Alignment / Tracking results
- Thread starter peter212693
- Start date
Then I shall leave you to your delusional views
LOL, too good
Carry on, it's hilarious.I was even trying to save you making a fool out of yourself too.
LOL, too good
I was even trying to save you making a fool out of yourself too.
So you think a FWD car should have toe in at the front then?
Ok then I am a fool....
No it's not. Also the position of the rack is irrelevant. FWD will toe in more under acceleration regardless of where the rack is as the pivot point for the front suspension is based on the lower arm.
Yes, check any workshop manual in the land.
How so? The bushing deflection will cause the outer ball joint and hence the hub to move in toward the centre of the car regardless of braking or acceleration. The rack position and length of the steering tie rod remain the same throughout.
So, steering pivot on the front of the hub, move the wheel hub inward, steering arm position remains the same, you get toe out.
Steering pivot rear of the hub, move the centre of the hub inward, steering position remains constant, you now have toe in.
You defy the laws of physics, the force is at the wheel, the moment is about the suspension inner pivots (the point of most leverage) with only a minor rotation at the hub that depends on the wheel offset in relation to the "king pin".
I don't need to read any workshop manuals, I have read enough race setup manuals to know the effects which you then translate into geometry setup.
Someone setup my 205gti with very slight toe in and it was horrible, tramlining under acceleration and just did not want to turn. I set it to 1 degree of toe out and it was perfect afterwards.
Exactly, an arc. It will move closer to the centerline of the car but not towards the steering rack.
Take the steering out of the equation and replace with solid arms. The wheels will toe in under power. However the magnitude of this effect depends upon the suspension design and geometry hence different cars like different settings
Take the steering out of the equation and replace with solid arms. The wheels will toe in under power. However the magnitude of this effect depends upon the suspension design and geometry hence different cars like different settings
Well the effect is negligible anyway, I think we can agree on that.
The toe effects of lift/squat will far outweight that effect anyway on heavy accel/braking, I think that's undeniable too.
Something else that I think we can all agree on is that toe out on the rear of a RWD car is not something that is desirable, unless you are trying to build a chronically underpowered drift car. It's also a fact that under heavy accel, any remotely decent rear drive chassis will toe in, ignoring live axles for now.
Toe out on the front of a car will help it turn in, doesn't matter front or rear drive, every road car will run toe in for stability reasons though. Pretty sure excessive toe out (1deg is a LOT) will have the same detrimental effect on traction in a FWD that it does in a RWD though.
You make some large assumptions with your weight transfer comments. Not all cars have a messed up roll centre or poor bump curves. Especially none lowered ones. The effect of dynamic toe change is also something that cant be ignored, static geometry settings are pretty irrelevant if you are running a tie rod front suspension on a front drive. The bushes have to articulate in the front subframe and can deform by several mm. This has an greater impact on toe than front end lift. Lift often helps grip as it removes camber
A lot of cars RWD cars will run zero toe on the front. Rear toe will be put in to help warm the rears tyres up to help with traction,(this is what gives grip,but at expense of tyre wear).
It's a complex subject. Don't try and use the Turbo toaster approach of justification, or claim other people are talking crap when they aren't. You are now trying to make out we agree, we don't as you picked up on Dr Who and made yourself look stupid.
This is usual though, you seem to have a veneer of knowledge, but combined with a bit of experience, which lacks the fundamental understanding. This is fine, however your approach is always an abrasive one.
A lot of cars RWD cars will run zero toe on the front. Rear toe will be put in to help warm the rears tyres up to help with traction,(this is what gives grip,but at expense of tyre wear).
It's a complex subject. Don't try and use the Turbo toaster approach of justification, or claim other people are talking crap when they aren't. You are now trying to make out we agree, we don't as you picked up on Dr Who and made yourself look stupid.
This is usual though, you seem to have a veneer of knowledge, but combined with a bit of experience, which lacks the fundamental understanding. This is fine, however your approach is always an abrasive one.
Last edited:
Oh in terms of dynamics you are spot on, more toe out generally better turn in and corner entry. Too much and it is squirelly on corner exit and acceleration. (minor side to side weight transfer results in lurching as each wheels tries to pull outwards transfering weight to the opposite side and ending up as a slight tank slapper).
TBH I think you have been arguing the same point but with a different outcome (ie I was talking road stability and you were looking at ultimate performance on turn in and steering response.). The effect is negligible unless you go to extremes of 4.8 degrees of toe out like the OP had.
Yes toe out on rear is generally not good as it causes more oversteer, I should have made that clearer that I was talking relative to a fwd car. However some sports cars with lots of downforce can run slight toe out.
My experience is from car setup in both full size and model cars where to be successful you really need to understand the dynamics and how they interact. On model cars the effects are amplified considerably (due to suspension play) so knowing what changes do what and how to correct undesirable effects is very important.
