I started the latest auto-x tire setup topic so I thought I'ld follow up with an alignment thread. So what are most of you guys (especially AS ap2 cars) running for alignment settings?

 

Front as much -camber and caster as I can get 3/32in. total tow out.

Rear -2.5 camber 1/8in. total tow in

 

Front
Camber Max
Caster Max
Toe - 0

Rear
Camber -2.0deg
Toe 1/8" total in

 

https://www.s2ki.com/forums/index.php?showt...&#entry15316482

 

I run...

front
1.5* camber
Max caster
0 toe

Rear
2.0-2.2* camber (I change it every alignment)
1/8 toe out

The toe out in the rear helps the car rotate. That is the way I like to drive, thus the tail out in my sig
Just remember that every person drives different, and you may not have the same set up as everyone else. I am running 12k spring front and rear on Megan Racing coilovers, I also have a Cusco front and Swift rear sway bars. I have been messing around with alignment for 2 years now and this is where I like the car. I have done about 15 alignments on the car. Trial and error makes perfect.

 

Kind of interesting. Last year was our first year autocrossing and we had SPC ball joints for the front. Due to advice largely from camber-limited stock S2000s, we ran:

-2 front -3 rear.

But we had been hearing from some experienced (National Champion and Trophy winners driving different RWD cars) who suggested less rear camber for autocross.

Going to try -2.5 in front with -2.0 in rear this year and see how it goes. We're running a staggered setup. My co-driver for this year is a very experienced autocrosser and he said it might help keep the rear square and planted to put power down better.

 

2.5 rear for canyons and trackdays with street tires, why would 2.0 be better?

 

(because of what I posted above)

The way I understand it is this (and I think it's autocross specific):

The more negative camber you have, the less contact patch you have in the rear for a straight line. If you're running stiffer springs, the car doesn't "squat" the rear tires flat on acceleration and you're not getting all the traction possible in a straight line.

For canyon carving and track driving on street tires, you generally won't be slowing down to 20mph, making a 90 degree hairpin and trying to get maximum acceleration... it's more of a modulation between 20 and 60 and the "fun" is the maximum cornering speed. For that, maybe the negative camber is better?

But then again, "Robinson" on the track thread runs -3.6 f and -2.1 in the rear....

I'll let you know in a few weeks how it feels.

 

All I know is that with anything more than -2.2 in the back my car is a pushing pig.

Changing rear camber doesn't increase or decrease overall grip - it just moves the slip angle vs. corner phase curve. ie - the car will have more grip in a different part of the turn and less grip in others

 

It was very shock dependent as far as rear alignment in my experience.

I ran min camber(-1.3) and 1/16" toe in in the back when I ran the OE and OTS Koni shocks. When I got the Penske 8300's I bumped up to -2.8 degrees of camber and 1/4" of toe in. The new shocks loaded the tire so much more quickly the car got to be a handful on turn in. I don't have any experience with the TC Kline or Koni-NA revalved units so I can't compare those to the Penske.

As far as the front is concerned, I tried toe-out and felt it hurt steady state too much(mid corner push) without helping transient turn-in enough to make it an overall benefit, so I stay with zero toe in the front. Max camber then max caster as all have mentioned.

You'll also notice your driving style likes different stuff, so plan to spend some $$ here tuning the alignment to meet your personal requirements.