alignment settings
 

What's everyone running for alignment specs?

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1432778862.jpg

I had a hard time getting less than -2.5 camber in the rear and I was maxed out at -2 in the front, but I have Elephant racing monoballs up front, so that was expected.

Car scaled out great though.

Weights are with FULL tank of gas, now wheels or tires, but camber/tow plates.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1432778957.jpg

How do you intend to use the car? Street only, track only, combo? Tire widths help to know, too.

Did you scale with the sways disconnected?

awesome Brendon - I'll aim to dig my specs up in ze mornin from last summer's cb/align here

nice weight! What was yer prediction?

Spirited street and weekend rack car. Tires are 315's in the rear and 245's in the front...

Of course the sways were disconnected. Also scaled it with ballast. SmileWavy

if you have lowered the car a lot that increases the neg camber and reduces how much you can take out

i put a set of $1000 tires on my 930 and had it set up to factory spec for good tire wear.
my alignment was also $80.

i found a shop that has a really good alignment machine. my opinion is to use the equipment that has the tigtest specs for tolerance's. what is better, someone that can set the camber to 2 degrees +or- .5 degrees or 2 degrees +or - .001 degree? (actually minutes).
once that is done take it and put it on scales.
the porsche shop here wanted like $400 for an alignment. he tried to tell how difficult the 930 suspension was and a bunch of other crap to justify his price.
the guy that did mine new what he was doing and was done in less than an hour.

the machine that my car was done on was so sensitive the guy doing the work new when i put my hand on the rack.

Please don't take this wrong way - but you're not answering the OP's question.


OP:

My car is set at -1.5 degree camber front, 7 degrees caster, 1/32nd toe in. Rear is set for -2.8 degrees camber and 1/16th toe in. My cross balance is pretty close to your and was set with 200lbs ballast on the driver seat. My car's weight was 2,694lb IIRC and add my ballast to 2,894.

We were shooting to get around -2.5 degrees on the rear but couldn't get there at my ride height.

Wheels are 9" +30et fronts with 255's and 11.5" +0et rears with 315's.

Ride height... Well... I think like 24.5"?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...ps3sjw7rtb.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...psmdkkzona.jpg

Along the lines of what the prior two gents are saying, your cambers end up rather dictated by ride height - and ride height is where I start things when I'm doing an alignment. So, this explanation is more about the ideology in alignments than the numbers you get - because you are limited, obviously.

The first rule I practice is keeping the suspension within its designed working range, starting with the front. If you haven't already raised your spindles at least 19mm (3/4") you should. Getting the car down low without preserving the correct angle of the lower A-arms will give adverse effects. While it won't make the car ill-handling, it will ride like crap and you won't be getting the full potential out of the tires and the suspension. I like to see the A-arms slightly pointed down and no lower than parallel to the ground when the car is static. This will put the tire at a good point to utilize the (factory) intended camber gain when it rolls in a corner.

Once the front is set, I move to the rear but I measure the car's rake angle and fine tune with actual height. I like to see somewhere around 1* rake with as little as 3/4* and as much as 1-1/4*.

'Hams930T' numbers work well for a street/light track setup, I think. But, I would try for less rear camber. If no less than 2.5* is the best you can get then it is what it is.

When you're at the track and if you can get enough heat into your tires, tire temps will tell you everything you need to know about the cambers and you'll have a clear direction where to go with them. Of course, keeping in mind that an optimal track setup typically means a less than ideal setup for street use and tire life. So, you'll just have to find a happy medium that you like.

Notes below.

Look at Elephant Racing's website for spindle height guidance for your given wheel diameter. I think you can do something like 40mm on 17s.

I measure rake at the bottom of the door sills.

Good luck!!

actually my first sentence does. if the car is lowered too much that can keep him from getting any more than -2.5 and -2

"my alignment was also $80"

Damn, wish I could find a place like that. Dealer here quoted $389 minimum. Said it would probably be more because I'm lowered some.

