Proper lowering setup/components

[sheizasosay]

Agreed. Those eibach sportlines are very low though.

That's why I said keep the Roush springs. We're on the same page. 1" lowered....not a big deal unless you put on some race rubber and then you would be eating in to more travel. The tires would dictate the need....as it should.

 

[quiksilver15]

FYI, I run steeda ultralights (1.25" front) and J&M upper strut mounts. My plates are maxed out on adjustment to get camber in spec. Food for thought.

 

[mfergel]

FYI, I run steeda ultralights (1.25" front) and J&M upper strut mounts. My plates are maxed out on adjustment to get camber in spec. Food for thought.

Interesting. That is good to know. I would have thought they would have had more than enough room to make a proper adjustment.

 

[jmauld]

Why would you want your camber in spec? A little extra camber will make the car handle better. I have my plates max'd out in the other direction, and still want to add more camber.

 

[NDSP]

Interesting. That is good to know. I would have thought they would have had more than enough room to make a proper adjustment.

You can run the J&M plates in two orientations. One will allow you to get maximum negative camber which still isn't quite enough (-2.5 max) and the other ( 180 degrees spun around ) to allow for "spec" alignment. You can just get it in spec if you max it outward in the max negative chamber orientation. which it sounds like what he is experiencing.

 

[quiksilver15]

Why would you want your camber in spec? A little extra camber will make the car handle better. I have my plates max'd out in the other direction, and still want to add more camber.

Which is great if I road raced the car. But for a toy that I just drive around with it will chew up tires.

You can run the J&M plates in two orientations. One will allow you to get maximum negative camber which still isn't quite enough (-2.5 max) and the other ( 180 degrees spun around ) to allow for "spec" alignment. You can just get it in spec if you max it outward in the max negative chamber orientation. which it sounds like what he is experiencing.

Ya I have mine maxed out to get the car in spec.

 

[csamsh]

Which is great if I road raced the car. But for a toy that I just drive around with it will chew up tires.

Given the people that post in this section of the forum...the only conceivable reason for many of us to lower a car is so it will be faster either on track or in an autox....so hopefully you understand why everybody is shouting "camber!"

 

[jmauld]

Which is great if I road raced the car. But for a toy that I just drive around with it will chew up tires.

A little bit of camber won't chew up tires as bad as you think it will. Just make sure your toe is set to spec. Honestly, if you're just lowering your car for looks, there was no need to spend money on camber plates. You would've been fine with just letting the camber work itself out.

 

[quiksilver15]

Given the people that post in this section of the forum...the only conceivable reason for many of us to lower a car is so it will be faster either on track or in an autox....so hopefully you understand why everybody is shouting "camber!"

Okay maybe I misunderstood the reason for camber plates when I installed them. I was under the impression that they were to get the car back into spec. But from the way y'all are explaining them, It sounds like they are to add additional (-) camber???

A little bit of camber won't chew up tires as bad as you think it will. Just make sure your toe is set to spec. Honestly, if you're just lowering your car for looks, there was no need to spend money on camber plates. You would've been fine with just letting the camber work itself out.

What is considered little enough to not chew up tires? I will be having my car realigned when I install new lower control arms this winter.
Sorry OP for hijacking your thread.

 

[Sam Strano]

You can do a lot better as far as I'm concerned with the parts list. But I'm not really sure what the goal is.

I've been working on and competing in these since they came out winning the first SCCA national event in a 2005 in 2006. I can help.

Frankly I think you might be using parts you don't need, and going the wrong way on the parts you want to really be good.

 

[jmauld]

I've never had a problem with -1.5 camber. -2.0 is probably okay, but it will depend on how aggressive you drive. Any more camber than that will start causing issues, if you don't drive it aggressively. If you do, you'll want even more.

 

[csamsh]

Okay maybe I misunderstood the reason for camber plates when I installed them. I was under the impression that they were to get the car back into spec. But from the way y'all are explaining them, It sounds like they are to add additional (-) camber???

Yeah "in spec" camber can tear tires up fairly quickly. Lots of us are looking for -3 degrees and such for track days/racing.

