Getting into DIY alignment, C4 vs C5 settings
#1
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Getting into DIY alignment, C4 vs C5 settings
I'm getting into some DIY alignment stuff on my 85 (thanks to Mr. Farmer for some great guidance at Stuff.com) and decided to start with VB&P settings as a baseline.
In their chart I noticed that they recommend 1.5-3 degrees negative on the front of a C4 and only .5 degree on the front of a C5 in the autocross baseline.
VB&P Chart
I realize they are very different cars, but in many ways, they are also similar in terms of weight, tire sizes, etc. Maybe those things don't play as a big a role as I think they might???
Why the huge difference? Is there something in the C5 geometry that "adds" camber when the wheel is turned? Is the chassis just that much better that it doesn't need so much camber? (<--Is that what they call "mechanical grip"?)
I guess the first question should be to those with experience with both, were your C4 camber settings a lot higher than your C5/6 settings now?
Obviously not trying to get into a C4 vs C5/6 debacle, just interested in learning more about suspension and alignment as I go.
In their chart I noticed that they recommend 1.5-3 degrees negative on the front of a C4 and only .5 degree on the front of a C5 in the autocross baseline.
VB&P Chart
I realize they are very different cars, but in many ways, they are also similar in terms of weight, tire sizes, etc. Maybe those things don't play as a big a role as I think they might???
Why the huge difference? Is there something in the C5 geometry that "adds" camber when the wheel is turned? Is the chassis just that much better that it doesn't need so much camber? (<--Is that what they call "mechanical grip"?)
I guess the first question should be to those with experience with both, were your C4 camber settings a lot higher than your C5/6 settings now?
Obviously not trying to get into a C4 vs C5/6 debacle, just interested in learning more about suspension and alignment as I go.
#2
Le Mans Master
I don't have experience in both, but I'd say the significant chassis stiffness on a C5 would mean it could get away with less camber.
#3
Le Mans Master
All I know is if you get any negative camber on a c4 without offset lower bushings you are lucky. I can only get 0 on my 92, offset bushings are this winter's project.
#4
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
I then measured the lean-in across the 17" wheel and it was 3/8". According to several sources, this is about -1.25 degrees camber. I eyeballed the toe a little and will finish tonight with real measurements.
There is an autox just a few miles from my house Sunday that I will drive to like this and then probably go back to -.5 to -.7 for the street. I've done two track weekends at 0 camber and it was FRUSTRATING. I know the car can turn better than that.
I'm surprised the 92 can't get close to the same. Are you sure all the shims are out? (at least all out in the forward bolt)
#5
Burning Brakes
I just did a trackday " Gingerman "
1.0 - in the front
1.5 in the rear
Zero toe both ends .
My Lt ft could have used a little more . I probably have differant wheel rates than you .
Im still playin with my smart struts
Car was pretty neutral ... 16" Kumos
I have a little room for more camber in the front , "no off set bushings "
I had worn U joints / bearings so it will get redone this weekend
End of the day I had 3- in the RT rear because of the U joint .
1.0 - in the front
1.5 in the rear
Zero toe both ends .
My Lt ft could have used a little more . I probably have differant wheel rates than you .
Im still playin with my smart struts
Car was pretty neutral ... 16" Kumos
I have a little room for more camber in the front , "no off set bushings "
I had worn U joints / bearings so it will get redone this weekend
End of the day I had 3- in the RT rear because of the U joint .
Last edited by Rob31; 05-14-2010 at 03:25 PM.