MikeHTally
Member
- :
- 2008.5 Speed3, 2006 Chrysler 300C, 2003 Ram 1500
Fed it. $4.02 (wow)
What have you done to your MS3 today?
- Thread starter ZoomVT
- Start date
oaklandopen
Member
thats like low grade here
MikeHTally
Member
- :
- 2008.5 Speed3, 2006 Chrysler 300C, 2003 Ram 1500
That evil fraudulent concoction should be $15. That would more reflect its true market price.
Gotta love Costco.
Got it aligned at White Wheel in Cleveland.
Front:
Camber: -1.5 degrees.
Caster: 4.0 degrees (Left) / 3.3 degrees (Right)
Toe: 0
Rear:
Camber: -2.6 degrees (Left) / -2.1 degrees (Right)
Toe: -0.1 (Left) / 0.01 (Right)
I wanted the camber in the rear at -1.5 but don't have the adjustable camber arms to make it possible...yet.
Front:
Camber: -1.5 degrees.
Caster: 4.0 degrees (Left) / 3.3 degrees (Right)
Toe: 0
Rear:
Camber: -2.6 degrees (Left) / -2.1 degrees (Right)
Toe: -0.1 (Left) / 0.01 (Right)
I wanted the camber in the rear at -1.5 but don't have the adjustable camber arms to make it possible...yet.
First of all Will, does the car want steer itself now? Re: -0.1/+0.1? I would think it would pull slightly left *Ahem edit* RIGHT w/that set up?
Second, you may find you don't even need that extra 0.5*. I'm running -0.9*L & -1.1*R w/adjustable arms and don't even notice a difference in handling or stability. Plus, and for me this is a biggie, my tires are MUCH happier now.
I just rotated them this weekend for the third time (+/-15k miles on them now.) 8.5/32nds across the board running 38F/35R psi.
The three previous set of tires I've had on this car would be worn out in another 4-5k miles, or in the case of the Falkens, RIGHT NOW. These look like they're going to go the distance. YES!!
Last edited:
Rich, my car is pulling slightly to the left... I have the top of the wheel halfway between 12 and 1 o'clock to go straight on the highway at 80mph. At lower speeds, 35-55 it doesn't seem as bad.
My tires definitely aren't going to wear well with greater than 2 degrees camber in the rear, so until I get some camber arms I don't think I can really worry about that.
With 3's how much does the alignment change (definitely RH camber, maybe toe?) with a the weight of the driver? I thought about having the shop do a ballasted alignment but wasn't sure if the change was significant enough to make a difference.
Thanks for the advice! (2thumbs)
My tires definitely aren't going to wear well with greater than 2 degrees camber in the rear, so until I get some camber arms I don't think I can really worry about that.
With 3's how much does the alignment change (definitely RH camber, maybe toe?) with a the weight of the driver? I thought about having the shop do a ballasted alignment but wasn't sure if the change was significant enough to make a difference.
Thanks for the advice! (2thumbs)
Hmmm? Left huh?
After thinking about it with a clearer, more awake mind (the *Ahem edit*) I would have thought the rear would be pulling left and therefore pushing the front end to go right?? Oh well....
Think of it this way... You can spend $400-$700 on a new set of tires every 15k. Or you can spend <$200 for adjustable camber arms once.
As to your last question: I think it would highly depend upon the car (std Mz3 like mine, or MS3,) whether the springs/shocks are OE or aftermarket and/or coilovers, and which ones you choose if they are AM.
I'm running H&R's and Koni yellows (rebound set nearly to the minimum,) plus the RB 27mm rear bar, so my setup is a bit on the stiff side. But since the LS on mine is set at less negative than the RS is when static, my weight (155lbs) might make up some of the difference?
Oh, and I asked that the toe-in, particularly in the rear be set @ 0". As far as I know, that's where it is. All I know is the tires are not wearing out like crazy now, and I'm happy with it. If I were racing, auto-x or track days, etc, perhaps a more radical set up would be better. But as my primary DD, and except for a stiffer ride than I would like, I am happy overall.
After thinking about it with a clearer, more awake mind (the *Ahem edit*) I would have thought the rear would be pulling left and therefore pushing the front end to go right?? Oh well....
Think of it this way... You can spend $400-$700 on a new set of tires every 15k. Or you can spend <$200 for adjustable camber arms once.
As to your last question: I think it would highly depend upon the car (std Mz3 like mine, or MS3,) whether the springs/shocks are OE or aftermarket and/or coilovers, and which ones you choose if they are AM.
