STR Prep - Suspension and Alignment
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 635
Likes: 0
Jon,
If the car isn't pushy, I wouldn't do a thing. You may try to run the same lines with a higher entry speed by introducing rotation earlier in the corner phase. You may find that the car tightens up at that point because the car is setup to be "easy" to drive. I think that once you try doing this, you'll find that the setup needs something else. perhaps less toe in the rear.
If the car isn't pushy, I wouldn't do a thing. You may try to run the same lines with a higher entry speed by introducing rotation earlier in the corner phase. You may find that the car tightens up at that point because the car is setup to be "easy" to drive. I think that once you try doing this, you'll find that the setup needs something else. perhaps less toe in the rear.
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 6
From: Near Philadelphia
Originally Posted by Random1' timestamp='1364279438' post='22428725
[quote name='imstimpy' timestamp='1364242553' post='22427519']
Under what circumstances have you determined that much camber actually necessary? The max I have run is -2.6*F/-2.4*R and I'm considering going back down. I thought increasing camber would net me higher overall cornering speed but I haven't seen anything to indicate it has accomplished much. The car isn't rolling over very far and pyro shows 10-20*F differential, increasing towards the inside.
Has anybody found a measurable difference with rear toe and straightaway speeds? Theoretically, a car with zero toe will create less drag than one with 1/4" total toe-in thus yielding a higher straightaway speed. I haven't experimented much with rear toe honestly. With every increase in rear toe the car has been easier to drive and, therefore, faster. Are there real-world circumstances where less rear toe is better (tire wear notwithstanding)?
My car is working brilliantly right now so I'm at a point where I might change something just to change it.
Under what circumstances have you determined that much camber actually necessary? The max I have run is -2.6*F/-2.4*R and I'm considering going back down. I thought increasing camber would net me higher overall cornering speed but I haven't seen anything to indicate it has accomplished much. The car isn't rolling over very far and pyro shows 10-20*F differential, increasing towards the inside.
Has anybody found a measurable difference with rear toe and straightaway speeds? Theoretically, a car with zero toe will create less drag than one with 1/4" total toe-in thus yielding a higher straightaway speed. I haven't experimented much with rear toe honestly. With every increase in rear toe the car has been easier to drive and, therefore, faster. Are there real-world circumstances where less rear toe is better (tire wear notwithstanding)?
My car is working brilliantly right now so I'm at a point where I might change something just to change it.
What tires are you running? What pressures? Maybe you are not going fast enough in the turns?
I wore Dunlop Z1s evenly (no flipping required) at -2.4F/-2.2R. Hankooks, on the other hand, wore the outside faster and had to be flipped when I ran them at -2.4R/-2.2R. I wore another set of Dunlops evenly at -2.6F/-2.4R. I run between 34 and 36psi on the Dunlops but pressures don't seem to matter much. The new ZIIs are rolling even less on the outside, which is what brought this to mind.
I'm running on the stiff side with the Gendron 1.375" front bar, Gendron 0.975" rear bar, 900# front springs, 650# rear springs. Provided the rates aren't too much for the car/tires, I'd think higher rates and less camber might be harder to drive but faster than software rates and more camber. The car is intuitive to drive and far more stable than any time in the past.
[/quote]
That's interesting...I ran Z1's at 4.0F/3.0R and I wore the outside faster. 800/700 springs with full stiff gendron hollow front bar and no rear bar.
Now with Z2's they like less camber I think, although it's been very cold here so not full grip. Also my setup is 100% different. I went down some on camber and I think I need to go down even more.
Probably has to do partly with how much street driving is done, I didn't do all that much, maybe a couple thousand miles.
And by the way, wouldn't a stiffer setup require more camber? You're getting less suspension deflection and therefore less camber gain.
Former Moderator
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,634
Likes: 28
From: West Virginia
The more street miles you put on your car compared to track miles will change your inside to outside tire wear. The street miles wear the insides, track miles more the outsides. A track only car will need more camber for even tire wear.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Seems tough to find a way to accurately measure actual camber required on an autocross car driven to events throwing off wear pattern, and not having a way to measure temps before getting back to grid at events.
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 6
From: Near Philadelphia
Originally Posted by IntegraR0064' timestamp='1364309187' post='22429301
And by the way, wouldn't a stiffer setup require more camber? You're getting less suspension deflection and therefore less camber gain.
Seems tough to find a way to accurately measure actual camber required on an autocross car driven to events throwing off wear pattern, and not having a way to measure temps before getting back to grid at events.
