Jump to content
git-r

Getting circa -2.5 degrees negative camber at the front?

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

Can anyone confirm whether it’s possible to get around -2.5 degrees front camber whilst running stock suspension/ride height without having to run adjustable top mounts? 

With a bit of googling I’ve seen you can get camber bolts but would these give enough? 

Am I right in thinking it’s possible to get about -2 degrees at the back with the stock adjustment? 

Finally, how bad is outer edge tyre wear on track when running stock alignment? 

Many thanks 👍 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not possible. I would say more like 1.5 degrees max with camber bolts.

You won't get uneven tyre wear with stock settings i.e., barely any negative camber and it's fine at 2.5 degrees. 

There is no camber adjustment at the rear, so no. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With stock suspension and at stock height:

Camberbolts at both upper 16mm (Whiteline KCA416) and lower 14mm hole net me ~ -2.2 to -2.3 front camber maxed out. Supposedly those that lower suspension a bit via eg. lowering springs got with both camberbolts & lowering reached ~ -2.5.

To get to -3 with stock non-eccentric topmounts i needed to use also eccentric front LCA bushing (Powerflex PFF69-801G or PFF69-801GBLK(stiffer)).

There were at some point in past eccentric rubber Com-C topmounts by Whiteline (IIRC KCA335), but their bearing soon binded for most, whiteline tried few times/revisions to fix, finally gave up and delisted twins as compatible with those. Advising against buying/trying these.

Recently Pedders released something similar to Com-C (PED-580096), but supposedly without it's issues. I haven't yet saw review/experience by someone installed/using them though.

So with stock shocks & at stock height for -2.5 to -3 camber range, try both camberbolts + powerflex bushings, or camberbolts + pedders topmount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, git-r said:

Hi all,

Can anyone confirm whether it’s possible to get around -2.5 degrees front camber whilst running stock suspension/ride height without having to run adjustable top mounts? 

With a bit of googling I’ve seen you can get camber bolts but would these give enough? 

Am I right in thinking it’s possible to get about -2 degrees at the back with the stock adjustment? 

Finally, how bad is outer edge tyre wear on track when running stock alignment? 

Many thanks 👍 

 

 

If you oval the holes in thr front struts and use camber bolts you should get near to -2.5°

At the rear there is no adjustment but if you lower it it will naturally gain camber at the rear. Around a 30-40mm drop will usually get you around -2° but it will often be different left to right which is where the need for adjustment comes in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, right. There is also option of slotting holes, as Deacon mentioned, but i somewhat dislike non-reversible mods. KW/ST shocks have top hole pre-slotted. IIRC also koni yellows in full set, not just inserts, have larger then stock upper hole. Word of warning, if deciding to dremel/slot strut hole, then to use stock bolts, eccentric camberbolts may slip there, people advise against camberbolts usage in slotted holes.

If one needs more camber probably for track purposes, then imho worth front camber upto -3 at least (and rear -2.5). For rears i'd advise to get LCAs though. Cheapest of them are not that much more expensive (OEM stamped steel alikes clones like SPC/Whiteline/Eibach) vs eccentric rear LCA bushings + shop time for tedious adjusting with those bushings. If you mentioned stock height, i guess more rear camber from lowering not exactly best option to gain rear camber, thus better get rear LCAs right away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huge thanks people, that’s so helpful!! 

Lauren - do you think that even with hard track use it won’t kill the edges of its tyres?

Church - that couldn’t be more helpful - thank you!! 

Deacon - as Church was saying it’d be good to keep the mods kind of bolt on . Also lowering is not an option unfortunately. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

git-r: "right way" to choose optimum camber is via using pyrometer, as it may differ a bit for eg. different tires. But for some generic numbers "in ballpark"/as starting point ..

- it mostly depends where and how you are going to use car. Where most of wear happens. For example - i may wear down ~ 10-15% thread per 10K km if dailying only. I can wear down on track in 10 trackdays tires till cord is sticking out :). So for me, with both dailying and tracking, with tire set usually around for one season, with 5-10 trackdays per summer, most of wear happens on track. Hence i optimise alignment mostly for it, as it's where i wear 90% of tire thread, despite daily driven mileage (but with little to no wear) being much much larger then that driven on track. So i put -3 front, -2.5 rear. Some for track rise upto -3.5 .. but it might be driver and tires dependent, and if one is serious about THE best/optimal, see mention of pyrometer usage to see exactly how contact patch is and how grip/wear results from temperature differences between outer/mid/inside of tire right after driving you want to optimize for.

