lowered cars what are your toe settings? | FerrariChat

lowered cars what are your toe settings?

Discussion in 'Technical Q&A' started by laswyguy, Jun 16, 2013.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. laswyguy

    laswyguy F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 24, 2006
    6,344
    i have a nissan 350z which is pretty slammed on coil-overs and I run -2.6% camber... what should my toe settings be? the alignment shop set it to positive 3/32.. which sounds correct.. what say you all?
     
  2. Steve Magnusson

    Steve Magnusson Two Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa

    Jan 11, 2001
    26,781
    30°30'40" N 97°35'41" W (Texas)
    Full Name:
    Steve Magnusson
    #2 Steve Magnusson, Jun 16, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2013
    Huge negative camber (which you are already using), on wide (especially low profile) tires, gives bad enough wear on the inside tire tread area in street use - as does running a lot of toe-in -- but, when used together, the inside tire wear goes up exponentially (and 3/32" toe-in is already towards the upper side of usual street car spec toe-in ranges).

    Why the huge negative camber (or is that the nominal ballpark for a stock 350z)? You need the extra tire-to-coachwork clearance at the top of the tire; you like the DTM look; it is used like a DTM car ;); the lowering shifted the camber adjustment range, and -2.6 deg is the new minimum without modification?
     
  3. laswyguy

    laswyguy F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 24, 2006
    6,344
    yes, i do not have a camber kit.. so hence the negative camber on my car.. its lowered about 4-5 inches and run +20MM hub centric spacers with my fenders rolled on 19s.. the tires are not super wide, 275 35 19s.. and barely clear.. within millimeters of the fender.. i thought the TOE is what kills tires.. not the camber, and the rule of thumb was negative camber positive toe..??
     
  4. 4REphotographer

    4REphotographer F1 Veteran

    Oct 22, 2006
    6,197
    Arlington, VA
    Full Name:
    Chris
    I'm running -1 in the front, -2 in the rear, 0 toe in the front, ~.2 toe in the rear, S2000 lowered 1.25". I actually ordered new coilovers yesterday to get me closer to -2" height and ill probably keep the same alignment as long as I can fit a 255 in the rear, I have fairly aggressive wheels. That said I had my wheels off last month and noticed a decent amount of camber wear on the rears, tires have about 10k on them so not too bad but I do need to get the rears swapped.
     
  5. Steve Magnusson

    Steve Magnusson Two Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa

    Jan 11, 2001
    26,781
    30°30'40" N 97°35'41" W (Texas)
    Full Name:
    Steve Magnusson
    #5 Steve Magnusson, Jun 16, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2013
    Yes, it is -- just not a double, mega-boatload of both ;) On cars with a rearward weight bias, they tend to run a little more rear toe in order to have the outboard (more heavily loaded) rear tire sort of pre-pointing in the direction that you'd like it to go when cornering (but people b*tch about the low tire life). For absolute maximum peformance, you'd probably need to run even more camber (I wasn't kidding about the DTM cars -- every time I see one the thought that flashes into my head is "is the front suspension broken?" ;)) so like most things, you have to define what "best" means for you in the trade-off between best absolute performance and best tire life.

    I'd agree more with this statement back in the days when the tire aspect ratios were in the 75~80% range -- i.e., the tire sidewalls were much longer and more flexible so the loading across the tread didn't change with camber as much as it does today with these uber low sidewall tires.
     

Share This Page