Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
03-13-2014, 05:31 AM
#26
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
I think this thread can be summed up with...
"If you want to get the most out of your tires (performance OR mileage) a camber kit would be beneficial"
There's really no reason to get pissed on an Internet forum fellas. If you want to debate stuff, cool. No need to make this **** personal.
"If you want to get the most out of your tires (performance OR mileage) a camber kit would be beneficial"
There's really no reason to get pissed on an Internet forum fellas. If you want to debate stuff, cool. No need to make this **** personal.
03-13-2014, 03:34 PM
#29
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA, United States
Posts: 7,539
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
The day I see 20k miles on a DOT legal RACE tire is the day I'll LOL on your face. The ONLY way you would achieve this is to seriously under use that tire. And for you to have such a soft compounded tire with 20k on negative 4 degrees I already know you're a bullshitter.
I don't know what kind of suspension you run, but my suspension doesn't bottom out. I have adequate travel, rebound and dampening in the version RR k-sports. Not to mention +/- 5* camber adjustment from my UCA and RUCA. Also, I'd LOVE to see that car going 150mph for a mile and a half and stay stable with that kind of camber. Like I said before, which you neglected to read because you're so dead set on the tire wear aspect of the camber kit which is a miniscule aspect of this debate. I'm sure you have perfect equal camber on all 4 corners with your inability to adjust the amount of camber at each corner.
OH and I almost forgot this part: If you're running -4 degrees with no camber kits and you bottomed out shock towers and cracked radiators it only means one thing. You daily drive a shitty setup with ebay coil overs on stock struts with improper spring rates and you have no respect for the performance scene and throw your money away. Which I see a LOT of and you're just another one of them. I see people like you all the time bouncing around like a pogo stick, hilarious! We need people like you buying cheap tires such as the Falken Azeni (90$ at discount son!)
I don't know what kind of suspension you run, but my suspension doesn't bottom out. I have adequate travel, rebound and dampening in the version RR k-sports. Not to mention +/- 5* camber adjustment from my UCA and RUCA. Also, I'd LOVE to see that car going 150mph for a mile and a half and stay stable with that kind of camber. Like I said before, which you neglected to read because you're so dead set on the tire wear aspect of the camber kit which is a miniscule aspect of this debate. I'm sure you have perfect equal camber on all 4 corners with your inability to adjust the amount of camber at each corner.
OH and I almost forgot this part: If you're running -4 degrees with no camber kits and you bottomed out shock towers and cracked radiators it only means one thing. You daily drive a shitty setup with ebay coil overs on stock struts with improper spring rates and you have no respect for the performance scene and throw your money away. Which I see a LOT of and you're just another one of them. I see people like you all the time bouncing around like a pogo stick, hilarious! We need people like you buying cheap tires such as the Falken Azeni (90$ at discount son!)
1) Azenis aren't even close to "DOT legal RACE tires". What an idiotic thing to say. They aren't discussing Hoosiers or anything, they're summer street tires that (at the time) were near the top of the crop for auto-x use in street touring classes. I'm also creeping up on 22k miles with my current set of RE-11s, but the tread is flushed to the wear bars.
2) I never said I had -4° with no camber kit. In fact, I explicitly stated that I had one. There really isn't any (easy) way to get that much camber on an Integra without one. Reading comprehension fail, or just overly emotional?
3) A stock engined GSR can't go 150mph, but I have gone 132mph for a half mile, down the straight at Willow Springs, with that much front camber. It isn't an issue at all staying straight. Are you somehow confusing camber and caster?
4) I do have perfectly even camber without any camber kit currently. Loosen and shift the subframe left/right to even out the front camber. Even then, it was only off by 0.1° before doing so.
5) Koni Sport shocks with GC sleeves is hardly a "shitty setup". What is shitty is killing the available front travel with a taller than stock UCA, which anything with a sliding balljoint is. You run a camber kit on these cars, and your UCA becomes the first point of contact, which means either playing around with bumpstop length/rate to prevent it or having occasional UCA to chassis contact thanks to road imperfections.
Hope you're having fun, because looking like a fool and not having fun just isn't worth all that typing.
03-13-2014, 04:51 PM
#30
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: PA, US
Posts: 3,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
Check this out below…Every gawddamned BMW I have ever owned (4) does this to the rear tires on FACTORY alignment. Eats the inner edge.
If your car drives where you point it, the tires live a life according to how you use/abuse them and within your budget; (front) camber kits can be skipped.
If your car drives where you point it, the tires live a life according to how you use/abuse them and within your budget; (front) camber kits can be skipped.
lol, don't think the tire guy noticed this.. must have been too heated to notice that you said front camber kits can be skipped.
saying that, don't bmw's run a aggressive toe angle?
03-13-2014, 06:16 PM
#31
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: In tha hood.
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
I love all the stupidity being displayed here.
1) Azenis aren't even close to "DOT legal RACE tires". What an idiotic thing to say. They aren't discussing Hoosiers or anything, they're summer street tires that (at the time) were near the top of the crop for auto-x use in street touring classes. I'm also creeping up on 22k miles with my current set of RE-11s, but the tread is flushed to the wear bars.
