robrob

For non-staggered and with no additional camber devices (stock ball joints) you will probably want to maximize the front camber (tell the tech to set camber to max) which will come out to around -2 degrees, use stock caster, and 0 toe.

In the rear just match the front camber or maybe go 0.5 degrees more negative if you don't like over steer. Stock rear toe for the AP1 is 0.25 inch total toe-in, the UK spec is 0.16 inch total toe-in.

More info on S2000 alignment can be found here: http://robrobinette.com/S2000Alignment.htm

ZDan

UK spec I've seen calls for 0deg 40', which equates to 0.67degrees total. sin(.67)*25" = 0.29". WAY overboard, excessive. I've run that much, and it was a total disaster. Awful nonlinear twitchy handling, unbelievable wear rate, instability in a straight line but less eager to find the apex after turn-in. No positive characteristics whatsoever!

If the official "UK spec" really calls for .16", that's 0.37degrees, much more reasonable, but IMO you can run much less with no ill effects.
[edit] Bad math in that link: 0º 20" = .083 inch toe-in per rear wheel = INCORRECT
0deg 20' is 0.333deg, 25" sin(.333deg) = .145" per side = .29" total.

US spec I found years ago was .48deg +/- .16deg. Spec linked to above gives .25" +/-.08, which is 0.57degrees +/-.18degrees.

Either way, in my opinion that is excessive.

I've tried a very wide range, and for me, rear toe at the bare minimum end of the range is much more predictable, linear-handling, while also giving much better tire life and better turn-in response.

turbo8765

Thanks, I'll try these settings. Agreed that one setting won't be optimal for both staggered and non-staggered, but I don't drive it anywhere near the limit on public streets, so I want to optimize the non-staggered handling balance.

I extensively tuned my Tein Mono Flexes in my prior NC, so I'm well aware of the benefits of tuning...but I don't have a tool for these, and they are @ KW's recommended settings, so I suspect they're in the ballpark. A friend is bringing a KW adj. tool to the track tomorrow, so I may fiddle w/ it then. Still, the quality of the valving makes it much better than lowering springs!
[/quote]

There is a huge difference in the valving with the KW shocks versus lowering springs. Your car will remain planted after hitting big bumps! I love that about them. Even on my aggressive settings, there is this huge bump on a freeway overpass that used to unsettle my car bad with HKS springs...now, it just soaks it up! No matter how aggressive my settings are.

Regarding your KW tools: I lost both of mine, the needle and the allen wrench. I replaced the Allen with another allen wrench, and the needle with a sports ball needle. Works perfectly!

KWV3's + Swift 12/10 springs + stock sway bars = Never understeers!

Compression: 1 off full stiff front and rear.
Rebound: 2 off front, and 6 off rear. I am curious how 4 or 5 off in the rear would handle, I just get too lazy and leave it alone at the track. These settings feel great, but are also with my staggered Swift springs. I believe they'd work well on the KW springs though too.

Camber: -3.3 all around on RS3's (they love camber)
Caster: ~6 degrees (whatever was max)
Toe: 0 front, 0.2 rear total toe in.
[/quote]
Stock anti-roll bars?

'09S2K

There is a huge difference in the valving with the KW shocks versus lowering springs. Your car will remain planted after hitting big bumps! I love that about them. Even on my aggressive settings, there is this huge bump on a freeway overpass that used to unsettle my car bad with HKS springs...now, it just soaks it up! No matter how aggressive my settings are.

Regarding your KW tools: I lost both of mine, the needle and the allen wrench. I replaced the Allen with another allen wrench, and the needle with a sports ball needle. Works perfectly!

KWV3's + Swift 12/10 springs + stock sway bars = Never understeers!

Compression: 1 off full stiff front and rear.
Rebound: 2 off front, and 6 off rear. I am curious how 4 or 5 off in the rear would handle, I just get too lazy and leave it alone at the track. These settings feel great, but are also with my staggered Swift springs. I believe they'd work well on the KW springs though too.

Camber: -3.3 all around on RS3's (they love camber)
Caster: ~6 degrees (whatever was max)
Toe: 0 front, 0.2 rear total toe in.
[/quote]
Stock anti-roll bars?
[/quote]

Yes sir!

Harpoon

Post #72 in this thread: https://www.s2ki.com/s2000/topic/687...ck-suspension/

robrob

The 2000-2003 Workshop Manual showing rear total toe-in at 0.25 inch.




Honda bulletin showing Workshop Manual rear total toe-in is 1 degree.

[edit: Disregard my following argument with ZDan about toe measurement. He's right and I'm wrong. The rear toe spec in Honda's Intranet Bulletin is crazy wrong and I was not accounting for the tire displacement at the rear of the tire during toe measurement.]

ZDan, I'm using Honda's math. All of the S2000 Workshop Manual specs match up with this bulletin's "Workshop Manual Specifications" section. The above bulletin says Workshop Manual spec is 1 degree rear total toe-in. The 2000-2003 Workshop Manual gives it in inches as 0.25 inch total toe-in. So using Honda's math 1 degree = 0.25 inch, then the UK Spec of 40 minutes = 0.166 inches total toe-in. The UK Spec reduces total toe-in by 33%.

