Front Camber Question
#1
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: B.C, Canada
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Front Camber Question
I'm currently running 205/50R15 Toyo R888's and I am having a bit of trouble with tire roll. Tire pressures were hovering at around 37-38 and I bumped them up a bit to no affect. I did a camber adjustment at the track which seemed to help, but looking for some advice to what settings you guys are running with for autox and track?
I just eyeballed it at the track so I will get more precise this weekend when I do the alignment.
I just eyeballed it at the track so I will get more precise this weekend when I do the alignment.
#2
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Great Falls, MT, USA
Posts: 822
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Front Camber Question
Tire pressure seems high. I'd start with mid 20's and work around that area. As for camber 1.75 seems to work for us @ around 5inch ride height depending on grip level and weight.
#6
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Playing in the sandbox
Posts: 2,761
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Re: Front Camber Question
That's ^^^ a big contributor to the roll over problem. The rates are awfully soft and that's a bunch of tire crammed on a narrow wheel. To keep it from rolling over you'll need to either get kinda wild with either a bunch of camber (3.5-4*) or pressure (42+).
#7
Ridin Dirty in Cali
iTrader: (1)
Re: Front Camber Question
Other poster with the mid 20's inflations was more closer to what I have found to work with a R888 24-26,27 ish is the place I started, nothing higher.
The R888 I found to have a firmer sidewall than say RA-1
My off track pressures after a run never exceeded 38 which I found to give me the best grip.
These are things you will have to tinker with to find your best set up.
Start with the spring rates especially in the rear (280) is way way too low
Trending Topics
#8
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Great Falls, MT, USA
Posts: 822
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Front Camber Question
yeah spring rates should be in the 400# to 600# range. no higher unless going with a R6 grip level of tire.
we use 300#/250# but use a 200tw tire. same car. in the wet is goes down to 250#200#
we use 300#/250# but use a 200tw tire. same car. in the wet is goes down to 250#200#
#9
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Playing in the sandbox
Posts: 2,761
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Re: Front Camber Question
Those rates ^^^ are insanely low and not suitable for an autoX car IMO. Mid-tier r-comps can take a pretty hard "hit" to the tire as can the current crop of 200TW tires. Body roll on my ITR with street tires is "acceptable" right now with 650/550 and I'll likely bump up both the front and rear rates. I ran 850/650 on my EF (also with street tires) with very good results (and manners).
PS
Don't confuse "workable" with "ideal"... Or you'll end up running rates that are about equal to some of the OTS stuff Honda offers. Also, don't neglect to factor in chassis weight, bars, and the shocks into the equation.
PS
Don't confuse "workable" with "ideal"... Or you'll end up running rates that are about equal to some of the OTS stuff Honda offers. Also, don't neglect to factor in chassis weight, bars, and the shocks into the equation.
#10
Re: Front Camber Question
Xian, can you please clarify what you mean by "workable" vs "ideal" spring rates?
If you do the maths, the ride frequencies for some of the setups people here use are insanely high. Something like 400/300 lb/in is much closer to the ideal/theoretical values. I always wondered why you use such high rates, seems like you'd be loosing out in terms of grip.
For Auto-X (i.e. low speed, very tight corners) I can understand how you could prefer response and rotation over grip but for road racing I really don't get it. Maybe I'm missing something.
If you do the maths, the ride frequencies for some of the setups people here use are insanely high. Something like 400/300 lb/in is much closer to the ideal/theoretical values. I always wondered why you use such high rates, seems like you'd be loosing out in terms of grip.
For Auto-X (i.e. low speed, very tight corners) I can understand how you could prefer response and rotation over grip but for road racing I really don't get it. Maybe I'm missing something.
#11
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 5,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Front Camber Question
ultimate technical/theoretical tire grip figures /= usable real world lap times. You have things like camber gain vs body roll loss which could very easily over heat the outside edge of the tire, and how quickly or slowly you can transfer weigh etc to get you through chicanes and quick transitions. A soft car may in theory have more mechanical grip but could also be slower than a stiffer car.
OP i would get tire temps and that will tell you more information on what needs to happen next.
OP i would get tire temps and that will tell you more information on what needs to happen next.
#12
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Playing in the sandbox
Posts: 2,761
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Re: Front Camber Question
Yep ^^^. You can't blindly stick with a dogmatic like faith to the "ideal" ride frequencies. We're talking about FWD'ers with econocar roots.