- if you don't push much and have only 2-4 trackdays per summer at most, i guess interim -2 to -2.5 front and -1.5 to -2 rear may work as good compromise. Yes, if tracked more then that tire thread outer side will still wear more, but not that drastically different as if tracking with stock alignment (of 0 camber front, -1.2 rear), so there will be more grip and better wear then stock aligned anyway. Nice bit, that this is easy to get for cheap - leave rear stock aligned, just add (cheap) camberbolts to front.

- if one daily drivers only, and/or tracks only in winter on ice tracks :), imho some -1 to -1.5 front and stock -1.2 rear is fine. Such relatively little camber (as there is not much tire sidewall flex during turns to compensate with static negative camber) will also work well on low grip. For example snow/ice/wet/gravel (from sport, including rallying/rally-x that is). Again, cheap, just add to front camberbolts, just one set of those at that.

- drifiting optimal alignment needs loads of negative camber front due how tire is placed when countersteered in mid drift. Seen numbers like -4, -5 or even -6. Thus if one is serious about drifting, there is lot of other things to do/mod, for example increase maximum steering angle (lacking on ours due wide boxer engine/lacking clearance w/o rubbing), add more power, maybe completely redone suspension with eg. wisedfab and alike kits ..

Wear/optimum camber .. as far as you are happy with wear and handling, it's good. With stock alignment on track i was not happy :). Penny pincher in me hated to change tires due completely worn outsides when there were still more then 50% thread left mid/inside. Extra camber also upped a bit cornering speeds due more grip.

Downsides from more camber - slightly worse braking in straight line, and car tending to a bit more follow longitudinal grooves in road surface. Wear wise there extra camber in range of -1.5 to -2.5 shouldn't add much extra camber wear, it's toe, if off too much, that may act as tire wear killer. Thus when doing alignment, suggest being extra anal about toe, getting it even side to side and to extent of just what one may wish. My choice usually is zero toe front, and slight toe-in rear of eg. total toe ~ +0.15 to +0.2 degree. Almost like stock, with exception that i ask alignment techs to dial it way more precize then what is allowed as passing for OE alignment :).

If you noticed, in most sample camber numbers i usually aim in front by half degree negative more camber then in rear. That is to make car less understeer-y then with stock alignment (0 front, -1.2 rear).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks again for the help, much appreciated. 

Lauren, sorry, my question was whether you thought the stock alignment would kill tyres on track (Church has answered this though) but good to know your alignment settings work for tyre wear on track. 

Church - thanks again and completely agree about the pyrometer having tried using infra red temp guns before, only way is to do as you describe. 

Im not bothered about inner tyre wear on the road,  as you were saying I also hate ruining tyres on track through lack of camber. I’ve never owned a car that doesn’t do this and the lack of adjustment in modern cars is so annoying. I’ve run adjustable top mounts on a few cars and find it unbelievable that it’s not possible to find a solution that doesn’t knock and make your car sound like a bag of spanners!

The camber bolt method I’ll try first then look at adding bushes to get to around 2.5 plus degrees (decimal). Thinking out loud here are there any adjustable lower control arms for the front that are ok for road use? Imagine it might be cheaper and less hassle than changing the bushes in the stock arms. 

Do you have the rear adjustable control arms? Are they noisy?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've ran with stock alignment years ago. The tyres took it okay to be fair. Don't mess around with adjustable front lower arms if they even exist, just go for pillowball top mounts. It's a no brainer. Better to go the whole hog thogh and fit coilovers if you want to transform the handling.  You won't notice any increase in noise through adjustable rear lower arms even with rose joints as I have. I have SPL lower arms, billet aluminium, titanium adjusters and rose jointed ends. 

IMG_3989.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't agree with you won't notice bit. I did notice .. to unbearable extent that i quickly reverted to rubber top mounts and searched for alternative ways to get front camber. Possibly with some aftermarket shocks it would have been different (as many drive with camberplates coming eg. in set of coilovers and say NVH is acceptable), but for me (stock shocks+raceseng camplates) it was unbearable on local roads :/. There is difference of just driving over some road pavement defects without minding them, or hear loud hit noises like dropping toolbox on concrete, that make impression that soon something will break, and thus trying to keep in mind every defect on roads and steer around them every time.

