I've often wondered if the BMW style alignment (more negative camber in the
rear than the front) was for emergency stability or just a design of the
strut front / multi link rear.
For my FWD, front-heavy car, I have more negative camber up front and run no
sway bar and have less negative camber in the rear with a big sway bar. But
I suppose doing this without a tire pyrometer is just bench racing with a
couch.
Brian
----- Original Message -----
From: "j watson" <jeffwatson@email.com>
To: <autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 4:57 PM
Subject: Theoretical ideal Miata alignment.
> I get the toe thing... caster is pretty straight forward (for my
purposes)... but I'm in a debate with a buddy...
>
> Is it better to have more-ive camber in the front of the car (a miata)
than the rear... or vice versa?
>
> I understand that there will be a handling balance difference, but which
would yield better performance?
>
> Has anyone had experience running more -ive up front than the rear? What
did you find?
> Most people (conventionally) run about 0.3 - 0.5 degrees more -ive camber
in the rear...
>
> My buddy says the opposite would be a better setup...
>
> What are your opinions... and do you think it is TOTALLY driving style
dependant???
>
> Thanks.
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|