Bye-bye 245 / 45 / 16... Hello noob alignment
 

245 / 45 / 16 nonsense is done. I know... they're still available IF you want to pay a small ransom. Screw that. For amusement, am going to run the most economical alternative (I can find) for 8" front, 9" rear Fuchs... we'll see how economy performs over time. And... because I can't get a "professional" alignment so tires wear evenly, will dive into alignment having never done it before. Am posting to get input on how to make alignment adjustments. First, some background for you...

Tires

Shopped online... TireRack, TireThis, TireThat.... problem is once shipping, balance and install is added... online's no longer an economical road (as I priced it.) Alternative size am going with is 205 / 55 and 245 / 55. Fronts = $62 each. Rear = $82. Installed total = $371. ZR rated (149+ mph.) Some have put 225 / 45 on rear---now I'm wishing I had the guys load that up to take a look.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1411495084.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1411496414.jpg


Installed

If you're highly sensitive to 911 dimensional relations, DON'T DO THIS --- you won't like it. Fronts are close to 1/2" larger diameter. Rears, 3/4" larger. So my lower... has just been raised 1/4" F... 3/8" R. Remember, tires are only a test. Real mission on hand is DIY alignment. Am covering tires as I imagine others may be thinking over 245 / 45 alternatives. (Good to bring your own stubby tire valves to shop or you can end up with way-too-longs.)

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1411494986.jpg Front = 8 x 16 Rear = 9 x 16


Inside tire wear = standard option that came with this car. Fronts have always worn out leaving good rubber on the outsides. Sometimes both front and back have done same. Regarding front, I've been told "toe is set right but camber will simply not go any more positive." (If that's the case... how bout compensating with toe?) Below is front driver's side tire. And alignment was done supposedly by professionals with the latest high tech equip.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1411495495.jpg


Rears did OK this time around. Still... they're wearing on inside... and I'm guilty of too high pressure. Am dumping rears early only because size change is front-to-rear related.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1411495524.jpg


Alignment

Toe, camber, caster... I understand principles. But am total noob where making adjustments is concerned. Thought "string theory" was interesting approach but from what I've heard, it's a lengthy set up. So... to check track, got $19 laser level from Harbor F. For toe, am going with "under C" method I picked up from Peter Bull in Sweden. TY Pete. His photos...

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1411495831.jpg


A look at my strut tops.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1411497919.jpg


As I know it, front-end toe and camber is relatively simple. Rear end... that's complete mystery to me. Not sure I really care about caster---steers fine. Am looking forward to front & rear adjustment input from you guys before putting a wrench to this. TY :)

I am all for do-it-yourself and I know some folks get decent results with home alignment.

My question is why can't you get a pro to align the car with an alignment rack and get good tire wear? There must be someone in Miami that can do it.

When I did my suspension rubber bushing replacement and tie-rods and shocks and so on I did a home alignment and got it pretty close. I drove it with the old tires for a few hundred miles and then had the pro do it with the proper tools, AKA an computer and laser on the alignment rack. My alignment was pretty darn close.

Good Luck.

How wide are your rear wheels? (They look like 16x8, but the pics are too small to be sure)

If you're going cheap, why not 225/50 16? That's what the factory used, it is the exact right height, looks right, etc.

2 points to make...

1. Alignment to factory specification makes the steering to sensitive, constant attention required to stay centered in the lane. Tried several alignments, shops, before being advised that factory alignment was more for track use, constant attention is expected. Was advised that if I wished to drive relaxed the shop would deviate from the factory specs.

Can put you in touch with my shop and maybe they will be willing to share their trade secrets.

2.,,,NOISE!


I always peruse Tire Racks customer reviews in an attempt to find the quietest tires that also fit the other desirable parameters. Sometimes successful, sometimes not.

Most times I have found that "quiet" tires only remain so for 8-10,000 miles.

Had one tire manufacturer that acknowledged that my 8,000 mile tire set was so loud that they not only refunded my cost, they contributed an equal amount to my favorite charity, Seattle Children's Hospital.

Tires are still in storage if anyone is interested.

Do you have the ray scrugs alignment pamphlet? it will walk you through the rear. Its time consuming but doable. I think some one has posted a scan of it on pelican if you search.

keep in mind that your larger diameter rear wheels will cause your car's gearing to become taller, which could affect its perceived performance.

My mechanic in Denver (Jim at Eisenbud's) "solved" the problem I've had with inside front tire wear by slightly bending the front struts (apparently my front suspension was at adjustment limits too). Apparently a common solution for them and I've seen MUCH more even front tire wear since then with no perceived effect on stability/steering effort/etc.

Would really like to know a place where I can go and pay for an alignment that results in even tire wear. But I've been down that road and haven't found anyone. Now happens to be a time when I can invest myself in the experience of understanding what's going on... and with guys like you who have done it before, am hoping you'll share tips & tricks to help me along in this challenge.

Front = 8 x 16. Rear 9 x 16. Yeah... was told about 225, and should have had guys mount one on the car. Just thought 225 was too narrow. Seems like just shy of an inch narrower. What am I missing here?

It's a real degradation

here's a comparison of 245/45 vs 255/5o x16 on a US 3.2 Carera
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1411508891.jpg

I hope the op made a typo and is using 255/50 not 255/55, which would be worse yet

Would like to call them. Pls PM me their number and who I should speak with. TY Will. LOL on quiet. That is a concern after I get the car set up to make them last!

What size are they? I might be interested.

Very nice on charity :)

I have email for Scruggs... have not contacted him yet for it. Will look for scan. TY Erik

Interesting on gearing getting taller. Never considered that. TY. Do you know if your struts were bent to go more positive camber Darrin?

TY for diagram. Rear is 245 / 55. Without thinking about effect of increased diameter, surly I've self adjusted way I drive to compensate to a degree. Will now apply a more studied sense to performance and comment later on this.

I would presume that was the case --

Setting caster and camber is pretty easy. I Went and bought a digital level at home depot, 80$ or so. Setting camber was done by simply placing it against the rim, and adjusting. Easy as can be.

Castor was done by setting it against the front of the strut, with the wheel removed. Pretty easy also.

Toe, not so easy...

Bo

More info please. Do you mean he bent the spindle upwards? That would make sense, though I am dying to know how that was done. Many folks could benefit from a method to tweak the spindle a half degree or so. But how? Short of hitting a pothole at 60mph ... :).

Bo

How have they attempted to adjusted the camber in the past when there is still the tar stuff on the strut top mounts? I suspect the store didnt even try, just like in my case.

Unfortunately, I didn't personally witness what they did -- you might want to try calling them -- Eisenbuds-Fine Service of Porsche, Mercedes, Audi and VW 303.825.0322

HA! And I thought toe was the easiest to adjust Bo. This is going to be interesting expidition.

How do you plan to bend the struts? Adjustable camber plates are available.

Bo

Darrin first suggested strut bending being a solution. But he does not know exactly how it was done. He has provided contact info to his mechanic. TY Darrin

Ok here's the results for 245/45 vs 245/50(per the receipt)

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1411516141.gif

There's additional degradation due to weight further from the axis of rotation but it's difficult to quantify w/o a dyno

OMNI Brake and Alignment, four two five 823-1511

Off of 2001 C4, 18", factory standard.

Someone mentioned the Scruggs pamphlet. Well worth the time to track down a copy. It helped me a great deal. I've completed exactly one home string alignment and 20k miles later I'm still seeing nice even tire wear. Strings can be tedious but if you are careful and diligent you can get your setup just as good as a high dollar machine.

Another tire option is out there now. Toyo Proxes T1R is back out in 245/45r16. The hitch with the T1R is the front. Front option is 195/55r16. You'll lose half an inch in section width and height. I'll stick with the RE-11s. I've gotten almost 18k out of the rears (they need replacing) and the fronts have a ton tread left.

FWIW my alignment specs are close to what Pete Z recommends. Daily driver with some hooliganism thrown in.

Front - 1/16" total toe in. / .6 degrees negative camber. / caster around 5.8

Rear - 1/32 - 1/16" total toe in. / 1.2 degrees negative camber.

A couple of things. Negative camber may increase IF you have worn strut inserts or other worn suspension components. Bent struts can make the problem worse as well.
The lower the front goes, the more negative the camber.
There are offset ball joints, not sure if they can make more positive camber.
On my '71, I used a strut brace to force my shock towers apart. I was able to get zero camber with my car lowered.

