Camber issuse. (prob not enough)

[dangerous_daveo]

Ok, new tyres, issues with the front. The OUTSIDE of the tyre seems to be wearing quite badly already. I would assume more camber would fix the problem. As on banked corners the car just tucks in and goes round hard, anything flat, its an issue.

ATM, the settings are 6.5* castor, 1.1* camber, and I think about 2* toe in.

I have the rest of the settings on the wheel alinement sheet, but they dont really make sence to me. So if they are needed sing out and I'll post them up.

[Mr GTS4]

is it on both sides? have you noticed a height difference?

[dangerous_daveo]

Yeah, its a pretty even alinement. The car goes straight fine, its VERY even. Hights might not be the same, but that shouldnt be an issue, espeically after it gets corner ballanced.

Im more so worried about scrubbing the outside of the tyres out. But I dont want to be running too much camber and have the insides scrub out.

Tyres are Brig GIIIs too if that helps.

[Abo Bob]

I was just thinking about this today.

I think you can get these things called adjustable camber tops. (I think) So you just stop your car and get out with the right size socket, loosen two nuts (for each one), move the wheel somehow and then tighten back up.

They have markings on them so you know exactly how many degrees you are adjusting them and therefore don't need a machine to tell you.

Anyone else heard of these? Can you get them for R34?

I guess the idea is that you adjust it to suit your driving at the time. Ie; for the track put 5 degrees in or something, for the street 1.5...

[dangerous_daveo]

Yeah, its already got camber tops I think tho, if you just change it you would still need an alinement of sorts, its not exact.

[dangerous_daveo]

Bump bump. Im not too keen on stuffing $270 tyres! Help someone please.

[Duncan]

Well you can't use adjustable strut tops to change camber on a skyline, they only work on car with mcpherson struts, skylines use double wishbones instead.

As a result you get better and more predictable suspension, less bump steer etc, but adjusting camber is trickier.

What you need for a skyline is shorter or even better adjustable upper control arm bushes, that will let you set the camber you are after.

Re the alignment problem, is that alignment current? the settings seem OK to me, maybe a little too much toe in which might be causing the problem? You haven't hit a gutter or anything since the alignment?

[Lunatic Dancer]

your 2* toe in is killing your tyres bad....

i'd get it realigned back to 0..

have you dont alot of twisty driving after ur wheel alignment?

[dangerous_daveo]

Not too much twisty stuff. But enought to what would seem kill the tyres. No bumps/gutters at all, i try and avoild them at almost all costs.

BTW the car is a cefiro, ie siliva suspension.

I'll get it redone in a few weeks along with a corner balace, as I think thats way out of wack.

[Silver-Arrowz]

I say try resetting the toe in.

[Sydneykid]

Ok, new tyres, issues with the front.  The OUTSIDE of the tyre seems to be wearing quite badly already.  I would assume more camber would fix the problem.  As on banked corners the car just tucks in and goes round hard, anything flat, its an issue.

ATM, the settings are 6.5* castor, 1.1* camber, and I think about 2* toe in.

I have the rest of the settings on the wheel alinement sheet, but they dont really make sence to me.  So if they are needed sing out and I'll post them up.

Is that camber 1.1 negative or 1.1 positive?

I wouldn't be running toe in, zero or slight toe out is best for turn in.

Post up the rest of the settings please.

How low is this C31?

If it's too low, they go positive camber on compression.

They also bump steer something terrible.

What tyre pressures?

Front spring rate?

Front stabiliser bar rate?

Rear stabiliser bar rate?

That should just about cover it, with that data we can make a pretty good assesment.

[dangerous_daveo]

Ok attached is the wheel alinement sheet with the company etc taken off Also the rear wheels as they were not touched at all.

All tyres are Brig GIIIs, prob on about 36psi.

Front spring rate is 350lbs. I dont know about the shock settings as they were custom built to apparently suit the springs (used to have 450lb springs, 350lbs are from the rear of the car, which now has 200lbs)

Front and rear stabilisers should be standard, if not they are off some factory nissan, so if say GTR or skyline ones are bigger and fit, they might be them, but we are pretty sure they are stock ceffy ones.

The front arms are pretty much straight.... So I guess it probably is too low, it is the plan to raise it a bit more, its probably (at the cat) about 90mm. But keeping in mind their stock hight is 150mm, and thats not with a big straight exaust.

That should be enough info.

Being serious tho, it could be me thinking the car should handle better, when really its just not posible for it to. But it does FEEL as if it could be doing a lot better than it is.

