Rate my Racey Street Alignment! - S2KI Honda S2000 Forums

Go Back  S2KI Honda S2000 Forums > General Interest > S2000 Talk
Reload this Page >

Rate my Racey Street Alignment!

S2000 Talk Discussions related to the S2000, its ownership and enthusiasm for it.

Rate my Racey Street Alignment!

Reply

 
 
 
Old 08-09-2018, 07:54 AM
  #1  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 193
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default Rate my Racey Street Alignment!

So I have a stock 2005 car. Running Stock 17s with Pilot Super Sports in stock 215/245. Car has 45K miles and no changes to suspension (or anything else).

I had a Racing shop (that specializes in S2000) in do my alignment. I told them I wanted street alignment that was slightly more aggressive than stock. I ended up with the below. I was perfectly happy with stock specs but decided to try something slightly different. From my own diving impressions after a week on daily commute (long straight two lane highways punctuated by a few high speed twisties ) is that the return to center is very strong. Steering feels heavier than I recall and also it fights me slightly on heavily crowned road sections. The turn in is a bit dead and not as quick as I remember in slow corner or 90 degree turns. I don't think I like that part. I am guess all of these characteristics are due to more negative camber in front and rear compared to stock. What I do like is that in high speed turns (50+ mph) the car does have noticeably more grip. To the point where I am afraid to push it harder because it seems that the car just keep gripping all the way to 9/10. Car also feels more stable planted at high speeds. Is this something that I have to compromise on i.e high speed stability in turns vs turn in rotation at low speed?

I don't track so I don't know how to interpret the finer balance nuances. Its more about getting used to it. It seems the ?"slight" tweaking has definitely changed the character of the car. I have not yet made up my mind about whether I prefer this over stock. That's why I would like to get some feedback from the experts here to see what you guys think of the "custom" alignment and if my observations are correct.

Should I be concerned about tire wear with these specs? Is rear Tow too much?

Also can anyone post the stock specs for AP2 in the same units as below. I am having a hard time changing units online.

kasher_khan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 08:02 AM
  #2  
 
noodels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 2,892
Thanked 37 Times in 36 Posts
Default

Only thing I would change is rear toe,ie closer to minimum
noodels is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 11:08 AM
  #3  
 
engifineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 856
Thanked 35 Times in 32 Posts
Default

The heavier steering is likely due to the high caster setting. This is not a bad thing since increased caster adds dynamic camber (aka more camber when turning). Increasing the caster will also allow a tad bit more camber if I recall as well.

If it were an AP1, that rear toe would not be bad (I would have kept it closer to 0.1) since it helps a little with the toe curve which is part of the snappyness of the AP1. For an AP2 I would think you would stay closer to 0, but AP2 owners will likely chime in on that.
engifineer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 11:09 AM
  #4  
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 85
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by kasher_khan View Post
From my own diving impressions after a week on daily commute (long straight two lane highways punctuated by a few high speed twisties ) is that the return to center is very strong. Steering feels heavier than I recall and also it fights me slightly on heavily crowned road sections. The turn in is a bit dead and not as quick as I remember in slow corner or 90 degree turns. I don't think I like that part. I am guess all of these characteristics are due to more negative camber in front and rear compared to stock.
This is probably caused by your increased caster, not camber.
Scigheras is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 12:27 PM
  #5  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 193
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Scigheras View Post
This is probably caused by your increased caster, not camber.
everyone in the forums is usually going on about maximizing caster and that it is a "good" thing... Why is that? what is stock caster
kasher_khan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 12:37 PM
  #6  
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 85
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by kasher_khan View Post
everyone in the forums is usually going on about maximizing caster and that it is a "good" thing... Why is that? what is stock caster
The things you describe "stronger return to center", "heavier steering", and "number turn-in" are all associated with increased caster.
The first two are in my opinion improvements, and probably in the eyes of a lot of other s2ki members too. I liked this change when I increased my caster to 7 degrees. Stock is 6 degrees.
Also you will gain more dynamic camber with increased caster.
However everyone is different and it seems like you just happen to not like it.
Scigheras is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Scigheras For This Useful Post:
kasher_khan (08-09-2018)
Old 08-09-2018, 01:00 PM
  #7  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 193
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Scigheras View Post
This is probably caused by your increased caster, not camber.
How aggressive is this setup. I can go back to the shop for a re-do if I decide but my main concern at this point is to make sure I am not going to get significant tire wear.
kasher_khan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 01:27 PM
  #8  
 
engifineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 856
Thanked 35 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by kasher_khan View Post
How aggressive is this setup. I can go back to the shop for a re-do if I decide but my main concern at this point is to make sure I am not going to get significant tire wear.
It is not overly aggressive at all. The first couple of years I owned mine I put about 7,000 miles per year on it plus 10 autocross events and 2 practice events (30 or so runs per event) , running -2.5 degrees of camber all the way around. I still got a season out of a set of tires doing that.
engifineer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 02:28 PM
  #9  
Registered User
 
rpg51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Vermont
Posts: 1,902
Thanked 65 Times in 60 Posts
Default

If tire wear is the issue my recommendation is to put rear toe and the minimum oem spec and to put front camber at -0.5 and rear camber at -1.5. This is what I am at, and it seems great for my lively street only driving.
rpg51 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 08:08 PM
  #10  
Jub
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 80
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
Default

I like it overall. I'd rather have a bit less toe in the rear. I have tried .35 degrees total on the AP2 and .1 degree total toe in. I liked the higher end better but would probably want to be around .2 degrees total ideally. You likely do not "need" that much camber for just street driving. Camber may cause some tire wear but toe causes significantly more.
Jub is offline  
Reply With Quote

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service