Do I need to have my wheels re-aligning? Had an OSR wheel bearing replaced last week whilst sailing through my MOT s:) :) s:) so thought I'd check the geometry as I am off to Bedford on Monday for a trackday. Anyway these were the readings (F1 Tyre Centre) which are just inside, bar the rear right the safe green zones. They all look a bit off, but I'm no specialist and don't know if these readings are pretty standard (and made to look scary so that as a punter, I'd want to have them fixed) or they are going to cause undue wear on my AD08's and be expensive if I don't get the adjustments done. Thanks
(http://i.imgur.com/hohvplB.jpg) (http://imgur.com/hohvplB)
(http://i.imgur.com/jvyVcEM.jpg) (http://imgur.com/jvyVcEM)
Is it just me, I cannot see the images?
Nope, I cannot see them either. s:-( :-( s:-(
can't see images, as is common with google drive images.
Try uploading to imgur.com and then copy the image urls into img tags.
Sorry everyone.....hopefully fixed now!
Fixed now.
Personally I'd want it a bit more even left to right. There's nothing wrong with the amount of camber you are running, -1.5 deg is fine, -2 towards aggressive. I'd also want that rear toe sorting a bit, reducing toe on the right rear and sorting out the thrust angle.
Just going to be blunt here... That's bad.
Why is the left side so cambered vs the right?
-2 is aggressive, anything over that I wouldnt run on the road.
But seriously, get it aligned because your tyre wear will be uneven.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
Thanks guys.......
So for a track car what settings should I ask them to put it to?
Going to Bedford Monday and do Brands Hatch Indy 2 or 3 times a year....so should it be set up for them, or just make it all as neutral as possible?
HFB
settings used by PhilMC (http://mr2roc.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=88&t=61248&start=30&sid=5a50057c472d8d5bf548c6b240424cc7) half way down this page are good, you could go for -1.5° rear camber as a slightly less aggressive setup though. Definitely get it done, will make a world of difference!
I'd start with this then for future track days you can refine it as you choose to get the balance how you like, nothing to say dead neutral is best depending on driving style and confidence
This is what Wheels in Motion set mine to when asked for 'Fast Road'' (right hand column, it was a mess when I handed it over as everything was new and just bolted on).
(http://i.imgur.com/U8LRJ5y.jpg)
So
Rear: ~1.5 Deg neg camber, 10 minutes of toe in.
Front: ~1.2 Deg Neg Camber, 5 Minutes of Toe in.
I can't vouch for this yet, it feels fine on the road but I've put very few miles on it. It looks broadly similar to what I ran on the Nurburgring last year which was a good, forgiving set up. Talking to the mechanic, he was advising keeping toe pretty stock, and putting a bit more camber on it for 'fast road'' style settings.
Exactly what they told me at AK Automotive. Hence I'm running stock toe, -2 on the rear and -1.2 front.
I really like it.
Wasn't sure at first as it's quite a departure from the stock. It felt more nervous on the motorway and hit tramlines harder. But I don't even notice anymore at all. Don't know why.
It's all worth it on the b-roads,and track I would imagine
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
I had my RX8 done and the difference was night and day. Only had some tiny adjustments done but it certainly was noticeable
OK....so just did a trip to Kwik Fit to have a second check and to do a quick adjustment.
Here was the before
(http://i.imgur.com/xFKszO4.jpg) (http://imgur.com/xFKszO4)
and the after
(http://i.imgur.com/KmZnwwX.jpg) (http://imgur.com/KmZnwwX)
They said that there was no way to adjust the cambers on this car, which confused me. I know the rear isn't adjustable (unless you fit camber adjusters) but I thought the front were adjustable (especially as I thought having Meister coilovers, made them even more-so).
Anyway, at least thrust angle is straight.
Not sure what I can do to even up the rear camber though?
HFB
Quote from: "HFB"OK....so just did a trip to Kwik Fit to have a second check and to do a quick adjustment.
Here was the before
(http://i.imgur.com/xFKszO4.jpg) (http://imgur.com/xFKszO4)
and the after
(http://i.imgur.com/KmZnwwX.jpg) (http://imgur.com/KmZnwwX)
They said that there was no way to adjust the cambers on this car, which confused me. I know the rear isn't adjustable (unless you fit camber adjusters) but I thought the front were adjustable (especially as I thought having Meister coilovers, made them even more-so).
Anyway, at least thrust angle is straight.