I'm running H&R's and Koni yellows (rebound set nearly to the minimum,) plus the RB 27mm rear bar, so my setup is a bit on the stiff side. But since the LS on mine is set at less negative than the RS is when static, my weight (155lbs) might make up some of the difference?
Oh, and I asked that the toe-in, particularly in the rear be set @ 0". As far as I know, that's where it is. All I know is the tires are not wearing out like crazy now, and I'm happy with it. If I were racing, auto-x or track days, etc, perhaps a more radical set up would be better. But as my primary DD, and except for a stiffer ride than I would like, I am happy overall.
Last edited:
I have Koni Yellows and H&R springs as well. My rebound is set somewhere in the middle for the fronts, and one turn off full soft in the rear.
I definitely agree with the camber arm vs tire logic! I've never had my Speed on the track or to an autocross (I have a Miata for that) so I'm not particularly looking for an awesome performance set up.
I definitely agree with the camber arm vs tire logic! I've never had my Speed on the track or to an autocross (I have a Miata for that) so I'm not particularly looking for an awesome performance set up.
Pulled my IM last night and did Injector seals, what A PITA! So far, have new seals, studs on crows feet, Pnp'd IM, VTCS delete, and I am just waiting for the PTP relief valve to show in the mail to button that side of the motor up. Then I will be working on the Exhaust manifold side and putting in a DNP manifold! Can't wait to get this all done!
Will, after 1-1/2 yrs of the rears set to 1-3/4, or just about past mid way, I pulled the rear suspension this w/e for some other work and adjusted them about the same as yours (+1 full turn from full off) to see if road/speed bumps would be more tolerable, and they are a bit. But a compression adjustment would make more of a difference.
I'm actually looking at either the non-adjustable STR-T shocks, or the FSD's/EiBach's for the next change-over. As much as I would like the look of the EiBach Sports, I'm low enough on the H&R's. As it is, it's a PITA to jack the car up, and I'm not into scraping my oil pan on speed bumps either. The Pro's would offer virtually no change in ride height just a more compliant ride.
I've also been experimenting with the fronts since the w/e. From full soft, to half way for the first part of the week, to full on now. I haven't made up my mind which works better. I've got one pretty severe off-camber bump then dip on my ride home from work. If I can get it to handle properly over that thing, I think I will have gotten it right. And again why I wouldn't want to go lower. Sometimes you just have to hit that monster at speed or risk getting run into from behind.
I'm actually looking at either the non-adjustable STR-T shocks, or the FSD's/EiBach's for the next change-over. As much as I would like the look of the EiBach Sports, I'm low enough on the H&R's. As it is, it's a PITA to jack the car up, and I'm not into scraping my oil pan on speed bumps either. The Pro's would offer virtually no change in ride height just a more compliant ride.
I've also been experimenting with the fronts since the w/e. From full soft, to half way for the first part of the week, to full on now. I haven't made up my mind which works better. I've got one pretty severe off-camber bump then dip on my ride home from work. If I can get it to handle properly over that thing, I think I will have gotten it right. And again why I wouldn't want to go lower. Sometimes you just have to hit that monster at speed or risk getting run into from behind.
Last edited:
oaklandopen
Member
About 370hp and near 400 torque. its a heavy b**** too
i suspect no chance from a stop and maybe a little closer loss from a roll with any normal ms3
i suspect no chance from a stop and maybe a little closer loss from a roll with any normal ms3
When we first tested the Challenger R/T, we recorded a 0-60 time of 5.1 seconds. For 2011 that number drops to 5 seconds flat. In the quarter mile the old car banged off a 13.6 second run at 104.9 mph compared to the new car's run of 13.5 seconds at 105.9 mph.
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/1011_2011_dodge_challenger_rt_test/viewall.html#ixzz1rC8tN0j9
Comparable...
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/1011_2011_dodge_challenger_rt_test/viewall.html#ixzz1rC8tN0j9
Comparable...
oaklandopen
Member
Yea yea yea....and i could beat a ferrari if i had the right mods. thats why i answered for a normal speed vs a normal challenger. and your weight for the challenger, does that include an 800lb driver?
all numbers on paper car for car suggest the rt challenger will best the ms3 in terms of 0-60 and 1/4 mile. i still think the challenger would win from a roll, say 40mph up to whatever
and its funny....identical engines between the challenger and charger, the challenger weighs more but always edges out the charger
all numbers on paper car for car suggest the rt challenger will best the ms3 in terms of 0-60 and 1/4 mile. i still think the challenger would win from a roll, say 40mph up to whatever
and its funny....identical engines between the challenger and charger, the challenger weighs more but always edges out the charger