TBH I think you have been arguing the same point but with a different outcome (ie I was talking road stability and you were looking at ultimate performance on turn in and steering response.). The effect is negligible unless you go to extremes of 4.8 degrees of toe out like the OP had.
Yes toe out on rear is generally not good as it causes more oversteer, I should have made that clearer that I was talking relative to a fwd car. However some sports cars with lots of downforce can run slight toe out.
My experience is from car setup in both full size and model cars where to be successful you really need to understand the dynamics and how they interact. On model cars the effects are amplified considerably (due to suspension play) so knowing what changes do what and how to correct undesirable effects is very important.
Last edited:
I wonder how much toe out TT runs with his 10000000000kg of downforce.
PS. Thanks for your comments I even started to doubt myself haha
Not really relevant here, but if you want to argue about that then my car has much harder springs and shocks than stock hence doesn't slam itself to full compression&extension when you drive it hard on sticky rubber. Much more controlled than that hence much less at the whim to geo movement from the associated effects.
Camber and toe are linked though, the way the lower arm arc causes camber change through the travel is exactly the same thing that happens to the toe. So long as the tie rod and lower arm are different lengths (all cars?), the two curves will not be in phase and you get bump steer effect.
Adjusting static camber has a huge effect on toe on my car too, not relevant to dynamics here though.
I only know trial and error stuff here. Toe out is no good, lots of oversteer and not too controllable either. Zero is ok but it breaks loose easily, 15 mins is a nice setting for me. More than 30 mins I found gives wild snap oversteer just when you don't want it, however it gives great traction when drifting and will give you an advantage in competition. Every chassis will of course be different.
I didn't make a fool of myself though, Dr Who came out with a bunch of stuff which is the total opposite to conventional wisdom (Fuzz has backed this up). You can only get away with this if your name is Mizuno ime.
The way I set cars up in general and I'll stick with FWD as it's more relevant to the OP and not a waste of my fingers typing it all out..
First port of call
ASK THE CUSTOMER WHAT HIS CAR IS USED FOR..
If it's a toy that rarely sees Motorways or long distance drives then by all means I'll stick some negative toe on the front.
You want the front wheels to do the driving and the rear wheels to help with the steering, negative toe will help it turn in sharper and "flick" the rear into the corner.
On the rear I'll be putting positive toe to make it progressive as it breaks away.
There's no good in having the rear negative as it makes it snappy and hard to catch, the outside wheel is always pointing towards the ditch Don't want to go there.
If it's more of a family car then it'll be positive toe on the front thank you.
Nothing worse than having to constantly correct for tramlining when you just want a nice comfy drive down to the coast on the weekend..
Same with Camber, less aggressive negative camber than the sports orientated settings above as the car will spend more of it's time sat on the inside of the tyre and just wear them out quicker.
Castor, usually I set that to the max available, gives a nicer steer to centre, more feedback, better dynamic camber which allows you to run less negative camber, so when you slam the anchors on coming up to a corner you'll have more rubber in contact with the tarmac and you'll pull up better/quicker/straighter.
That really is all there is to it for most FWD cars.
First port of call
ASK THE CUSTOMER WHAT HIS CAR IS USED FOR..
If it's a toy that rarely sees Motorways or long distance drives then by all means I'll stick some negative toe on the front.
You want the front wheels to do the driving and the rear wheels to help with the steering, negative toe will help it turn in sharper and "flick" the rear into the corner.
On the rear I'll be putting positive toe to make it progressive as it breaks away.
There's no good in having the rear negative as it makes it snappy and hard to catch, the outside wheel is always pointing towards the ditch
Don't want to go there.If it's more of a family car then it'll be positive toe on the front thank you.
Nothing worse than having to constantly correct for tramlining when you just want a nice comfy drive down to the coast on the weekend..
Same with Camber, less aggressive negative camber than the sports orientated settings above as the car will spend more of it's time sat on the inside of the tyre and just wear them out quicker.
Castor, usually I set that to the max available, gives a nicer steer to centre, more feedback, better dynamic camber which allows you to run less negative camber, so when you slam the anchors on coming up to a corner you'll have more rubber in contact with the tarmac and you'll pull up better/quicker/straighter.
That really is all there is to it for most FWD cars.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2005
- Posts
- 1,698
- Location
- Southport
Thanks for your input guys. If im honest the rears that where on it when I got it about a year ago dont seem to have lost any tread at all. Bit annoyed they didn't mention the rears now or seem to fussed the fronts being out so much.
So is the general reaction to get the rears looked at by someone willing to do the adjustment even though the tyre wear is ok and "feels" ok?
So is the general reaction to get the rears looked at by someone willing to do the adjustment even though the tyre wear is ok and "feels" ok?