Not sure what I can do to even up the rear camber though?
HFB
Kwik fits vary.
I know the one that my car went to did an ok job because it was checked 6 months later at DT.
Meister R fronts are adjustable for camber surely. What else are the adjustable top mounts for?
Quote from: "JoeCool"This is what Wheels in Motion set mine to when asked for 'Fast Road'' (right hand column, it was a mess when I handed it over as everything was new and just bolted on).
Rear: ~1.5 Deg neg camber, 10 minutes of toe in.
Front: ~1.2 Deg Neg Camber, 5 Minutes of Toe in.
I can't vouch for this yet, it feels fine on the road but I've put very few miles on it. It looks broadly similar to what I ran on the Nurburgring last year which was a good, forgiving set up. Talking to the mechanic, he was advising keeping toe pretty stock, and putting a bit more camber on it for 'fast road'' style settings.
Very similar to what Ardent got when he went to WIM and i think we all know he is very happy.
Meister R's have a slotted top bolt hole and camber adjustable top plates. You can go from about +2 to - insane camber on the front. So kwik fit had you on that, they could have sorted front camber out, but it's effort so that's why they didn't bother.
Most important thing is how does it drive now? The toe alone should have made a difference.
Also, you can just say you've got is set up for clockwise circuits and/or to compensate for drivers weight ;p
The rears you need a cammed camber bolt, they cost about £ 20 a pair and I believe Toyota do oem ones. Some go in the top hole, some go in the bottom but never both, you need to keep one of the big crash bolts in there for safety's sake.
HFB
Part number 90105-14147
I paid about £3.50 each from Mr T and it gave wheels in motion all the adjustment he needed. Does not look a lot on the bolt but the 1mm shallower shank makes all the difference.
If you look at the top table in the pic you are looking for the type C
I may be doing them a dis service but for something like this I would not trust Kwik-fit.
(http://jp-carparts.com/images/parts/211130/211130_4802_0001.png)
So, you had your before setup measured twice, first at F1 tyre centre and then at KwikFit. These should both presumably have given the same results, let's compare them (the first measurement I quote for each is from the F1 centre):
Left front camber: -2.5 (F1) and -2.26 (KwikFit) Right front camber: -1.5 and -2.16!!
Left front toe: 0.25 and 0.2 Right front toe: 0.4 and -0.16!!
Left rear camber: -2.2 and -2.3 Right rear camber: -1.6 and -1.8
Left rear toe: 0.3 and -0.016!! Right rear toe: 0.85 and 0.55!!
Some pretty serious discrepancies there marked with!! Three of the four toe measurements are simply miles apart...
Quote from: "lamcote"So, you had your before setup measured twice, first at F1 tyre centre and then at KwikFit. These should both presumably have given the same results, let's compare them (the first measurement for each is the F1 centre):
Left front camber: - 2.5 (F1) and - 2.26 (KwikFit) Right front camber: - 1.5 and - 2.16!!
Left front toe: 0.25 and 0.2 Right front toe: 0.4 and - 0.16!!
Left rear camber: - 2.2 and - 2.3 Right rear camber: - 1.6 and - 1.8
Left rear toe: 0.3 and - 0.016!! Right rear toe: 0.85 and 0.55!!
Some pretty serious discrepancies there marked with!! Three of the four toe measurements are simply miles apart...
Someone is still sober!
Well done that man.
Either these guys dont know how to use their euipment or the suspension isnt secure.
I know its more money but i think you need to go somewhere that really knows their stuff.
Abbey Motorsport should know their stuff. You are Gatwick arent you? They are Oxted not far from J6 M25.
EDIT.
Get your money back from kwikfit. They lied to you.
I do numbers better when drunk!
Quote from: "lamcote"I do numbers better when drunk!
Cool.
I will get you a few large ones and you can do my tax return for me. s;) ;) s;)
I don't think I can handle numbers that big....
Quote from: "lamcote"I don't think I can handle numbers that big....
I wish.
Alternatively... Suspension is dynamic. Your wheels describe a complex path as the shocks compress, under load, etc. As they adjust the suspension you should see them give it a good shake, rock the car back and forth, bounce it, all to settle the suspension into some approximation of a static position. Unload it from the machine, load it back on, re set up the wheel reflector thingies... You'll get different results. Hence the margin of error on all the target data.
That kind of undermines the whole process doesn't it? How does anyone define the correct static position? Surely there shouldn't be the kind of discrepancy noted here if the car is in remotely the same position?