[dangerous_daveo]

Quick bump! I dont mean to bump it, but Id like to have an asnwer ASAP so I dont get ripped off by another suspenion shop.

[Sydneykid]

Ok attached is the wheel alinement sheet with the company etc taken off  Also the rear wheels as they were not touched at all.

All tyres are Brig GIIIs, prob on about 36psi.

Front spring rate is 350lbs.  I dont know about the shock settings as they were custom built to apparently suit the springs (used to have 450lb springs, 350lbs are from the rear of the car, which now has 200lbs)

Front and rear stabilisers should be standard, if not they are off some factory nissan, so if say GTR or skyline ones are bigger and fit, they might be them, but we are pretty sure they are stock ceffy ones.

The front arms are pretty much straight....  So I guess it probably is too low, it is the plan to raise it a bit more, its probably (at the cat) about 90mm.  But keeping in mind their stock hight is 150mm, and thats not with a big straight exaust.

That should be enough info.

Being serious tho, it could be me thinking the car should handle better, when really its just not posible for it to.  But it does FEEL as if it could be doing a lot better than it is.

My observations;

No rear whell alignment settings, they are part of the package and can have great effect, don't ignore them/

Toe in 1.9mm is pretty insignificant but I would not have it on my car.

It shows some bump steer, usually a sign of it being too low. The standard measurement is from the centre of the wheel to the guard verticaly. That way wheel diameter makes no difference, neither does size of exhaust.

Caster and camber are both OK as is SAI.

Summary, it's not a wheel alignment problem, the spring rates are OK. That leaves height. Measure it up and post the heights on here (all 4 please), we should be able to compare it with others.

[dangerous_daveo]

Ok, thanks for that...

Now the rest of the info, plus what I remember from the last time the rear was done.

Rear settings were 1.9* of camber as we couldnt dial anymore out of it, the rest would be what a normal run of the mill road car would be using, such as toe etc. Also those rear tyres have worn almost perfectly flat, nothing abnormal.

Now for the hights. Assuming I have dont it correctly.

FL 335mm FR 320mm

RL 330mm RR 320mm

I also checked that all the suspension arms, the rears seem to be pointing slightly downwards as I guess they should.

The fronts however are horizonal, dead level, so I would be saying as soon as they have any downward pressure they are starting to lose the camber.

[Sydneykid]

Ok, thanks for that...

Now the rest of the info, plus what I remember from the last time the rear was done.

Rear settings were 1.9* of camber as we couldnt dial anymore out of it, the rest would be what a normal run of the mill road car would be using, such as toe etc.  Also those rear tyres have worn almost perfectly flat, nothing abnormal.

Now for the hights.  Assuming I have dont it correctly.

FL 335mm                  FR 320mm

RL 330mm                  RR 320mm

I also checked that all the suspension arms, the rears seem to be pointing slightly downwards as I guess they should.

The fronts however are horizonal, dead level, so I would be saying as soon as they have any downward pressure they are starting to lose the camber.

My guess is looking pretty good, 320mm and no angle on the lower control arms, sounds like it abouts 35 mm too low. It won't have enough travel and the lower arms will angle up on bumps, braking and roll and it will go towards positive camber. Time for some new springs.

[dangerous_daveo]

Coilovers my friend SydneyKid, we shall just raise the barstard

One question tho, front and rear or just the rear? Because as I say, the rear arms are pointing down how the should be unlike the front.

[Sydneykid]

Coilovers my friend SydneyKid, we shall just raise the barstard

One question tho, front and rear or just the rear?  Because as I say, the rear arms are pointing down how the should be unlike the front.

Personally I'd start with a 10 degree angle on the front lower control arms and then have the rear sill (measured just in front of the rear wheels) 8 mm higher than the front sill (measured just behind the frontwheels). For future refence, that's called "rake". Then try coming down a little, say in 5 mm steps (centre of wheel to guard) until the handling goes off. Then you know how low you can go.

Changing the rake will affect the overall balance, so you can play with that once you have settled on an optimium height. After all that's what coil overs are for.

[dangerous_daveo]

Alright. Thanks heaps. At long last an answer the suspension shop couldnt give me. They just said it was too stiff all the time. I kept pointing out to them they had custom built the shocks

[dangerous_daveo]

Ok, all done today, along with a corner ballance. So what bloody happens, it buckets down with rain. But it did imeadiately feel a LOT better to drive.

I'll post back again once it drys up.