git-r: there are front adjustable arms too. But almost never they are considered, because unlike rear LCAs, front ones relatively cost fortune and also all have pillowball joints (non street legal @LV). For example these . Hence on twins to gain camber adjustment most popular way is adjustable rear lca-s, and different combinations of camberbolts + topmounts (most commonly camberplates) front.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lauren: in some combinations with other parts and in some of joints i'm certain slight extra NVH of pillowball bushings can be acceptable for most. Just not in this particular case with stock shocks and at topmounts for me. Many aftermarket coilovers have in stock set own camplates, many report their moded suspension often even more comfortable then stock and with acceptable NVH even when going over bad quality paved roads with potholes. I tried several iterations, like reinstalling at other shop, asking to take extra care, check for common mistakes (eg. not tightening top nut), get most camber at lower mount with camberbolts and just a little at topmounts .. gave up. I doubt a bit misinstallation, i doubt for camplates to be at fault (AFAIK many use raceseng ones with wide selection of shocks without much issues). I - couldn't. I have stiffer bushings in several places (eg. rear velox LCAs, front LCAs  have whitline extra caster bushings & powerflex for camber, topmounts while rubber, but are stiffer group-N ones, i have gearbox & tranny bushings, rear subframe bushings,  planning to install even more, like engine mounts, steering rack lockdown and such), i do notice more NVH after installing most of them, but all that extra NVH was below my tolerance treshold. With exception of front camberplates with pillowball with my current still stock shocks. That lone part was unbearable even if i tried hard to live with that. I may try 3rd time installing camplates, when i will install not delivered yet B6 shocks, but maybe not .. after all, i reached camber of -3 using other means. It's proven and works and didn't had those issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for the advice. 

I’ve yet to purchase a GT86 but have pretty much decided now it’ll work as a car that can be bearable on the road yet still huge fun on track, hopefully without costing a fortune in consumables. 

My plan would be to keep the car as stock as possible and sprint it. Loving the idea of running the primacy tyres! 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

git-r: for very first trackday you may even try to go with everything completely stock. You'll feel better what is to your liking and what is not, some baseline, against which you will be able to evaluate changes, limits you'll hit and now will know by own butt-dyno feel/experience which and if and to what extent may need improving. Also twins imho are surprisingly capable even in completely stock form (probably due low weight). Just that i've seen people first modding s**t out of cars with 10K+ budget, and then at most doing one trackday at most at leasury pace if doing at all, with eg. BBK installed more "to better fill new big wheels", not to rise thermal capacity :) (after all, best performance mod ever is making driver better, not car, with more seat time & maybe help of HPDE instructors to shorten learning curve).

My "minimum track set" would be rear LCAs, front camberbolts in both holes, performance alignment with those, more track oriented brake pads & brake fluid of higher boiling temps, that's it.

I arrived to it in "steps", but it also better educated me as to what were limits i hit, what i now wished to fix, which mod, installed/changed one step at a time, affected what and how. Eg. stock alignment ripped outsides and was a bit too understeery in some turns - felt how extra camber (especially front) helped with that for higher speed in curves and grip balance easier to drive with, changed toe settings to even and slight toe-in rear - helped both for winter driving and accelerating out of corners on track, brake pads & fluid - i now could drive longer sessions without fade .. but i still feel beneficial to had first felt how stock fluid boiled and pads overheated/glazed to get that brake fade feel and importance of improving that part :). Beneficial to have those tires worn in non optimal fashion and to experience that front understeering first. Grippier tires upped speed .. but i'm glad to first wear down completely stock primacies when familiarizing with car both in daily driving & tracking it, instead of upgrading right away after purchasing car, to had experienced what people were spoken of "fun from low grip playfulness" instead of dulling everything with high grip "tramlining" tires to not loose traction even if i do stupid driving inputs and with which i wouldn't know how to handle  when (at much higher speeds) they will loose grip in probably less progressive/more abrupt manner. One can call primacies in names as no-grip, "prius" tires and such, but in reality even with those one can pull respectable side-Gs on skidpad and often go with confidence on roundabouts at 1.5x normal speed of generic family cars. If one will loose grip, it's usually because of driver inputs, especially of steering yanking and accelerator lead-footing and by then imho lower grip limits ease actual learning of fine control, input steadiness, how to correct when one looses grip .. and make mistakes cost less :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, git-r said:

Thanks again for the advice. 

I’ve yet to purchase a GT86 but have pretty much decided now it’ll work as a car that can be bearable on the road yet still huge fun on track, hopefully without costing a fortune in consumables. 

My plan would be to keep the car as stock as possible and sprint it. Loving the idea of running the primacy tyres! 

 

 

Just run it totally stock it will be absolutely fine. I tracked mine a fair bit before I changed anything. Don't change anything until you decide what you need to do. Always a good idea to run it stock and then change as you go along and where necessary. Cheaper that way too. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Church - thank you again - and this :

 

“My "minimum track set" would be rear LCAs, front camberbolts in both holes, performance alignment with those, more track oriented brake pads & brake fluid of higher boiling temps, that's it.”

is exactly what I’d plan. 

Same as you, I’d kill the edges of the tyre without camber so wouldn’t want to track it until that’s done, otherwise I will leave it completely stock. That’s the plan! 

Great advice about using stock first though!

Lauren - thanks also, and agreed but as above!

Hopefully I’ll be reporting back soon with news of my new car 😎

Thanks again for such useful advice 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×