Edit. Looking at the left rear specifically as an example, the camber measurements are quite close, this shows the suspension must be more or less in the same position, yet the toe angle shows enormous variance, that must be either user error or loose wheels! If that degree of toe change was acceptable within small suspension movements the car would be undriveable.
How do we know that for sure? Because the suspension will be designed to generate more camber change than toe change over its normal range of travel. The measurements suggest the exact opposite to this so something is wrong.
To put this into context, the toe variance at the left rear is nearly 0.4 degrees. Porsche's four wheel steering system only steers the rear wheels by a maximum of 2.8 degrees at full lock.
4 minutes of a degree isn't 0.4 degrees.... The kwik fit machine is giving it in decimal, the other machine is giving it in degrees and minutes.
Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't trust kwik fits numbers as fast as I could throw a hunter hawkeye, bit neither would I expect precisely the same numbers twice in a row.
KwikFit is degrees and minutes, F1 is decimals. I have converted KwikFit to decimals for my comparison. I am quoting the variance between 0.3 (toe in at F1) and -0.0166 (ie 1 minute toe out, at KwikFit) which is nearly 0.4 variance as I said, that's actually 19 minutes DIFFERENCE on a toe angle that Wheels in Motion aim to SET at 10 minutes +/- 1 minute!
I agree you won't get the same results each time but that degree of variance is just way beyond acceptable limits and certainly can't be explained by normal suspension variation at or around static ride height.
Thanks for all of the input guys....will look at getting some proper readings done soon.
Is that all I'll need Ardent to have adjustable rear camber?
HFB
Bit of a depends answer I'm afraid.
Stock bolts - no adjustment
These with the shallower shank give you adjustment
Do they give you enough for "your" needs, I don't know.
I sincerly believe they would allow you bring the reading s more central if that is your aim.
Your approx 20 miles closer to wheels n motion than I am, I would bite the bullet and take it to these guys.
As mentioned above not the cheapest but arguably one of, if not, the best.
My alignment there, which was all directions and on all wheels and took 90 minutes, was £114 Inc vat. No, not cheap, but good value for money IMO. Car went in undriveable and came out fun as all hell.
Quote from: "JoeCool"Car went in undriveable and came out fun as all hell.
Says it all
Quick question guys - is it worthwhile me NOT fitting my rear camber bolts, driving it down to wheels in motion and then having them fit them as part of the alignment process?
I'm just wondering if there is any reason why this would be a bad idea, financially or otherwise...
That's the preferred way. Shouldn't be a problem for them
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
That's what I would do personally, subject to calling them first to get an idea of cost.
+1 to both aboves
Just spoke with Joe on the phone.. the full alignment is £130 plus tax, and they'll charge 30min labour £30 odd to fit the camber bolts,... so basically do I want to save my self the £30 and try and get the camber bolts on properly myself... I think I might do with Patricks directions below:
QuoteBolts go on the bottom of the two massive bolts at the bottom of the strut.
"Bolt goes in on the right and out the left with the ring with the lip on the right side. Lip pointing outwards. They're a pain to adjust. All the best :-) :-) :-) Drive carefully
to your alignment place as the camber will likely be wrong."
Seems expensive for putting a bolt in? The time must be in the adjustment which ought to be included in the alignment for £130?
If you fit it just try to get the camber somewhere close to where it is now, although the impact of camber change on toe settings is less on the rear wheels than the front so there should be less to worry about.
Yeah...I was a bit surprised by the cost..Will endeavour to get it decent my self first.
I guess they factor in how much of a sod these can be to remove
Quote from: "Essex2Visuvesi"I guess they factor in how much of a sod these can be to remove
Do you reckon I might be better off not fitting these financially as Patrick has described the nuts as "chocolate" (superpro ones)... I'd hate to get to the point where I need to buy new ones cost I'd messed up the old ones!
Bear in mind J that I totally messed up by for some inexplicable reason putting copper slip on the bolt.
That totally knacks the torque. I over torqued it and ruined the nut.
The other side was done at the alignment place (at no extra cost...) and it went fine.
So, don't worry. Get it on yourself.
At worst you'll be running some excess camber. You'll be able to get to the place fine
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
HFB
in light of simons post above. Would seem more resesrch is required.
Hi Guys
Thanks for all of the very helpful input.
Was at Bedford yesterday and the car handled like a dream (except for one moment when I ran out of talent and spun it on the long right hander on the inner section) and affirmed how much fun this car is on track.
