Quote:
Originally Posted by 993innc
Well I'm not exactly sure how comparing a completely different car applies? I have been told here and by others, that the values need to be as close to -3 camber etc as I can get as a starting point to work from.
These values are maxed out as you see it. These aren't arbitrary values, they are all the car could give me for the parts I altered.
|
I understand where you are coming from, but some things don't look right to me either.
That right rear looks like too much negative camber and too much toe-in. I am guessing from these rear end camber vs. toe numbers that your rear end is lowered to the point that you cannot reduce the camber any more, and you are stuck with too much toe-in at the rear. You may need to raise your ride height slightly to get back into a good adjustment range.
For the front I like to run absolute zero front toe, but to each his own. It's usually not a big deal, but I think these cars naturally have a bit too much caster. If you have the adjustable bushings in the center of your GT3 arms, you can adjust out some of that caster. Sometimes this helps if you are having problems with really wide front tires rubbing on the fender liner. I also have a theory that reduced caster can help with that stupid power steering overheating issue, and seems to help bump steer.
I'd take it back, even if it meant another iteration with corner weight adjustment.
One more thing on that -3 deg negative camber thing: If you are running NT-01's, I think this is really more camber than is optimum based on tire temperatures and wear patterns I have experienced. If you are running HoHo R6's or A6's, yes you definitely want the -3 degrees. Dunlops seem to like close to -3 also. I can't say for sure on others, but generally the stiffer the sidewall, the less negative camber a given tire needs.
Good luck.
Hybrid Mode