245/55? That's a Nascar tire! Huge! I had to run 245/50s once and it looked way out of place.

Don't forget that the taller rear will increase forward rake, which effectively lessens caster . . . .

Interesting chartographics Bill. TY. Have not been out yet since this realization so am curious to see if I can sense it.

Yeah... got email for Scruggs and phamplett is supposedly here in Pelicanworld somewhere but haven't dug it up yet.

TY for specs you're running JAR. Am curious how you DIY calculate "o.6 degrees neg camber?"

Track... my car is lowered (until new tires!) Looking at top of my struts, do you know if top can be pushed (further out) against car? There's about 1/4" space there.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1411574307.jpg

TY for input Flat. Neg ramifications of larger tire size... definitely increasing. Am pondering the evil I have done.

It's hard to tell from the picture. But it is worth trying to push them out as far as you can. Look under the fender, as the strut mounts can hit underneath as well. I took my strut mounts off and squished them in a vice to make them thinner, in an effort to gain more adjustment. Every little bit helps.
Make SURE everything is TIGHT on your front suspension. I once found I had a loose wheel bearing and that made it seem like I had negative camber on one side. A loose strut insert can cause the same effect.

Nice crush move Gordon. TY on input.

Toe is easy with a set of toe plates from Longacre. Here's the Scruggs book. Send him some money as a thanks.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-911-technical-forum/97217-toe-adjust-techniquest.html

How does the 205/55 look/fit on the 16x8 front? 205 on an 8 in. wheel is stretching that tire a bit. Typically a 205/55 is recommended for a max wheel width of 7.5 in.

I am willing to bet your front toe is currently a mess with tires that have inboard shoulders like you show. That inner shoulder wear is typically not what an old 911 will show. These old 911s have one heck of a time getting any decent amount of negative camber. Tires that look like that either have a boatload of negative camber or a ton of toe-in. So I suspect that is toe related or a badly bent strut. I've tracked 911s with a group for about 10 yrs and the stock-ish ones always have a ton of outer shoulder wear on the fronts, with not a lot of inner wear. My point of mentioning the track driving is that it accelerates tire wear and shows you what kind of wear you could expect to see after several thousand miles of street driving.

Barring any wild deviations from stock, proper alignment specs are always going to be a moving target and driver specific. The stock Porsche alignment specs are designed around reasonably spirited street driving. Drive like a Grandma or some aggressive canyon work or spirited track use and poor tire wear will result. Uneven tire wear is the nature of the beast for a sports car. If your getting more them 10k miles out of a set of higher tread wear street tires on any Porsche with a factory alignment, your doing ok.

You can back off the specs for longer freeway tire life but when driving spiritedly, performance will suffer. There is no magic alignment setting, it is all about matching it do the drivers requirements and the rest of the suspension set up.

That said, bent struts are a common thing and may be a cause of not being able to achieve alignment goals. At typical ride heights with un-bent stock parts, between 1 degree negative and 2.5 degrees negative appears to be the normal range most cars can achieve. Ride height, bushing age/quality, and chassis differences affect on which end of the scale any particular car falls and/or ability of exceed the boundaries of this range.

Am having to eat my rear tire size as given. It's not 245 /55. It's 245 / 50. You guys must have thought me insane with the 55.

My Bad. My apology.

Here's front/rear size confirmation.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1411599471.jpg


Went back to TirePlus today and asked what their "policy towards a customer who didn't like their tires was?" They said they'd replace all provided I bought the replacements from them. Damm nice. They got a new, dedicated customer. Gonna sleep on it.

On my 16x8 + 16x9 combo, I have 205/55s on the front and 245/50s on the back. As it turns out, the speedo is dead, nuts on at all speeds up to 75 (the highest I went over a time course). But, as I have said before, not all tire makers measure their tires in the same way. My experience with Kumho is that they are narrower and have shorter sidewalls than the nominal size would suggest. The speed trials bear this observation out.

Again am going to correct REAR tire size as I initially posted. Excuse = senility. Here's larger images of 205 /55 / 16 front and 245 / 50 / 16 rear. And TY for input Kevin.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1411600854.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1411600868.jpg

Good commentary Evan. Makes perfect sense. TY

Take a look at larger car pics just posted above. Size is yours Eric... but for manufacturer deviations. Did you roll front fenders?