So I recently lowered my car on coilovers, and it's not insanely slammed, though it is quite low. I went to get an alignment today and it seems the lowering has impacted the range of the camber that can be achieved with the adjustments. However, that's not the odd part. It's that the left and right are vastly different in the rear.

Basic data:

Starting values
Camber
Front Left: -1.1 deg
Front Right: -1.1 deg
Rear Left: -2.5 deg
Rear Right: -1.0 deg
Caster
FL: 6.7 deg
FR: 6.7 deg
Toe
FL: -0.35 deg
FR: -0.32 deg
RL: 0.44 deg
RR: -0.03

It was nice to see that except for the Toe, all the front details were right as they should be, as I wanted UK spec... so around -1 camber, with 0 toe, and 6.75 caster (6 deg and 45 arcminutes). The front was easy to get perfectly to UK spec.

However, the rear toe and camber were vastly out of alignment. Here's what was finally achieved for the rear.

Camber
RL: -2.3
RR: -1.7
Toe
RL: 0.25 deg
RR: 0.30 deg

Toe was fixed, but camber was not, and therein lies the problem. It's not that they didn't reach it, it's that it couldn't be reached due to the range limitations.

My left rear camber could not get any more positive, as in, could not reach -2.0 deg. My right camber could not get any more negative, meaning, it could not get to -2.0 deg from the other side. Both camber adjusters were maximized in the direction trying to obtain the UK spec -2 deg.

So my questions are, what may be causing this? Is there something I can do to fix it? How severe is this discrepancy? You guys have any suggestions? I'm very certain that both sides of the car are equally lowered, I painfully measured the spacing on the coil-overs to make sure they are identical to a fraction of a mm. But it is NOT corner balanced, that I will admit.

Anyone in the bay area have an alignment machine (and corner balance?) they are willing to help me use to do this myself?

You want things done right, do them yourself... does that apply here?

Thanks guys!!

Mark

 

First of all, who did your alignment? I've seen some shoddy work by cheap alignment shops.

Second, that shouldn't be simply an effect of lowering the car. It seems more like you have a bent suspension component. You may want to check out your rear right lower control arm.

For reference, I've gone from UK spec on my stock suspension AP1 (-1.0 front camber, -2.0 rear camber) to a custom alignment (-2.2 front camber, -2.7 rear camber). My friend with Tein SRC's gets -2.4 front camber and can get somewhere above three degrees in the rear. He is lowered to a ~2 finger gap.

Auto Innovations in Milpitas or Tech III in San Jose would be my choices for an alignment. Orlando at AI is friendly and always has a helpful opinion on your alignment.

However, again, I would check on your suspension components before you take it in for an alignment. If the height is relatively the same on all 4 corners, the difference in maximum camber from side to side shouldn't be too far apart, especially not to the extent of being .6 degrees apart.

 

This is what happens when you drop your car, you need a camber kit. I installed one in the rear also because I was having a camber issue in the back just like you.

You can get Eibach (SPC renamed) balljoints that will give you a extra 1.5 camber of play on each side.

For the camber kit, you can get it on ebay for around 140. I'm dropped on Bilstein PSS9 at the minimum (recommended height). It's about a one finger gap all around.

 

or you can go somewhere that knows how to align your car because the s2000 has wide range

 

I think the issue is that you have asked for too much rear toe in, and toe and camber in the rear are linked. AP2 rear suspension does not need that much rear toe, OEM spec is 0.14 degree +/- 0.08 total toe. Heck, even the AP1 is 0.25 total toe, so you have more than 4x the total toe you need.

 

Doubt ur issue is toe related, ur toe specs are well within what many driver use (u run approx 1/8inch total toe in)

I suggest u check ur suspension arms, suspect there is some deformation there & get a 2nd opinion on the alignment.

 

THIS

 

It IS toe related because the more toe in you put in, the less negative camber you can get.

 

perhaps u misunderstood my reply.

he runs toe values that are quite commonly used so he shouldnt have the issue with the camber being so far off usually achievable values.

i know that toe affects the camber u can get but i'm simply saying that in his case, its probably not the cause of the reduced camber.

 

Okay, but I disagree that he is using common toe settings, since I've pointed out that it is four times more toe in than is recommended by Honda.

I'd put $5 on the fact that toe is limiting camber.