Looking for advice on maximum positive camber on my street/track 308 QV. When I lowered it with the new QA1s and stiffer springs, the rear camber was increased a bit (which I like) but the front seems to have remained pretty neutral. I am having the alignment checked/done at a local performance shop while I get my new tires mounted, and want to throw some pos camber into the frontend (the car pushes quite a bit on the track entering turns, but I can get a little rear end drift on exit). I know too much camber in the front can be a bad thing, especially on a street car, so hence my question. I'll also be continuing to experiment with tire pressures,damping and springs at the track this weekend, but with as much understeer and outside edge tire wear as I am experiencing, I'm thinking at least a little more camber is needed in the front. How much ?
Don't you mean that you want more negative camber at the front to reduce understeer (push)? IME, you'll run out of threaded stud length on the front lower A-arm brackets before you'll get too much negative camber -- IIRC, mine maxed out at about -1 deg (negative) camber, and I would've liked to run more negative just to get more even tire wear (lowered with 205/55-16 tires).
lou was it involved getting tho fit in your car? was there any modification needed to make them fit? how much lower did it make your car thanks
On the advice of the local P guy whos sets up cars locally "max camber" which on my 308 ended up neutral with all the shim we could put in there. If I got serious I'd make forks with longer studs to achieve at least -1 maybe -2.5 degree (see Hoosier site). Rear you can get a little more negative with the stock forks. What about bump steer . . . anyone dialed in (or not for analytical reasons) the bump steer on the 308? Also, anyone done camber curves with wheel travel? I was surprised the geometry didn't gain some camber with lowering . .. this is something "that happens" on the 911's. Here's another secret if you get serious to improve handling/mechanical grip . .. if the location of the top shock mount didn't share the same location as the control arm pivot, it makes the spring rate increase due to the geometry . .. just requoting form Carrol Smith's books . .. haven't laid out the geometry to confirm this. To answer your question, you'll run out of thread before you'll have enough camber to be fast Sean edit: just like 91tr said . . . but I couldn't get -1 with the stock forks . .. seemed like it even lost a bit when I lowerd
Yeah.. more neg. So, looks like i can't put enough camber in with stock forks, so I'll just max it out. Thanx.
Sean, Yes, seems the rear increases with lowering, while the front decreases. Must be the geometry of the control arms front vs rear. Looks like a job for Luckydynes, Verell, or Mke..."New 308 front camber fork upgrade mod !!"...um....I mean "fork shaped paperweights !" Cheers