At 400#, you'll need a massively higher static ride right to keep off the bumpstops. If you're on the bumpstops then you've just cranked your ride frequency thru the roof. At your higher ride height, you've got a higher CG and more roll. So the outside front de-cambers when it's loaded up. So you've got to add static camber. But now it doesn't brake so well on entry and can't put down power as well on corner exit.
If you double your front rates, almost all these problems go away. If you've got high end shocks, you can still have a car that's very compliant over bumps and uneven pavement. As far as rear rates go, I prefer to go somewhat softer than the front but make up for it with rear bar. Given the lighter rear corner weights (vs the front) it makes the car less skittish and therefore easier to drive while still maintaining a decent spread in roll rates front to rear. (This is assuming a street/autox and sometime track car)
For a 100% dedicated road race car, I've always run a rear spring biased setup. I suspect you could get the above setup to work also but I haven't done it yet.
At 400#, you'll need a massively higher static ride right to keep off the bumpstops. If you're on the bumpstops then you've just cranked your ride frequency thru the roof. At your higher ride height, you've got a higher CG and more roll. So the outside front de-cambers when it's loaded up. So you've got to add static camber. But now it doesn't brake so well on entry and can't put down power as well on corner exit.
If you double your front rates, almost all these problems go away. If you've got high end shocks, you can still have a car that's very compliant over bumps and uneven pavement. As far as rear rates go, I prefer to go somewhat softer than the front but make up for it with rear bar. Given the lighter rear corner weights (vs the front) it makes the car less skittish and therefore easier to drive while still maintaining a decent spread in roll rates front to rear. (This is assuming a street/autox and sometime track car)
For a 100% dedicated road race car, I've always run a rear spring biased setup. I suspect you could get the above setup to work also but I haven't done it yet.
#14
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 5,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Front Camber Question
Yep ^^^. You can't blindly stick with a dogmatic like faith to the "ideal" ride frequencies. We're talking about FWD'ers with econocar roots.
At 400#, you'll need a massively higher static ride right to keep off the bumpstops. If you're on the bumpstops then you've just cranked your ride frequency thru the roof. At your higher ride height, you've got a higher CG and more roll. So the outside front de-cambers when it's loaded up. So you've got to add static camber. But now it doesn't brake so well on entry and can't put down power as well on corner exit.
If you double your front rates, almost all these problems go away. If you've got high end shocks, you can still have a car that's very compliant over bumps and uneven pavement. As far as rear rates go, I prefer to go somewhat softer than the front but make up for it with rear bar. Given the lighter rear corner weights (vs the front) it makes the car less skittish and therefore easier to drive while still maintaining a decent spread in roll rates front to rear. (This is assuming a street/autox and sometime track car)
For a 100% dedicated road race car, I've always run a rear spring biased setup. I suspect you could get the above setup to work also but I haven't done it yet.
At 400#, you'll need a massively higher static ride right to keep off the bumpstops. If you're on the bumpstops then you've just cranked your ride frequency thru the roof. At your higher ride height, you've got a higher CG and more roll. So the outside front de-cambers when it's loaded up. So you've got to add static camber. But now it doesn't brake so well on entry and can't put down power as well on corner exit.
If you double your front rates, almost all these problems go away. If you've got high end shocks, you can still have a car that's very compliant over bumps and uneven pavement. As far as rear rates go, I prefer to go somewhat softer than the front but make up for it with rear bar. Given the lighter rear corner weights (vs the front) it makes the car less skittish and therefore easier to drive while still maintaining a decent spread in roll rates front to rear. (This is assuming a street/autox and sometime track car)
For a 100% dedicated road race car, I've always run a rear spring biased setup. I suspect you could get the above setup to work also but I haven't done it yet.
#15
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 3,788
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Front Camber Question
My ITA CRX had 600/750 with no front bar and skinny OEM rear. (roadrace setup)
I just put on the 450# on the front so I'm at 450/750 with OEM barz front/rear and I'll see how it works next weekend but last weekend was a wake up call that the front wasn't working well enough and the rear worked great. So I decided to make the front work better instead of reducing the function of the rear.
Also, I run 225/45/15 RR on 15x7" wheels and rolling over wasn't my problem. Heat was. It was a cold day and I couldn't get enough heat in the tires to function. I was faster on the 205's because I could generate another 20F in tire temp. IMHO, a 205 R888 on a 6.5" rim is just fine. We see 225 Hoosiers on 7" rims. Pretty common in ITA cars.
