Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

went in to get pink slip today, and was told the inner part of my front tyres were completely bald. I didn't even realise because it's not on the showing side, and I was told it was due to the camber on it.

I bought 2 new tyres and chucked them on to get my pinks approved, but was advised to get camber kits to fix the wear.

I'm not very knowledgeable in this area and thought it would be quicker to ask.

I've dropped my car a while ago with king springs (i think ultra low?) and the final measurement done by the workshop for camber was:

left: -2º08'

right: -2º16'

individual toe (both left and right): +0.8mm

setback: +0º07'

Wondering if camber kits is the way to go to fix up the wear, and if so, what is a reliable brand to go with?

:sweat:

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/431951-how-to-fix-my-camber/
Share on other sites

What car do you have?

Are the figures on camber you gave for the rear or front?

what suspension do you have? Typically everyone has a coilovers with top hats to adjust camber at the front and rear camber arms for the rear.

Ideal camber front and rear for spirited road and light track is -2 all round anyways.

Wow I didn't know you can get that much negative camber from height drop. You might have aftermarket arms (have a look).

-2deg is the most you would want to run on the street. You can add more toe in for more contact patch. But if you're daily driving it, better off bringing it out to -1.5

Have a look here: http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/409304-installing-front-camber-arms-and-radius-rods-r34/

Legendary,

Ideal camber is not -2°. If you have that and spend a reasonable proportion of time driving straight, you will wear out the inside edges. IDEAL camber depends on the usage model of the car. -1 to -1.5° is a more sensible amount for a typical streeter. If your "typical" actually means "flogged through the hills 90% of the time" then 2° will work well.

Furthermore, Skylines do not have front camber adjustment via strut tops because they do not have MacPherson strut suspension. Regardless of what it looks like, they do in fact need upper arm adjustment to gain camber adjustment.

suwidji,

Adjustable length upper arms that have rose joints on the end are not street legal. So if roadworthies are a concern for you do not consider them. Also do not consider cheap ones of these anyway, as they are crap. Sadly that means spending up big on some decent ones if you're going to use them.

Adjustable length uppers with rubber (or poly) bushes on the end are legal, although you may still get an argument from a dumb cop or a stupid inspector. It's not the adjustable length that's a problem, it's the rose joints that are not legal, but the rule gets misinterpreted.

The only almost completely invisible no legal trouble option is eccentric poly bushes for the existing arms, but they only offer a small range of adjustment. Still, it should be enough to dial out half a degree of camber, which should help.

GTSBoy,

Thanks for the info. In hindsight almost every car I owned was macpherson strut so just naturally assumed.

With the ideal camber, I had Toyo R1R's, Proxes 4 and Goodyear F1's all on -2 degree all round, and I did not see any camber wear on the inside. Hence my comment.

I had -1 to all around before and the car felt unwilling when I came into a corner (normally). Each to there own.

Legendary,

Ideal camber is not -2°. If you have that and spend a reasonable proportion of time driving straight, you will wear out the inside edges. IDEAL camber depends on the usage model of the car. -1 to -1.5° is a more sensible amount for a typical streeter. If your "typical" actually means "flogged through the hills 90% of the time" then 2° will work well.

Furthermore, Skylines do not have front camber adjustment via strut tops because they do not have MacPherson strut suspension. Regardless of what it looks like, they do in fact need upper arm adjustment to gain camber adjustment.

lots of terms that i had to google lol, not familiar with suspension terms.

So what you're saying is, I won't need camber kit, but getting an aftermarket upper arm with poly bushes (or rubber) OR just getting eccentric poly bushes and replacing the ones on the current arms is the way to go?

& that's correct, i drive the car straight pretty much all the time, and the inside of the tyre was worn completely. So just a 0.5 or 1 degree adjustment would be sufficient to fix my tread wear?

Any recommendations to reliable brands for upper arms/eccentric poly bushes? Don't want to cheap out on this lol

Adjustable arms or eccentric bushes are both "camber kits". "Camber kit" is a bit of a crap term brought about by the shitful rear suspension on early IRS Commodores that needed a kit to fix the 1970's geometry. Adjustable length arms are a somewhat more aggressive "fix" to the problem. Eccentric bushes are essentially the same thing as the "camber kit" for Commodores.

I don't know if pulling back to 1.5° will be enough to "fix" your camber wear, but it will certainly alleviate it. You'll get more miles out of the tyres. That really really depends on exactly how the car gets used. I have somewhere between 1 - 1.5 on my car and I don't see any noticable camber wear by the time the tyres get shifted to the rear of the car. They then proceed to get raped to the canvas at the rear anyway. I drive most of my miles just commuting to work, but I make it work hard in every corner I can, so my usage may be different enough to yours that the results will be different.

-2° front and -1.5° rear on my car. Front obviously wear the inside but the rears wears down evenly. If you like to push it a bit around corners (as I like to do) then -1.5° should be fine. If you're just putting around in your car then -1° is about as much as you want to run. Note that toe can also affect wear patterns.

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

    • Had I known the diff between R32 and R33 suspension I would have R33 suspension. That ship has sailed so I'm doing my best to replicate a drop spindle without spending $4k on a Billet one.
    • OEM suspension starts to bind as soon as the car gets away from stock height. I locked in the caster and camber before cutting off the kingpin. I then let the upright down in a natural (unbound) state before re-attaching it. Now it moves freely in bump and droop relative to the new ride height. My plan is to add GKTech arms before the car is finished so I can dial camber and caster further. It will be fine. This isn't rocket science. Caster looks good, camber is good, upper arm doesn't cause crazy gain and it is now closer to the stock angle and bump steer checks out. Send it.
    • Pay careful attention to the kinematics of that upper arm. The bloody things don't work properly even on a normal stock height R32. Nissan really screwed the pooch on that one. The fixes have included changing the hole locations on the bracket to change the angle of the inner pivot (which was fairly successful but usually makes it impossible to install or remove the arm without unbolting the bracket from the tower, which sucks) and various swivelling upper arm designs. ALL the swivelling upper arm designs that look like a capital I (with serifs) suck. All of them. Some of them are in fact terribly unsafe. Even the best one of them (the old UAS design) shat itself in short order on my car. The only upper arm that works as advertised and is pretty safe is the GKTech one. But it is high maintenance on a street car. I'm guessing that a 600HP car as (stupidly, IMO) low as you are going is not going to be a regular driver. So the maintenance issues on suspension parts are probably not going to be a problem. But you really must make sure that however your fairly drastically modded suspension ends up, that the upper arms swing through an arc that wants to keep the inner and outer bolts parallel. If the outer end travels through an arc that makes that end's bolt want to skew away from parallel with the inner bolt, you will build up enormous binding and compressing forces in the bushes, chew them out and hate life. The suspension compliance can actually be dominated by the bush binding, not the spring rate! It may be the case that even something like the GKTech arm won't work if your suspension kinematics become too weird, courtesy of all the cut and shut going on. Although you at least say there's no binding now, so maybe you're OK. Seeing as you're in the build phase, you could consider using R33/4 type upper arms (either that actual arm, OEM or aftermarket) or any similar wishbone designed to suit your available space, so alleviate the silliness of the R32 design. Then you can locate your inner pivots to provide the correct kinematics (camber gain on compression, etc).
    • The frontend wouldn't go low enough because the coilover was max low and the upper control arm would collapse into itself and potentially bottom out in the strut tower. I made a brace and cut off the kingpin and then moved the upright down 1.25" and welded. i still have to finish but this gives an idea. Now I can have a normal 3.25" of shock travel and things aren't binding. I'm also dropping the lower arm and tie rod 1.25".
    • Motor and body mockup. Wheel fitment and ride height not set. Last pic shows front ride height after modifying the front uprights to make a 1.25" drop spindle.
×
×
  • Create New...