[k_swap_it]

Just got done rebuilding my Spyder with the following:

Fortune 500 coilovers
Superpro poly bushings
Koyo wheel bearings all around
New ball joints
New tie rod ends
New brakes

The issue I'm having is that I can only get around -1° camber in the front on both sides, even with the camber plates and hub adjustment slots maxed out. The rear is fine, with plenty of room to spare. Seems unlikely that both of my front lower control arms could be bent the same amount, but I guess anything is possible. Just wanted to do a sanity check and see if I'm missing something here before I order crash bolts or replace my lca's

 

[BYSpyder]

Buy crash bolts.

 

[OKSpyder]

Crash bolts. 3 different sets of coilovers on the race car and all required crash bolts to get the front to -3.0

 

[k_swap_it]

Crash bolts. 3 different sets of coilovers on the race car and all required crash bolts to get the front to -3.0

Where were you at before the crash bolts? That seems crazy but makes me feel a little better

 

[scotched]

Do FA coilovers not have elongated holes on the lower strut mount bracket? I'm failing to see how you could be maxed out at -1 even with just the camber plates.

 

[k_swap_it]

Do FA coilovers not have elongated holes on the lower strut mount bracket? I'm failing to see how you could be maxed out at -1 even with just the camber plates.

Yes they do. I don't understand why either, which is why I made this topic. I reset everything on the front today to make sure it's absolutely maxed out and am still only sitting around -1.5°

 

[MidwestManiac]

I had my car at an alignment shop a few weeks ago and said "get as much camber as you can out of the front and rear" They called and said they could only get -1* front and -1.5* on the rear. I'll be getting another set of crash bolts now for the rear just to max out the camber without having coilovers.

 

[k_swap_it]

I had my car at an alignment shop a few weeks ago and said "get as much camber as you can out of the front and rear" They called and said they could only get -1* front and -1.5* on the rear. I'll be getting another set of crash bolts now for the rear just to max out the camber without having coilovers.

Is that with the stock bolts?

 

[MidwestManiac]

Is that with the stock bolts?

Yeah, i threw the stock bolts in for the alignment

 

[k_swap_it]

Yeah, i threw the stock bolts in for the alignment

This is why I'm questioning my car. I'm not really getting any more negative camber out of it than what people seem to get on a bone stock setup.

 

[Funkycheeze]

I can get like -3 degrees max. on stock struts with the H&R camber bolts in the upper position only. Stock was close to zero. I run around -1.5 on the street and -3 at autox with the A7s.

 

[scotched]

Yes they do. I don't understand why either, which is why I made this topic. I reset everything on the front today to make sure it's absolutely maxed out and am still only sitting around -1.5°

My 10 year old BC BR would do more than -2, and my newer S3 coilovers will do a ridiculous amount more. I'm questioning how a newer coilover like FA would give you less. Maybe someone will the same coilovers will respond.

 

[k_swap_it]

My 10 year old BC BR would do more than -2, and my newer S3 coilovers will do a ridiculous amount more. I'm questioning how a newer coilover like FA would give you less. Maybe someone will the same coilovers will respond.

Weird thing is that I could probably get something like -6° in the back of I wanted to. Unless someone else with fortune coilovers chimes in, I have to assume there is something strange going on with my car.

 

[2zzmr2]

what does adding -3 camber do?

 

[k_swap_it]

what does adding -3 camber do?

Added grip under hard cornering

 

[Petrus]

Added grip under hard cornering

Caveat: At sufficient speed to generate the g-forces needed to deform the tyres.

This, the g-forces, is why more at the rear than at the front; the rear is heavier. Same speed x radius x less/more weight.

 

[k_swap_it]

Caveat: At sufficient speed to generate the g-forces needed to deform the tyres.

This, the g-forces, is why more at the rear than at the front; the rear is heavier. Same speed x radius x less/more weight.

I think it's more about the changing camber angle from suspension travel / body roll. And pretty much everyone runs more camber in the front than the rear. Less camber in the rear gives better straight line acceleration since it offers a better contact patch.

 

[Petrus]

Caveat: At sufficient speed to generate the g-forces needed to deform the tyres.

I think it's more about the changing camber angle from suspension travel / body roll. And pretty much everyone runs more camber in the front than the rear. Less camber in the rear gives better straight line acceleration since it offers a better contact patch.

Everyone car park racing perhaps.
For the rest: as you please.

 

[k_swap_it]

Everyone car park racing perhaps.
For the rest: as you please.

When you lower these cars you start gaining positive camber with any amount of body roll since it's a McPherson strut design. Didn't mean to make it sound like tire deflection is not a factor though.

 

[Petrus]

When you lower these cars you start gaining positive camber with any amount of body roll since it's a McPherson strut design.

Because that is a given and the car is set up for that it is irrelevant unless you lower the car a LOT and therefor mostly operating in the end range of wheel travel.

I remain that for the ZZW30 the set up for fast street, touge and track is more rear than front negative camber because the car is heavier at the rear.
My seriously lighter pfl is -2 and -2,5 with Sportivo springs and Whitelines on standard spec, tyre sizes. Use is hard & fast street/ ´touge´ on real world tarmac.
The lighter weight and not much lower springs makes the ride hight only just below OEM; 15-20 mm front, 10-15 rear.
Because I have a more rearward weight bias, it could do with more negative at the back but it makes for more oversteered at low speed.