Understanding alignment printout after lowering

Stormster

Stormster

Stormster

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
4,671
Location
Stoke-on-Trent
Hi guys. I've just had some new wishbone bushes, ball joints, ARB D bushes and drop links, Eibach Sportline springs and Eibach front camber bolts fitted. Crucially the drop in ride height means a lot of increased camber on EP3's which can be rectified by adjustble front camber bolts and rear camber arms, the latter I have not bothered with.

When coming to align it, he asked me how I drove and I said not particularly hard as I have fitted the springs mainly for looks. So I was simply looking for a planted drive really, stable at speed, no mad tyre wear. I don't go around corners at breakneck speed. The rear camber is not adjustable as I didn't fit adjustable arms. I did have the front bolts fitted for the sakes of £20. The car feels good on the road...planted, secure in corners so far. However, to those who understand these things, how does this print out of the settings it has look - and how do I make sense of it so I understand it properly? :)

(Sorry for potato pic)
alignment.jpg.jpg
 
I know, on my last EP3 I had a little nudge against a kerb in the snow, knocked my steering out thought I'd bent something, but the camber bolt had just a few threads. Hit a pot hole on the way to the garage to put it right and knocked it straight again. Which is why I've not added rear camber adjustment as well, as it's all too fragile for road use if you ask me.
 
Obviously the rear camber is far too much. Front camber gain doesn't really exist with mcpherson struts as you can see. You should get rear arms to get it back within spec they won't be fragile or move like crash bolts do.
 
Yeah i'd get the rear arms otherwise you'll find you'll be wearing out the inside edge of rear tyres in no time. The rear arms work in a different way and are a lot more resilient than camber bolts.

I think i had D2 camber arms on my DC5, think they were only like £60 or something?
 
I need an excuse to burn off the crap back tyres so this will do, it'll be a reasonable indication on how well they last as the car feels pretty good on the road, far better than standard and it's not too stiff or anything. However, perhaps after winter I will add the rear camber arms as it'll likely be time for tyres all round so makes sense to add them then re-align with new tyres fitted.

But the numbers, excluding rear camber, do they read OK to those in the know?
 
Stormster said:
But the numbers, excluding rear camber, do they read OK to those in the know?
Click to expand...

Surely that's a bit like asking a doctor "so if we ignore the rampant ebola, my results look ok?"

You have to take the numbers as a complete package, having say, "toe in" in spec, but massively out camber would still result in a poor overall package, you can't cancel out having bad camber by having great toe, or caster.

"It's OK guys, I know I've only got 12º of steering lock, but I have great Ackerman!"
 
-3 degrees jeez.

It's not just about tyre wear, it's about way more than that. Braking, high speed stability, cornering and how the car feels will all be affected.
 
Personally I would want a few more minutes toe out on the front rather than pretty much parallel.

On the rear -

UBpoIcs.jpg


:p
 
This is why I asked the question, because I am no expert. I don't get the numbers, but it feels good on the road, more solid and stable than as it was prior to everything being changed. So much less bodyroll yet the ride is OK. My centre pipe is a bit low though so will take a beating in time I feel.

I will add some rear camber arms later on, I did add the springs mainly for aesthetics but I would hate to get ripped by the OcUK brigade for epic rear camber! However as said it does seem to feel more stable and planted in most situations. Probably yet another thread I shouldn't have started though due to my lack of knowledge vs. other peoples :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom