More Front Camber. How's it done?

[BRAIDusa]

We are running pretty much a stock alignment on our 84 Carrera RallyCross car right now but we feel we need more front and rear camber. The rear we can get out of the stock adjustments but the front seems limited. What are the methods and/or parts people have used to get say -3 degrees in the front? What's worked, what hasn't. What's not too expensive either?

[Mahler9th]

You can get a little more negative camber via efforts to create more clearance in the shock towers. For cars with t-bars, you can get some additional negative camber from a product like the Wevo Camber king.

Camber plates of course are possible for a broader range of adjustment.

Modified factory control arms (cut and rewelded) are an age old way of getting more negative camber.

The 935-style front suspension from companies like Eisenlohr Racing Products can allow quite a range of negative camber to be achieved.

De-cambered ball joints from Elephant Racing Products can get you a bit more negative camber.

My race car is really low and has coilovers. I will likely soon change to tires that need quite a bit more negative camber than I have currently. I do not have camber plates. To achieve my goals, my first choice will be the 935-style parts from Eisenlohr. My second choice will likely be modified factory arms.

Third would be the de-cambered ball joints if I need just a smidge, but I have heard from reputable shops that you cannot count on an additional 3/4 degree from those parts (so expect something less), and I have heard reports of failures that make me uneasy. I have a couple of friends that have been running them in similar cars, and they are being very vigilant.

If I had a car with a high ride height that was used off road, I would consider the Eisenlohr parts or modified factory a-arms, the latter with work done by someone with previous experience. My next choice would be camber plates, but that is a big fab job on the shock towers.

[BRAIDusa]

Originally Posted by Mahler9th

You can get a little more negative camber via efforts to create more clearance in the shock towers. For cars with t-bars, you can get some additional negative camber from a product like the Wevo Camber king.

Camber plates of course are possible for a broader range of adjustment.

Modified factory control arms (cut and rewelded) are an age old way of getting more negative camber.

The 935-style front suspension from companies like Eisenlohr Racing Products can allow quite a range of negative camber to be achieved.

De-cambered ball joints from Elephant Racing Products can get you a bit more negative camber.

My race car is really low and has coilovers. I will likely soon change to tires that need quite a bit more negative camber than I have currently. I do not have camber plates. To achieve my goals, my first choice will be the 935-style parts from Eisenlohr. My second choice will likely be modified factory arms.

Third would be the de-cambered ball joints if I need just a smidge, but I have heard from reputable shops that you cannot count on an additional 3/4 degree from those parts (so expect something less), and I have heard reports of failures that make me uneasy. I have a couple of friends that have been running them in similar cars, and they are being very vigilant.

If I had a car with a high ride height that was used off road, I would consider the Eisenlohr parts or modified factory a-arms, the latter with work done by someone with previous experience. My next choice would be camber plates, but that is a big fab job on the shock towers.

That's an interesting collection of options and observations Mike. Thanks for your input. A little research into these is required me thinks. Better put the kettle on.

[wildcat077]

I was able to get -3.0 front camber after i replaced my Tarett camber plates with the ER units which give you a little more range.
For the record,i was maxed out at -2.4 on both sides with the Tarett camber plates so i installed ER decambered balljoints which gave me an additional 0.4 degrees but it still wasn't enough at -2.8 and my "R" compounds were slightly suffering more outer shoulder wear than i liked.With the ER camber plates and decambered balljoints you will easily gain -3.0 for the front and in the rear with the Cambermax adjuster i'm good at -2.8 on both sides.

Cheers
Phil

[Mahler9th]

High ride height is an enemy of negative camber. So that should be taken into account as you collect your thoughts.

Also, I use the term camber plate to describe a family of products with a very wide range of adjustabiilty. In older 911 cars, these are bolted on to a welded-in arrangement/box that replaces the stock shock tower tops. This approach can give you a big range of adjustment.

There is another family of products that are bolt-in strut tops/bearings that offer more negative camber than stock strut mounts. I think these offer a lower opportunity for additional negative camber.

It helps to know how much you need, and what will work with your ride height. My car is slammed low so I don't need as much additional negative camber as a car that is much higher.

I will send you a pm.

[Driven97]

I run cheap eBay camber plates. The bearings disintegrated after only a few months, but I got some kickass stainless replacements that popped right in. Even having to do that, I'm still way under what ER charges for theirs.

[BRAIDusa]

And how much camber can you get?

Originally Posted by Driven97

I run cheap eBay camber plates. The bearings disintegrated after only a few months, but I got some kickass stainless replacements that popped right in. Even having to do that, I'm still way under what ER charges for theirs.

[BRAIDusa]

I'll have to look into ER camber plates.


FYI our car is at stock US ride height.

Originally Posted by wildcat077

I was able to get -3.0 front camber after i replaced my Tarett camber plates with the ER units which give you a little more range.
For the record,i was maxed out at -2.4 on both sides with the Tarett camber plates so i installed ER decambered balljoints which gave me an additional 0.4 degrees but it still wasn't enough at -2.8 and my "R" compounds were slightly suffering more outer shoulder wear than i liked.With the ER camber plates and decambered balljoints you will easily gain -3.0 for the front and in the rear with the Cambermax adjuster i'm good at -2.8 on both sides.

Cheers
Phil

Originally Posted by Mahler9th

High ride height is an enemy of negative camber. So that should be taken into account as you collect your thoughts.