There were a couple of guys there who do driver training and I got into a discussion with one of them about mods for the car and handling and he suggested that adjustable rear arms would be way more convenient and give more adjustability than camber bolts.
Anyone know what it is exactly I am looking for (links would be very helpful) and if they are easier to fit/replace than camber bolts?
I'm pretty sure that having Meister coilovers gives me the camber adjustability on the front already....is that correct?
After a coaching session with Brad there, I went from 3 min 30's down to 3.13 best lap of the day..........not BTCC standards, but made it great fun for me.
Will try and post up a Youtube clip here when uploaded of my last session with th e roof down and a lovely dry day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNljQXApmlU&feature=youtu.be
Will heed your advice and once I've sorted out (camber bolts or adjustable arms) adjustability will call up W.I.M/Abbey Motors and get a proper geo set up done.
Will me swapping wheels from TD set to road set mess with the geometry (they are both PFL 15" sets of wheels)?
Cheers all
HFB
Bear in mind that adjusting camber by lower arms alone can lead to asymmetric track.
Quote from: "ChrisGB"Bear in mind that adjusting camber by lower arms alone can lead to asymmetric track.
AAAARRGGGHHHHHH!!! s:evil: :evil: s:evil:
So what would people here recommend to enable me to have full, easy adjustment for front and rear camber and Meister coilovers please?
HFB
I think the camber adjustments at the top of the strut and or the adjustable arms are less appropriate than the strut bolt option because they change the angle of the whole strut itself. The struts are already at quite a significant angle (c.15 degrees) so adding negative camber by these methods further increases this angle which affects steering geometry/feel at the front and reduces the effective spring rates slightly.
Using crash bolts / camber bolts avoids these issues.
Right. Adjustable arms, other than the toe arms, IMO, aren't worth it. Which is why I didn't fit them. In fact I don't think I've ever seen adjustable traction/track arms (the front and lower arms of the three) for a roadster. You're just far more likely to ruin your geometry than fix it. Those are the two arms that predominantly dictate the actual position of the hub carrier on the car - fore and aft and in terms of track width.
The stock car actually has good toe arm (the rearmost arm with the ball joint) adjustability. It can move the cammed bolt a good cm or so either way for adjustment. I did get adjustable toe arms, but mainly because they were cheaper! (and a bit bling). I still got the minor adjustment done using the cammed bolts, you just set them to length and fix them there.
Camber adjustment is what the stock car doesn't have, and annoyingly what even coilovers don't gain you. I don't know why rear coilovers don't have slotted top bolt holes (or adjustable camber plates on the top mounts) like fronts do, but they don't. So you need camber bolts. But most camber bolts appear to offer about 2 degrees of adjustment which should be ample to get the car in spec. If you want more than that then you're doing something quite specialist. I can't imagine slotting the top holes slightly would be a terrible idea, bit unless you're making a stanced car you shouldn't need to anyway.
Anyway, my suspension overhaul at the rear involved:
- Gt-4play polybushed traction and track arms.
- Hard Race toe arms also supplied by GT4-Play
- Camber bolts (some American engineering company) second hand
- Meister R's.
That got me everything I needed to get the car in spec.
The fronts, the coilovers alone get you plenty of adjustment: the top holes on the strut leg are slotted so you can pivot the hub knuckle on it, and they top mount is adjustable for fine tuning.
No, swapping wheels alone shouldn't change your geometry.
I've got Che adjustable arms and they are fine, you set them side to side with the stock arms and can measure thread exposed to make sure you start in the same place side to side before fitting. They weren't that expensive and you won't knock the alignment off over curbs which I seem to recall some of the guys in the mr2 championship grumbling about.
I'd price it up and go with the cheaper option (bolts vs arms) -it depends if you have any bushings that are a bit tired as well..
I think the CHE arms are rose jointed also? In place of the inner bushings? That's another consideration IMO. Bit of a difference to Noise and vibration and you have to decide if you want the compromise.
I think you need to be doing something quite special geometry wise if you actually "need" all around adjustable arms.
Mine had a bent lower arm, it was doing something special geometry wise BEFORE I fitted the Che arms!
Yes they are rose jointed. I didn't notice any vibration or noise at all from this. I do know the car was epic in the bends at Bedford when I was there a few years ago. Need to get off 17s and back to stock diameters and hopefully it'll be like it again, just this time with 2zz power s:) :) s:)