My settings with 9x17 and 10x17 235/255:

Front Rear
Toe-in: +5' +15' (per side)

Camber: -1°30' -1°30'

Caster: 5° -------

i asked around at some of the tire shops about who does 930's or who had 911 experience. one shop told me about this guy with the latest and greatest machine. i asked him if he had done 930's and he said yes. now i take all my cars there.

this is why i posted what i did. to let others know you dont have to get a $400 alignment for it to be right.
i did my 77 like the OP did at a friends shop. i noted some things about doing it this way that leaves a little to be desired if you want it the best it can be.
also thought the OP may have concerns about having it done like this vs a computerized machine. i was also having issues with rear camber, mainly on one side and the rear wearing out tires.

My OP was to express some concern that I wasn't able to get enough camber OUT of the front and rear, which might e the case on the front. But the rear looks to be OK.

I was merely looking for the specs guys were running. As metalracer noted, the proof will be in the temps. Whats good for one car/driver may be completely different for another. I am running 350/800 springs so I may need less camber than others. I am also running lowered ride height, adjustable sways, mono balls, so there are a lot less places for the factory suspension to move/flex in the rubber bushings.

I have to disagree with one thing though. Having the best it can be, by having the latest and greatest alignment machine most race teams still string up their cars and are very successful. Sure, a computer alignment can get you within a certain Minute Of Angle but it might not be the correct MOA for your car.

Have you tracked your car and checked your specs against temps?

Baseline alignments are just that, a baseline. For street cars that is great, but for spirited or tracked cars, you will have to fine tune your baseline for every track and even different weather conditions for the same track.

Looks like I need to get a lapping day in and check some temps. I have a feeling my -2 in the front might be an issue, but I think I have a fairly good baseline and the car tracks nicely on the road right now. I'll have to get it under some loads to be sure.

Thanks for all the input guys it's really appreciated

Brendon-

Found mah stats from last summer for ya:

Camber LF -.5 degrees RF -.5 degrees
Front Caster 6.0 degrees
Front toe +.04 degrees
Camber LR -1.9 RR -1.9
LR Toe +.25 degrees RR toe +.25 degrees

Ride height to fender with 180 Lb driver and no ARB connected
LF 25 3/4 RF 25 5/8
LR 25 1/2 RR 25 5/8

LF 592 RF 552
LR 987 RR 928
Cross weight 50.2%
total: 2,889

This was setup @ Musante Motorsports here, they widely (and quite successfully) campaign their own 930 in VSCCA / PCA events.

My car's usage is same as yours... very spirited street, some DE. I'm running 255/295x18s, OE front torsions / Rebel Racing rear coilovers with 500* springs. Tire wear seems even so far (knockwood!) with maybe 2k mi on them thus far.

While no tire temps, the handling is nothing short of sublime, with razor sharp precision turn-in.

Diggin it, fersure.

Hope that helps...

looks like I am going to have to bring my ride height up a little to get the camber where I need it to be. Either that or get some non-cambered mono balls for the front suspension.

Thanks!!

it's not exactly like raising it up from where yer currently at is going to result in Ranchoness

yesterday:

<img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-tq_l7h3e5LE/VWepDZ10kDI/AAAAAAAAlSY/Wjh20dE1aWE/w1316-h741-no/20150528_194703.jpg"height=400width=600>

and that's with me bumping the nose up by a C-hair (redheaded) with the torsion adjuster because I was getting some tire rub under compression with my instructor onboard @ MMC

I haven't tried -2 on my front end yet. However I went from -1 and 6.5 degrees caster to -1.5 and 7 degrees caster. I have slower turn in at -1.5 but holds the line better. The trade-off is I also noticed a little less stability straight line. I dialed in a 32nd of toe on the front to add a little stability as a test.

Once my car is done at TK and I have it back, I am going to lower front spring rate 50lbs, go back to -1 degree camber / 6.5 degrees caster on the front and pull out the toe. I am thinking the camber/caster change will speed up turn in and the lower spring rate up front will move my balance back up front a little more.

With that to say - I have observed my car doesn't need as much camber on the front due to the weight bias of the car.

Chris.

Ooooops .... supposed to be in the POTD thread

^sweet alignment settings there, Paul!!!^

(errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...) :p