Also, I use the term camber plate to describe a family of products with a very wide range of adjustabiilty. In older 911 cars, these are bolted on to a welded-in arrangement/box that replaces the stock shock tower tops. This approach can give you a big range of adjustment.

There is another family of products that are bolt-in strut tops/bearings that offer more negative camber than stock strut mounts. I think these offer a lower opportunity for additional negative camber.

It helps to know how much you need, and what will work with your ride height. My car is slammed low so I don't need as much additional negative camber as a car that is much higher.

I will send you a pm.

[Driven97]

Originally Posted by BRAIDusa

And how much camber can you get?

I measured a little more than -2°. When I put the stock camber plates in breifly it was definitely less, but I didn't think to measure it. As you know my car is quite a bit lower than yours.

I also have my front caster maxed out, aka top of the struts all the way rearward in the adjustment range. While this doesn't give you static camber, you do get camber gain with increased steering angle. The penalty is the steering gets more difficult. Note the angle of the tires here:



Despite having -2° of static camber, the front right is pretty clearly in positive camber at this wheel angle. The front left is probably at -5° or more. Thinking of reducing caster slightly this year.

[BRAIDusa]

Originally Posted by Driven97

I measured a little more than -2°. When I put the stock camber plates in breifly it was definitely less, but I didn't think to measure it. As you know my car is quite a bit lower than yours.

I also have my front caster maxed out, aka top of the struts all the way rearward in the adjustment range. While this doesn't give you static camber, you do get camber gain with increased steering angle. The penalty is the steering gets more difficult. Note the angle of the tires here:



Despite having -2° of static camber, the front right is pretty clearly in positive camber at this wheel angle. The front left is probably at -5° or more. Thinking of reducing caster slightly this year.

Nice shot. Needs more stickers LOL.

And not to change the subject but.................what offset are your wheels and what size tires. I know you told me once but I'm old now.

[BRAIDusa]

Interesting how these two cars have diverged over less than 18 months yet..............Shall we dance?

[Cory M]

Don't forget that the 935 kits mentioned above are for cars that have been converted to coilovers, they won't work with torsion bars. If the available range you can get from bolt on camberplates like Tarett and Elephant aren't enough you can lengthen the control arms. Fabcar performs this mod. You can also make adjustable control arms but there is more fabrication and cost involved.

[Dan J]

As high as your car is your going to have to use longer lower control arms either 935/ERP style
or modified stock, I have a pair of modified stock ones that are very robust. One heim joint needs to be replaced. If you want them you can have them as I have no use for them just pay shipping

[bpu699]

Originally Posted by Driven97

I run cheap eBay camber plates. The bearings disintegrated after only a few months, but I got some kickass stainless replacements that popped right in. Even having to do that, I'm still way under what ER charges for theirs.

Cool find. Do you have the links to the bearings?

Bo

[Flieger]

Originally Posted by Driven97

I measured a little more than -2°. When I put the stock camber plates in breifly it was definitely less, but I didn't think to measure it. As you know my car is quite a bit lower than yours.

I also have my front caster maxed out, aka top of the struts all the way rearward in the adjustment range. While this doesn't give you static camber, you do get camber gain with increased steering angle. The penalty is the steering gets more difficult. Note the angle of the tires here:



Despite having -2° of static camber, the front right is pretty clearly in positive camber at this wheel angle. The front left is probably at -5° or more. Thinking of reducing caster slightly this year.

To me it looks like the right front has more inclination than the left. The reason is that while caster adds "good" camber to both inside and outside wheels as you apply steering, KPI (the angle of the strut when seen in front view) adds positive (i.e. bad) camber to both wheels as steering is applied. The KPI on a 911 is usually greater than the caster I believe, so the KPI effects should more than cancel the caster. The right front is being helped by the body roll angle established when the car was still sticking and building lateral acceleration to the left. The correction has been applied so quickly that the roll angle is still present. However, the suspension being in droop on that side of the car will tend to decrease the camber.

[Driven97]

Originally Posted by Flieger

The reason is that while caster adds "good" camber to both inside and outside wheels as you apply steering, KPI (the angle of the strut when seen in front view) adds positive (i.e. bad) camber to both wheels as steering is applied.

I had a really hard time visualizing that, now I feel dumb that it took me so long. Very interesting and enlightening.

[Driven97]

Originally Posted by bpu699

Cool find. Do you have the links to the bearings?

Bo

I used FK brand SSX14T bearings. Don't remember where I bought them from, but here is a vendor.

If you want to go $$$ baller you can get some aircraft grade ones here in the 14T.

Or if you want to get by on a budget, there's also the plain COM-14T.

I'm sure you can find more brands if you Google 14T spherical bearing, just make sure the axial load ratings are equivalent to or greater than the ones listed.

[bpu699]

Thanks!

[Flieger]

Originally Posted by Driven97

I had a really hard time visualizing that, now I feel dumb that it took me so long. Very interesting and enlightening.

Don't feel dumb. It took me a while to figure it out the first time too. Vehicle dynamics and kinematics can be pretty complicated.

[Mahler9th]

Looks like you have some great input.

That picture posted by Driven97 makes me remember the good old days of AX... for some reason Dwight Mitchell/Weltmeister/Automotion come to mind. I wonder how many air cool 911 cars are active in AX these days.

Mr. Dan J, I am curious about your modified factory arms. I run stock 911 arms now, but will need to make some change to get a bunch more negative camber. Can I pm you to learn more about what you have?

- Mike