I see the same wear on 10" wheels

 

I am moving to 9" wheels and -3.2 front and -3.0 rear. Wont be on track until the fall though

 

What alignment are you going to use (full specs, I see the camber). Just wondering as I have the same setup.

 

Non-stag is fine with no wing and unchanged sways. I think the only place you'll be more hesitant is WSIR.

Very easy. Throw a blanket on car. Pop trunk. Two harness plugs, four 10mm bolts, trunk lid off. Throw the other one on and repeat in reverse. Takes <5 minutes. And very easy to do solo. I bought a spare trunk for $40 and use that. I bought a spare trunk lock as well, but this is easy to swap too (only two 10mm bolts) so isn't necessary.

I am the same way as I can't stand street driving the car with a big wing (though the CR wing is small enough that it doesn't bother me).

 

I've been wondering this as well.

Assuming that most people run a massive front sway to support their square setup.

By going square you have the situation where there is more front end grip than rear right? Adding a front sway bar is not going to suddenly get more rear end grip for you... the rear end grip is still the limiting factor in this scenario.
So by adding the front sway it seems that all you are doing is undoing the changes you made by putting big front tyres on so that the car no longer oversteers.
But to correct the oversteer you are just adding understeer, rather than correcting the problem at the end that has the problem.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm yet to see a good reason why you want a big front sway and square tyres.

(adding a wing this all changes, I can totally see square, stock sways and wing. That makes a lot of sense to me and is where I'd like to end up)

 

The part where you are wrong is that adding front roll stiffness (or reducing rear) infact does add rear end grip. When you add front grip with bigger tires, the balance changes. Stiffening the front roll resistance will shift some of the extra grip to the rear. This can be done with swaybars or springs.

When the front end is stiffened (or rear softened) there will be less weight trasfer in the rear so the tires are more evenly loaded causing an increase in grip.

 

Are you saying you want proportionately more grip in the front than the rear? This can't be the case otherwise you wouldn't change the sways to add grip back to the rear.

So why add more tire in front but not in back? If you go to a 255 in front more front grip, you can stuff a 275 (or bigger) in the rear on a 10" wheel to keep the stagger. Is the lack of 10" wheels the limiting factor?

 

Going to that large of a rear wheel/tire combo requires extensive fender modifications.

 

At a certain level of driving, you need more tire up front. You can throw tons of camber at a non-staggered set up and try to get it to work, but in our experience, the balance just isn't there for more advanced drivers.

There is a reason that most of the fast s2000s are on non-staggered setups - it's faster. The s2000 doesn't have the power to need more grip in the back, even with bolt ons. You don't drive this car like a Corvette, waiting to pin the throttle coming out of the corners. You drive an s2000 fast by attacking the corners. In my car, I am full throttle before I even get to apex in most cases.

If you want to be fast on track in an s2000, you need more front grip, not more rear grip. Even if 10" wheels were available, I'd just run a 10" non-staggered set up.


**edit** the above sentence is a general statement about all s2000s, not the case of non-staggered no aero. Even so, I still feel a non-staggered setup is optimal.

Ask yourself why most of the fast people run more camber up front vs. the rear too - more grip.

 

^ This. To me "advanced drivers" means guys that know how to use heavy trail braking into corners (using the edge of the traction circle) and skinny fronts can't hack it without overheating much more than the rear.