Page 1 of 1
wheel alignment
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 3:01 pm
by mossy
I'm getting a wheel alignment done tommorrow, my question is if i change the settings on my tein flex after the alignment's done will this affect the alignment?
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 4:24 pm
by Garry
Changing the ride height will affect the aligmnent.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 11:53 am
by mossy
I think I've got the ride height ok, approx 12.25 in all corners.
2deg neg front
1.75 neg rear max caster but i what the toe was.
Centreline in Thomastown set it up for me, they done an excellent job although they said the car wasn't as responsive at turn in as other mx5's, could that be due to having a power steering rack that has been depowered for manual?
Re:
Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:23 pm
by Charlie Brown
mossy wrote:I think I've got the ride height ok, approx 12.25 in all corners.
2deg neg front
1.75 neg rear max caster but i what the toe was.
Centreline in Thomastown set it up for me, they done an excellent job although they said the car wasn't as responsive at turn in as other mx5's, could that be due to having a power steering rack that has been depowered for manual?
Going back to manual steer won't effect the turn in only the weight on the steering wheel. Not sure it the gearing on the rack is different between the power rack and the unpowered version?
Why carry so much negative on the front? I would have thought that with 1.75 rear you should have about 1.25 negative up front.
You don't give the toe figures. If you want better turn in you need to run zero to a fraction of a fly turd positive on the front, though the car will tramline easily.
You are running the car very low so probably the best person to contact for the camber setup is CT. Drop him a line.
Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:01 am
by rodent
Pardon the n00b question, but what are the advantages of running more rear camber?
I'm pretty sure I'm running 1.75 front and 1.25 back (with bugger all toe). Quite happy with the setup.
jonno.
Re:
Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:42 am
by Matty
rodent wrote:Pardon the n00b question, but what are the advantages of running more rear camber?
I'm pretty sure I'm running 1.75 front and 1.25 back (with bugger all toe). Quite happy with the setup.
jonno.
It's a setup that seems to have fairly neutral handling on MX-5s with stock or near-stock suspension.
However, once you start changing things (springs, sways, etc) this "rule" goes out the window and you're better off setting camber based on tyre temps.
Re:
Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:41 pm
by CT
mossy wrote:I think I've got the ride height ok, approx 12.25 in all corners.
2deg neg front
1.75 neg rear max caster but i what the toe was.
Centreline in Thomastown set it up for me, they done an excellent job although they said the car wasn't as responsive at turn in as other mx5's, could that be due to having a power steering rack that has been depowered for manual?
That will be fine and should be fairly neutral as long as there is a little rear toe in and zero (or minor toe out) on the front. The camber thing is really about cornering grip so if you are lacking grip at one end, adjust accordingly.
Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:29 pm
by mossy
I took in the specs for Lannys alignment from miata garage but since the car will be on the track or a sunday drive car they suggested more aggresive settings, I'm not sure if they done Lannys spec on the toe or their own because I forgot to ask but they do a lot of race cars so i left it in their hands.
They said it felt different to the other mx5s they have done but it might be because they had power steer and I don't?
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 12:51 am
by SPy vs. SPy
seeing as we are on topic I took in CT's spec when I had the new tyres fitted last week.
values are
Front
Total toe +0.1mm
Partial L +0.1mm
Partial R +0.1mm
Camber L -00.99
Camber R -01.05
Caster L +5.08
Caster R +4.48
Rear
Total Toe-0.1mm
Partial L +0.0mm
Partial R +0.0mm
Camber L -01.02
Camber R -01.04
Guy who did it was very grumpy about this setup........
tyres (PP2's) have now done 750 kms, very little twisty work.
what twisty bits I did get into it felt like the rear was not quite bolted down as it should be.
Car also runs stock suspension which has covered 55K.
Anyway does the above match CT's spec or have I misread something.
Spy
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 8:38 am
by StanTheMan
Power steering rack is a quicker ratio. One of the best handling NA6's i've ever drĂven was fitted with a power steering unit. Comparing it to my own was like apple & oranges. I personally loved the quicker turn in.
one thing I found also after going from the sticky road tyres semis to Old hard road tyres that there was a lot less understeer.
with the same suspension settings.
May be because I'm taking corners a lot slower & more careful now?.......
Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 4:48 pm
by CT
Lannys alignment is an understeer fest IMO. Spy, your settings look fine and similar to what my car ran for ages but why was the guy grumpy? Furthemore, different tyres do different things so the rear end condition could be the tyres and the pressures. I'd be playing in that space to settle it. I do prefer zero front toe but that's me.