Since your numbers are about twice what me & Honda come up with it appears your formula isn't taking into account that you measure toe on just one side of the tire.

Dan, Here's some math you should be able to follow: A 25 inch diameter tire has a circumference of 78.54 inches (25 x pi). So 1 degree = 78.54 / 360 = 0.22 inches. Honda rounded up to 0.25 inches for their spec.

The original poster asked about non-staggered alignment settings. Me and my S2000 run at record setting pace on track with a non-staggered setup. My alignment settings are not "theory," they work.

ZDan, in your signature you have an arrow pointing to your Z with the caption "fast car" and an arrow pointing to your S2000 with the caption "slow car." If that's true then you don't know much about setting up an S2000 for the track. I've never encountered a Z of any generation that could come close to keeping up with a well prepped and driven track S2000. You need to swap those captions.

//steve\\

For what it's worth I called KW in regards to changing the spring rates without a revalve and was told anything +-150lbs and you're definitely safe. Probably still safe at +-200lbs as well but wouldn't go beyond that. This was calling about my Clubsports but I imagine the same is true for the V3s considering they aren't really that far off from each other.

I just got an Eibach front sway that I'm going to try out with my non-staggered 255 setup and factory Clubsport spring rates. If the front sway isn't enough I'm going to look at upping the front rate a tad.

Depending how low you are and how much caster you're willing to give up will determine how much camber you get on the stock ball joints. With a hair under optimal caster I was able to get -2.8 up front. What exactly is the effect of less caster? I definitely plan to get some offset joints eventually.

Also does anyone know if Billy's settings for the V3s apply to the Clubsports as well? I started with his and run one less compression sweep in the rear and one less click of rebound in the rear.

ZDan

Those two specs are not equivalent. .25" total over 25" tire diameter = .01. sin-1(.01) = 0.57 degrees total toe-in.
Strictly speaking you would take the toe-in per side and double it, but for small angles it's the same.

Any manual that specifies 1 degree total rear toe-in should be TOTALLY IGNORED as far as alignment specs go. That is an insane amount of rear toe and absolutely WILL make the car an awful-handling beast, particularly in low grip conditions (been there).


That's not "Honda's math", you're simply showing that two different sources from Honda are not consistent with each other. I've seen another "official Honda spec" that gave .32* +/-.18* for the AP1.

40 minutes of toe is NOT .166 inches.
40 minutes is 2/3 of a degree, or .667*.
25"sin(.667) = .29"

Toe on one side of the car is the lateral displacement between the leading edge of the tire and the trailing edge of the tire. Total toe is the difference between the distance between the two leading edges and the two trailing edges.

But we're not talking about degrees around the circumference of the tire, we're talking about degrees looking down on the tire from above. The toe-in (in inches or degrees) is NOT relative to the radius of the tire, but rather relative to the distance between the leading edge and the trailing edge, or twice the radius, which is 25".

Honda did NOT round up to .25" from .22", they just have two very different specs. And again, any spec for ONE DEGREE total rear toe-in should be ignored, that's an absurd and totally unworkable amount of rear toe (again, I've inadvertently BEEN there, and it's a total disaster for handling).

I'm sure your settings work adequately enough, but if you're running .166" total rear toe, that is NOT 40 minutes of rear toe, which would be .667deg. .166" total toe-in is sin-1(.166"/25") = 0.38degrees total toe in.

I know enough to have won my class time trialing it for three years (also three class championships with the Z).


Well, you've never encountered MY Z.
FWIW, my Z makes about 245 rwhp, weighs 2300 lb. and has suspension mods. My S makes about 190 or so rwhp, weighs 2750 lb., and has totally stock suspension (other than alignment settings), zero mods to the car. You can believe that the Z is SIGNIFICANTLY, HUGELY faster than my S.

robrob

Quote:

robrob said:

I was wrong, you can't follow the math. Looking from above, if you turn our tire in a 360 arc the leading edge of the tire will describe a 78.54 inch arc all the way around--that's called a circle. Divide that circle by 360 degrees and you get 0.22 inches per degree. Honda's spec of 1 degree of total toe-in = 0.22 inch.



You should call Honda and let them know how bad they screwed up the rear toe-in spec [edit: He really should because they did get the 1 degree of total toe-in wrong.]

ZDan

But the toe-in at that angle is NOT that .22inches. The .22" is the displacement at either the front trailing edge or the rear trailing edge, while the toe-in in inches will be the addition of the lateral displacement at the front and the rear, or 0.44" per degree.

See if you can follow this:
The toe-in on a given side of the car is equal to the lateral displacement between the leading edge of the tire and the trailing edge of the tire.
It is NOT the lateral displacement between the leading edge or trailing edge relative to the middle of the tire. That's where you are screwing up the geometry/math.

If you have one degree total rear toe, that is 0.5degrees per side.
Toe-in in inches will be 25" (tire diameter) multiplied by sin(0.5deg) or 0.22" PER SIDE. This is the total lateral displacement difference between the front and rear of the tire.
One degree of TOTAL rear toe-in is equal to 0.44" total. NOT 0.22.

You would be on the right track *IF* toe-in were the lateral displacement of the leading edge of the tire relative to the MIDDLE of the tire. But it is TWICE this amount.