. is that normal? also, note the difference in caster. I would assume that should be within a tenth if not matching. I brought it up to them and they shrugged it off saying it was normal.

Remind me, what wheels? (I'm on mobile, so harder to search) Did you ever weigh your wheel/tire package compared to stock? Did you weight the ms3 brakes? I would assume that they added about 5lbs per corner?

Cross caster isn't as big a deal as cross camber. But their allowable spec of 1.5 degrees is laughably high. Less than 0.5deg cross camber and cross caster is typically OK. (analysis retentive and racing types will aim for zero) Many OEMs will actually spec some xcamber or x caster to compensate for road crown (customers who don't understand the concept of road crown will make warranty claims for vehicle pull when the actual cause is road crown. Fun Fact: Florida is always the worst in these claims, as they crown their roads to 4deg,the standard is 2deg nationwide). Camber pulls positive and caster pulls negative. I have 0.4deg xcamber and while I would like that to be lower, my personal preference is to optimize (maximize) negative camber, instead of optimizing xcamber. So I tend to agree with the shop, 0.3 xcaster isn't a big deal.

I assume you weren't in the vehicle when it was corner balanced (unless you and your 5 are insanely light). With that said, the slight left bias is a bit unusual. If anything, a right bias in an empty car is ideal so that with driver (how often do you drive without someone in the drivers seat?) the LH/RH balance is closer to even. With the current LH bias, putting in only a driver will obviously make the balance worse. Your data would be strong data to support a lightening (or relocation) of the heavy battery currently residing in the front left.

 

[Silentnoise713]

Thanks for the input all! So it seems the end goal for everyone is more towards zero toe for the sake of tire and DD.

I'm a bit surprised to see the 57/43 split, I really thought it would be a bit better. But the 3446 weight is promising. With the 34lb savings of my suspension and wheels/tires (compared to stock 16"), and removal of the spare, I might be below 3400 curb weight, that would be pretty decent.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/minivans-vans/112_0809_2008_mazda5_first_look/viewall.html
Transmission 5-speed manual; 5-speed automatic Curb weight (dist f/r) 3417-3475 (mfr)
Weight dist., f/r 56/44 manual, 57/43 automatic

His results matches what Motor Trend observed when they spec’d out a 2008 GT (MR6 is a Touring). Saving grace for MT owners is you get a lil’benefit from the tranny weight savings and spread one percentage point towards the rear. However, this prob does not apply to +’12 folks who also get a 6sp MT. FYI, the +’12 uses a solid steel rear hatch door vs the <’10 which uses some type of composite material so you will prob have more total weight but better rear bias. As with any revision, the new car gets more “refined” with “stuff” = weight. Makes me wonder how the Mz3 is distrusted…

I assume you weren't in the vehicle when it was corner balanced (unless you and your 5 are insanely light). With that said, the slight left bias is a bit unusual. If anything, a right bias in an empty car is ideal so that with driver (how often do you drive without someone in the drivers seat?) the LH/RH balance is closer to even. With the current LH bias, putting in only a driver will obviously make the balance worse. Your data would be strong data to support a lightening (or relocation) of the heavy battery currently residing in the front left.

Isn’t it good practice to corner weight with the driver or equivalent weight ballast in the seat unless you are looking to get a true dry weight of the car? If so, then this is ok. If not, the left bias with no driver is not good. Let us know if you can find a way/place to move the battery.

@ MR6 – are those numbers before you play with your CO setting or are these your final numbers after adjusting them?

 

[sac02]

Yes, corner balancing should be done with driver (or equivalent weight). That's why i questioned what looks to be a weight w/o driver.

A cross weight of 0.1% is either a miracle on a new setup, or that is the "after" numbers. (my guess)

Thanks for the link, I hadn't found the distributions for the 5 listed anywhere yet.

I don't have the data at hand, but I've seen the numbers for the ms3, it is heavily front biased (like 60/40 or worse). The turbo system (turbo, int & exhaust manifold, intercooler, etc.) and the heavy duty trans w/LSD add a lot of weight to the front. And there's just less body in the rear, plus the shorter WB. All adds up to not-that-great distribution.

