Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Basically I have installed a set of "dog bone" upper camber arms and I can not get more then +1 camber on the front!! I could get -2 camber using the whiteline bushes/standard arms.....the wierd thing is that the hole to hole measurement is 10mm shorter on the dog bone arms (165mm) so in theory they should be giving better camber then -2...not +1.....?????

Bek

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/269876-r32-gtr-upper-camber-arms/
Share on other sites

I'am stating that the shorter the arm used the more negative camber, the question is why is an arm 10mm shorter then the standard arm giving less camber instead of more??

Edited by boostd_r32_gurl

It may be because the dog bones don't have the same offset as the stockers between the inner and the outer

You can install them in various ways and it effects both camber and caster. If you have them offset towards the front it may explain your problem (you also lose caster). If you have them even you will gain caster and it should increase your negative camber. I did in my GTSt, also going from an adjustable bush type to a dogbone.

I'm kinda guessing but it's about the only thing it could be really, short of a dud tape measure or your existing bushes having enough compliance that the geometry changes when loaded.

Yeah I ofsetted them to the exact shape/measurement as the standard arm so the dog bone was basically identical...might try to install them another way and see if that works....running out of idea's as its going for an alignment Friday.

Bek

who is measuring the camber? sometimes the problem is in the alignment gear.

also, have you adjusted castor since you had the -2 with the bushes? with the arms being 10mm shorter than the old -2 set-up with the offet bushes you obviously should have more neg not less.

has the height of the car changed since you had the -2 with the bushes? that will affect the camber too of course.

All sussed, had a play around today and although the arms were ofsetted correctly, the right hand side arm had been installed in the left hand side and vice versa......simple mistake....very annoying. Thanks for everyones help especially "badhairdave" who seemed to be right on the money. Looks to be around -3/-4 at about 355mm eyebrow height but will soon find out tomorrow at the aligner.

Bek

I'm betting that they put them on the wrong way around!

It's hard to describe, but the arms are an "H" shape. When installed correctly, the H shape should not symetrical. If they are installed incorrectly, the change in body length due to the adhustment doesn't pull at right angles to the direction of camber.

Anyway - take your wheel off and post a picture and I'll tell you if they are installed properly :-)

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


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • If as it's stalling, the fuel pressure rises, it's saying there's less vacuum in the intake manifold. This is pretty typical of an engine that is slowing down.   While typically is agree it sounds fuel related, it really sounds fuel/air mixture related. Since the whole system has been refurbished, including injectors, pump, etc, it's likely we've altered how well the system is delivering fuel. If someone before you has messed with the IACV because it needed fiddling with as the fuel system was dieing out, we need to readjust it back. Getting things back to factory spec everywhere, is what's going to help the entire system. So if it idles at 400rpm with no IACV, that needs raising. Getting factory air flow back to normal will help us get everything back in spec, and likely help chase down any other issues. Back on IACV, if the base idle (no IACV plugged in) is too far out, it's a lot harder for the ECU to control idle. The IACV duty cycle causes non linear variations in reality. When I've tuned the idle valves in the past, you need to keep it in a relatively narrow window on aftermarket ecus to stop them doing wild dances. It also means if your base idle is too low, the valve needs to open too much, and then the smallest % change ends up being a huge variation.
    • I guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
×
×
  • Create New...