 

[sheizasosay]

You can run out of negative camber with lowering.
You want to avoid the camber bolts. Plates are recommended over bolts every time. Of course you will pay that difference.

Getting the car back in spec for daily driving is the goal, but Having the ability to adjust for more negative camber is more important for those who track their cars.

This is the reason why folks say "what is the intent" or "goal" many times. You competing? Daily driver with a track days...etc.

 

[Whiskey11]

Yeah "in spec" camber can tear tires up fairly quickly. Lots of us are looking for -3 degrees and such for track days/racing.

Depends entirely upon how that "in spec" is achieved... with camber bolts, "in spec" + big tires = dead tires from "camber" wear even if toe is in spec... There was a thread on here not too long ago of a guy who had -0.75º of camber and +0.10º toe in and complained about "camber wear" and the only thing I could think of was a scrub radius change caused by camber bolts at the strut knuckle, wide wheels and tires with radically different offsets from stock.

I ran for about 500 miles during Nationals at -3.0º camber, -0.10º toe out and +7.0º caster and had no issues, daily drove this year at -1.5º, 0 toe and +7.0º Caster for close to 12k miles without any excessive camber wear and last year I drove at -1.7º camber, 0 toe and +7.3º caster with no issues. I'm still seeing outside camber wear on my autocross tires and the insides still have the nubbies on them. I also take corners more enthusiastically than most people do so that helps some but I don't do a lot of straight line driving and hard braking while daily driving so YMMV.

 

[BigRed06GT]

You can run the J&M plates in two orientations. One will allow you to get maximum negative camber which still isn't quite enough (-2.5 max) and the other ( 180 degrees spun around ) to allow for "spec" alignment. You can just get it in spec if you max it outward in the max negative chamber orientation. which it sounds like what he is experiencing.

You sure it's 2.5? I have mine installed in race orientation with bilsteins and steeds sports with a 285 tire and maxed I was only able to get 2 degrees negative. I was hoping for -2.5.

Just giving the OP a heads up if he goes with the J&M plates.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Whiskey11]

You sure it's 2.5? I have mine installed in race orientation with bilsteins and steeds sports with a 285 tire and maxed I was only able to get 2 degrees negative. I was hoping for -2.5.

Just giving the OP a heads up if he goes with the J&M plates.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is going to depend entirely upon the springs used because you are going to "gain" some negative camber by lowering up until the lower control arm is perpendicular to the steering axis but you obviously then quickly lose it the closer you get to that point without either relocating the chassis side pickup or getting taller ball joints.

 

[moostang09]

If you want to hook a brother up on the roush's shoot me a pm with details and an asking price. No rush.

 

[BigRed06GT]

That is going to depend entirely upon the springs used because you are going to "gain" some negative camber by lowering up until the lower control arm is perpendicular to the steering axis but you obviously then quickly lose it the closer you get to that point without either relocating the chassis side pickup or getting taller ball joints.

So if I go with some taller ball joints I would be able to get some more negative camber?

Thanks for the info

 

[SoundGuyDave]

So if I go with some taller ball joints I would be able to get some more negative camber?

Thanks for the info

Nope. All the ball joints will do is change the front roll center, which I don't think is something you need to worry about if your main goal is to slam the car, and not focus on handling.

 

[mfergel]

My head hurts.

Hmmm..........you guys have me concerned about the J&M camber plates now, even if I run them flipped 180. With my Roush setup I'm at spec with no camber plates (but there is no wiggle room to go any further). I was thinking of going no more than -1 to -1.5 with the J&M plates. At spec with the Roush springs I've been really happy with tire wear in terms of 'daily driver' and haven't seen any significant wear on the tire. Maybe slightly more on the inside but still getting good life out of the tires. In terms of 'running the course' I've been on the fence about the Eibach's (wondering if they were too low). Right now I get a pretty good ride from my setup with the Roush springs and stock struts/shocks............but...........I've got way too much rebound, especially out back. I don't recall any significant times when I "bottomed" out. As much as I'd love to close up a little more wheel gap maybe the best bet is to stick with the Roush springs and look into an adjustable shock/strut. With the Roush springs I'd think the J&M camber plates would still work??