Aggressive street and light track alignment
I've been reading up on a lot of alignment setups but wanted to run my exact situation by the people here to make sure it sounds good.
2003 S2000
Bone stock
205/?/16 front tires (S02)
225/?/16 rear tires (some other Potenza pole positions)
I do mostly street driving, probably 15-20k miles a year. I do an occasional track day, but I'm not sure when I'll get back out there. I do *not* autocross the car, so stability and predictability is going to be more of a focus for me than extremely fast response and ease of transitioning.
I enjoy an aggressive street alignment on most of my cars. My previous car was an LS1 FD with what most people would consider a very aggressive street setup or a medium duty track alignment and it was exactly what I was looking for, so I'd like to do something similar.
As far as driving style, I'm pretty comfortable with a loose setup - I actually ran my '01 S2000 without any tire stagger and did a couple track days like that. It was a bit of a handful, but a lot of fun. Obviously slower than if I had a staggered setup, but as long as the breakaway is predictable, loose is fine. Better than understeer!
It seems like the UK specs would be a good place to start, but I feel like a bit more front camber might be a good idea. Maybe slightly less rear toe as well. I'm not sure what would be best for caster, maybe I should try for more?
UK Specs:
Front
Caster Left 6
2003 S2000
Bone stock
205/?/16 front tires (S02)
225/?/16 rear tires (some other Potenza pole positions)
I do mostly street driving, probably 15-20k miles a year. I do an occasional track day, but I'm not sure when I'll get back out there. I do *not* autocross the car, so stability and predictability is going to be more of a focus for me than extremely fast response and ease of transitioning.
I enjoy an aggressive street alignment on most of my cars. My previous car was an LS1 FD with what most people would consider a very aggressive street setup or a medium duty track alignment and it was exactly what I was looking for, so I'd like to do something similar.
As far as driving style, I'm pretty comfortable with a loose setup - I actually ran my '01 S2000 without any tire stagger and did a couple track days like that. It was a bit of a handful, but a lot of fun. Obviously slower than if I had a staggered setup, but as long as the breakaway is predictable, loose is fine. Better than understeer!
It seems like the UK specs would be a good place to start, but I feel like a bit more front camber might be a good idea. Maybe slightly less rear toe as well. I'm not sure what would be best for caster, maybe I should try for more?
UK Specs:
Front
Caster Left 6
What I'm running on my stock '01, which I track sometimes:
max front camber (~1.5*)
max rear camber (~2.2*)
zero front toe
2x 0.25* = 0.50* total rear toe (2x 15' = 30' total rear toe)
Works for me...
I'll probably take the rear toe down to 0.4* total next time I get it aligned.
As for caster, I prefer to maximize camber first, then caster.
max front camber (~1.5*)
max rear camber (~2.2*)
zero front toe
2x 0.25* = 0.50* total rear toe (2x 15' = 30' total rear toe)
Works for me...
I'll probably take the rear toe down to 0.4* total next time I get it aligned.
As for caster, I prefer to maximize camber first, then caster.
I've driven on the street with:
Stock alignment, OEM AP1 tires
UK alignment, Michelin Pilot Sport Cups (MPSC) 225/245
Settings very close to ZDan's setup, MPSC 225/245
ZDan's setup, Blizzaks 205/225
F -2 camber, >6 caster; R-3.0 camber, 0 toe. RE-01R 235/265
F -2 camber, >6 caster; R-3.0 camber, 1/16" toe in. RE-01R 235/265
F-2.5 camber, >6 caster; R-2.0 camber, 1/16" toe in. RE-01R 235/265
Obviously, there are other parts of our setup that aren't stock: front bar, shocks, springs, differential, etc.
IMHO:
If you drive 20k miles per year, the alignment is going to be a compromise between type of road conditions and your tire budget.
If I drove 20k miles per year in mixed straight line with some twisties, I'd budget $1400 on tires and buy two sets of RE-11s or $1200 and get two sets of Star Specs. I'd keep the UK alignment so the tires wore more evenly.
With that many highway miles, if you put a lot more negative camber on the tires, you'll wear the insides first, basically taking away the advantage of your increased static negative camber... the tire would wear down to "square" again.
If you had $2800 to budget on tires yearly (4 sets) or if you had LOTs of twisties and were wearing evenly on the UK specs, then I'd think it was fine to go up on the negative camber for the performance benefit while on fresh tires.
Otherwise, I don't think you're getting much actual bang for your buck by getting a track alignment and wearing the tires down in a straight line.
I'd pick a squarer setup and stickier tires that wear evenly as a safer alternative that gives good overall performance and durability.
That's my $0.02.
My suggestion would change if it was driven limited mileage or had a higher proportion of twisty driving. Then I'd go aggressive alignment and replace sticky tires as needed.
Stock alignment, OEM AP1 tires
UK alignment, Michelin Pilot Sport Cups (MPSC) 225/245
Settings very close to ZDan's setup, MPSC 225/245
ZDan's setup, Blizzaks 205/225
F -2 camber, >6 caster; R-3.0 camber, 0 toe. RE-01R 235/265
F -2 camber, >6 caster; R-3.0 camber, 1/16" toe in. RE-01R 235/265
F-2.5 camber, >6 caster; R-2.0 camber, 1/16" toe in. RE-01R 235/265
Obviously, there are other parts of our setup that aren't stock: front bar, shocks, springs, differential, etc.
IMHO:
If you drive 20k miles per year, the alignment is going to be a compromise between type of road conditions and your tire budget.
If I drove 20k miles per year in mixed straight line with some twisties, I'd budget $1400 on tires and buy two sets of RE-11s or $1200 and get two sets of Star Specs. I'd keep the UK alignment so the tires wore more evenly.
With that many highway miles, if you put a lot more negative camber on the tires, you'll wear the insides first, basically taking away the advantage of your increased static negative camber... the tire would wear down to "square" again.
If you had $2800 to budget on tires yearly (4 sets) or if you had LOTs of twisties and were wearing evenly on the UK specs, then I'd think it was fine to go up on the negative camber for the performance benefit while on fresh tires.
Otherwise, I don't think you're getting much actual bang for your buck by getting a track alignment and wearing the tires down in a straight line.
I'd pick a squarer setup and stickier tires that wear evenly as a safer alternative that gives good overall performance and durability.
That's my $0.02.
My suggestion would change if it was driven limited mileage or had a higher proportion of twisty driving. Then I'd go aggressive alignment and replace sticky tires as needed.
SPC adjustable balljoints. Otherwise it's hard to get more than around 1.5-1.8 in front without sacrificing caster. Some people eek out a little more from stock by loosening up suspension bolts and really preloading before tightening.
Thanks. do you have any recommendations for an AP2 on star specs that is still wanting to push a bit. 225/255 with 32 psi front and rear.
Rear alignment is -2 camber, .1 toe. Front is as stated with o toe. I think I am maxed out and limited as to what to do next to try and eleviate the push with my chassis.
thanks again
~Bruce
Rear alignment is -2 camber, .1 toe. Front is as stated with o toe. I think I am maxed out and limited as to what to do next to try and eleviate the push with my chassis.
thanks again
~Bruce
Trending Topics
I'm lowered on Espelirs and have -1.4 camber in the front, -2.5 in the rear....and love it! Tire wear hasn't been too bad, even with a couple autox events thrown into the mix, and the car holds the road really well.