 

[phunky.buddha]

That was from immediately after my coilover install 2 years ago. I'm now running about 0.5 degrees more negative camber all around probably because of spring settling, and have put my rear toe back to factory specs because the NTB near me isn't as willing to screw with the car anymore. Overall feel is pretty good for a FWD car with minimal understeer and the ability to slide the rear a hair when you really want to. Current alignment is what sac02 drove when he was up here late last year.

 

[phunky.buddha]

Yes, corner balancing should be done with driver (or equivalent weight). That's why i questioned what looks to be a weight w/o driver.

Seconded here... I always carry my weight in sand bags and other ballast when corner weighting or getting an alignment. I don't get looked at funny when doing this with the S2000, but the alignment shop kinda give me the eyebrow when doing this with the 5.

 

[Silentnoise713]

My final numbers. Goal is for a stable and forgiving DD'er.
Yellowspeed DSP, SPC arms, +5MM spacers on front wheels, FSB is detached + MS3 RSB.

 

[sac02]

Those numbers look pretty darn good.

More front camber if you want to go AX'ing or canyon carving regularly (for reference, I know that's not your goal).

Less front toe-in will really liven up the steering, and won't affect straight line stability until you breach zero toe and start getting into toe out. I've settled on 1.5mm toe out in the front, that gives awesome steering response and only the smallest hint of highway wandering in heavy winds / rough roads. I think zero front toe is totally doable for most people.

I see you are on the low end of spec for rear tie-in, again, I think that's good. I run zero rear toe, though some people may not be comfortable with that.

Have you tested with /without the FSB and decided you like without? Or are you just running without while you finalize your endlink situation?

 

[Silentnoise713]

Those numbers look pretty darn good.

More front camber if you want to go AX'ing or canyon carving regularly (for reference, I know that's not your goal).

Less front toe-in will really liven up the steering, and won't affect straight line stability until you breach zero toe and start getting into toe out. I've settled on 1.5mm toe out in the front, that gives awesome steering response and only the smallest hint of highway wandering in heavy winds / rough roads. I think zero front toe is totally doable for most people.

I see you are on the low end of spec for rear tie-in, again, I think that's good. I run zero rear toe, though some people may not be comfortable with that.

Have you tested with /without the FSB and decided you like without? Or are you just running without while you finalize your endlink situation?

Thanks. I used all of your feedbacks as baseline + some of the popular internet specs from my Miata days + made some adjustments based on what I “think” is more appropriate for my needs. I have to keep in mind my wife drives the car 90-95% of the time so stability is most important. My goal is to let the suspension parts do the work and take some of that off the tires. I actually don’t want “too” livery of a steering response.

I haven’t try with and without the FSB for an apples to apples to compare. My initial plans was a debate if I should keep both bars, which would need $$ to build the front links, or detach both front and rear bars all together after I’m on COs. I will ride it out this winter to see how I like it. My initial fear was the thicker MS3 bar, compounded with NO front bar, may led to too much rear rotation when letting off throttle during a turn. I haven’t done any HWY yet (will do this weekend) to test this out. So far, “I” like it! I think this “snap-steer” may occur if I go too aggressive with my alignment, which I don’t want for stability anyway. My plans, as of now, is to keep it as is. Plan B is to remove the RSB in additional to detaching the front. Plan C is to build the THK links and put both bars back on.

 

[Silentnoise713]

With that said, the slight left bias is a bit unusual. If anything, a right bias in an empty car is ideal so that with driver (how often do you drive without someone in the drivers seat?) the LH/RH balance is closer to even. With the current LH bias, putting in only a driver will obviously make the balance worse. Your data would be strong data to support a lightening (or relocation) of the heavy battery currently residing in the front left.

I can confirm that there is definitely a left bias with this car. It must be something with how they loaded it up. I set both the Fronts and the Rears equally the same using dial calipers and was surprised to see this as well. I didn't get the sense of this until I put the pics next to each other.

Note the car was not "empty" per say. It has some small cargo that adds very little weight but I am using a bigger/heavier battery. Future CO users might want to compensate for this L-R, just a little.