I'm hoping this coming race weekend delivers us a sunny day with track temp >80F so my bigger tires get a chance to do their job.
I just put on the 450# on the front so I'm at 450/750 with OEM barz front/rear and I'll see how it works next weekend but last weekend was a wake up call that the front wasn't working well enough and the rear worked great. So I decided to make the front work better instead of reducing the function of the rear.
Also, I run 225/45/15 RR on 15x7" wheels and rolling over wasn't my problem. Heat was. It was a cold day and I couldn't get enough heat in the tires to function. I was faster on the 205's because I could generate another 20F in tire temp. IMHO, a 205 R888 on a 6.5" rim is just fine. We see 225 Hoosiers on 7" rims. Pretty common in ITA cars.
I'm hoping this coming race weekend delivers us a sunny day with track temp >80F so my bigger tires get a chance to do their job.
#18
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Playing in the sandbox
Posts: 2,761
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Re: Front Camber Question
My ITA CRX had 600/750 with no front bar and skinny OEM rear. (roadrace setup)
I just put on the 450# on the front so I'm at 450/750 with OEM barz front/rear and I'll see how it works next weekend but last weekend was a wake up call that the front wasn't working well enough and the rear worked great. So I decided to make the front work better instead of reducing the function of the rear.
Also, I run 225/45/15 RR on 15x7" wheels and rolling over wasn't my problem. Heat was. It was a cold day and I couldn't get enough heat in the tires to function. I was faster on the 205's because I could generate another 20F in tire temp. IMHO, a 205 R888 on a 6.5" rim is just fine. We see 225 Hoosiers on 7" rims. Pretty common in ITA cars.
I'm hoping this coming race weekend delivers us a sunny day with track temp >80F so my bigger tires get a chance to do their job.
I just put on the 450# on the front so I'm at 450/750 with OEM barz front/rear and I'll see how it works next weekend but last weekend was a wake up call that the front wasn't working well enough and the rear worked great. So I decided to make the front work better instead of reducing the function of the rear.
Also, I run 225/45/15 RR on 15x7" wheels and rolling over wasn't my problem. Heat was. It was a cold day and I couldn't get enough heat in the tires to function. I was faster on the 205's because I could generate another 20F in tire temp. IMHO, a 205 R888 on a 6.5" rim is just fine. We see 225 Hoosiers on 7" rims. Pretty common in ITA cars.
I'm hoping this coming race weekend delivers us a sunny day with track temp >80F so my bigger tires get a chance to do their job.
Tossing out the common ITA fitment of the 225 R6 on a 7" wheel is a bit of a red herring as it's construction (semi-cantilever and super stuff sidewalls) is quite a bit different than the R888. Also, the camber curve on the EF is wildly different and better than the EG. I'd loooove to have the EF's camber gain on my ITR.
I'm interested in hearing how your new setup works out. The softer rate plus a small front bar isn't what I'd do for that car but I also wouldn't have the stock rear bar on it either so...
#19
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: B.C, Canada
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Front Camber Question
Great post guys, thanks! The spring rates are what came originally in the K-sport Pro Coil overs, so I might look into putting something a bit stiffer for next season. The body roll isn't that much of a concern at the moment and the corner turn is awesome, even more so now that I increased the camber. Though I had a bit of toe in after doing so which kind of burned up a right front tire, but that's racing Anything to beat corvettes and BMW's! I'll be tying out the new setup this weekend at Castrol Speedway and see how it is.
#20
Honda-Tech Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kelowna, B.C, Canada
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Front Camber Question
Great post guys, thanks! The spring rates are what came originally in the K-sport Pro Coil overs, so I might look into putting something a bit stiffer for next season. The body roll isn't that much of a concern at the moment and the corner turn is awesome, even more so now that I increased the camber. Though I had a bit of toe in after doing so which kind of burned up a right front tire, but that's racing Anything to beat corvettes and BMW's! I'll be tying out the new setup this weekend at Castrol Speedway and see how it is.
Good luck at Castrol that's way to far of a drive from Kelowna B.C for me
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
K-Twizzle
Tech / Misc
12
01-07-2005 06:31 AM
Kelvin96GSR
Road Racing / Autocross & Time Attack
21
01-21-2003 10:38 AM
WRXRacer111
Road Racing / Autocross & Time Attack
3
11-20-2001 11:00 AM