Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

First, I want to give a huge thanks to this forum already. Without you all, my Laurel would still have a locked trunk and I'd be paying a locksmith to get in. I live in the US and we recently started getting R32s, A31s and C33s because of a law that makes them classic cars over here after 25 years. Unfortunately, shops don't have specifications for anything on the cars. Was curious if anyone knew and could give me the stock alignment specs for a C33. I'm trying to fix some alignment issues, but the shop said they couldn't do much without knowing what the alignment should be from factor.

I'm on coilovers as well, so if you have better specifications to make the car stable, I'm all ears. I spend a lot of time around 110 - 130kph if that makes a difference.

Thanks

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/460642-stock-alignments-specs-c33-us/
Share on other sites

Here's the new alignment specs for the C33. The shop based them off an S13. They happened to do a heavily modified, very low one the day before so it ended up being pretty easy for them.

Thanks to anyone who at least gave some thought to it. Hopefully this will help someone in the future.

Cheers

xW1vCW4.jpg

  • 3 weeks later...

just dont run 24" rims as in the above alignment picture :nyaanyaa:

general car alignment should be the same as s13 + what ever feels better

front
camber- pending how much grip you need while turning, how long you want your front tyres to last from camber wear 2.5 deg should be nice and grippy
even for both side 7-8 deg castor pending how you want steering wheel to flick back, think stock is 6 deg maybe..
front toe 0.5mm toe each side so total toe 1mm

rear
least amount of camber unless fitment game rules over grip
toe is usually driver preference, least amount for straight line grip, adding more and playing around can help with stability while drifting

:action-smiley-069:

Edited by Dan_J

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

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...