1) Azenis aren't even close to "DOT legal RACE tires". What an idiotic thing to say. They aren't discussing Hoosiers or anything, they're summer street tires that (at the time) were near the top of the crop for auto-x use in street touring classes. I'm also creeping up on 22k miles with my current set of RE-11s, but the tread is flushed to the wear bars.
5) Koni Sport shocks with GC sleeves is hardly a "shitty setup". What is shitty is killing the available front travel with a taller than stock UCA, which anything with a sliding balljoint is. You run a camber kit on these cars, and your UCA becomes the first point of contact, which means either playing around with bumpstop length/rate to prevent it or having occasional UCA to chassis contact thanks to road imperfections.
I wasn't too heated I just didn't think a response that idiotic deserved attention.
03-13-2014, 06:22 PM
#32
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: In tha hood.
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
Thought I'd start a fire with your Koni/GC set up:
More people prefer KSport for racing these days simply because they are better designed. I know I'd rather be able to adjust my ride height with out affected my shock travel or adding top-hats to restore my rebound and dampening. But to each his own.
How long a Koni will last will depend on your spring rates and your ride height. As a guy who has run nothing but Koni's on my Integra and Civic for the past 10+ years I have to admit that I think my KSports are superior in just about every regard.
1. KSports are monotube with larger pistons vs a twin tube "street shock"
2. KSports are slightly lighter than a Koni/GC setup
3. KSports are significantly cheaper (~$800 online vs ~$1200 for OTS/GC/tophats) when you consider they include springs as well as aluminum top hats.
4. KSports have independend ride height in addition to spring height/preload
5. Call me a ricer but the KSports look better, especially since they are anodized aluminum vs painted metal
6. Performance: With my car they have outperformed my SPSS and my custom valved and shortened bodied Koni's
YES: I am sponsored by KSport, but if they didn't perform I wouldn't run them. If you think I'm biased and I'm just trying to hype up KSports, results don't lie...
http://www.nasa-tt.com//Arizona_Track_Records (look at the class "TTS").
Additionally, I just got back from a NASA So Cal event at Buttonwillow (#13 CW).
http://www.nasa-tt.com/Socal_Track_Records
They haven't updated the website yet but I broke both the TTS and TTU track records at Buttonwillow Raceway Park (#13 cw). On Saturday I ran TTS with my low HP tune (270WHP) and ran a 1:56.4xx. On Sunday I ran TTU and put some fresher tires on and ran my 300WHP tune and had a lap time of 1:52.8xx besting both of the current track record holders (and faster than even Chris Rado has run there to date!).
I am simply running the OTS (Off The Shelf - not even the RR versions!) KSport Kontrol Pro kit with 14K (front) and 12K (rear) springs!
NOTE: Yes, I think KSports used to suck hairy donkey ***** when they first came out and everyone has a story about someone they knew who had an early set or even a set from a couple years ago. They have come a LONG way since then...
If you want to read about more details about KSports on my car check out KSports blog spot --> http://ksportusa.blogspot.com/
1. KSports are monotube with larger pistons vs a twin tube "street shock"
2. KSports are slightly lighter than a Koni/GC setup
3. KSports are significantly cheaper (~$800 online vs ~$1200 for OTS/GC/tophats) when you consider they include springs as well as aluminum top hats.
4. KSports have independend ride height in addition to spring height/preload
5. Call me a ricer but the KSports look better, especially since they are anodized aluminum vs painted metal
6. Performance: With my car they have outperformed my SPSS and my custom valved and shortened bodied Koni's
YES: I am sponsored by KSport, but if they didn't perform I wouldn't run them. If you think I'm biased and I'm just trying to hype up KSports, results don't lie...
http://www.nasa-tt.com//Arizona_Track_Records (look at the class "TTS").
Additionally, I just got back from a NASA So Cal event at Buttonwillow (#13 CW).
http://www.nasa-tt.com/Socal_Track_Records
They haven't updated the website yet but I broke both the TTS and TTU track records at Buttonwillow Raceway Park (#13 cw). On Saturday I ran TTS with my low HP tune (270WHP) and ran a 1:56.4xx. On Sunday I ran TTU and put some fresher tires on and ran my 300WHP tune and had a lap time of 1:52.8xx besting both of the current track record holders (and faster than even Chris Rado has run there to date!).
I am simply running the OTS (Off The Shelf - not even the RR versions!) KSport Kontrol Pro kit with 14K (front) and 12K (rear) springs!
NOTE: Yes, I think KSports used to suck hairy donkey ***** when they first came out and everyone has a story about someone they knew who had an early set or even a set from a couple years ago. They have come a LONG way since then...
If you want to read about more details about KSports on my car check out KSports blog spot --> http://ksportusa.blogspot.com/
03-13-2014, 06:27 PM
#33
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: In tha hood.
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
I think this thread can be summed up with...
"If you want to get the most out of your tires (performance OR mileage) a camber kit would be beneficial"
There's really no reason to get pissed on an Internet forum fellas. If you want to debate stuff, cool. No need to make this **** personal.
"If you want to get the most out of your tires (performance OR mileage) a camber kit would be beneficial"
There's really no reason to get pissed on an Internet forum fellas. If you want to debate stuff, cool. No need to make this **** personal.
03-13-2014, 09:40 PM
#34
Honda-Tech Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Nowhere and Everywhere
Posts: 29,530
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
47 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
oh lawdy lawdy where to begin... let me start by quoting my original post in the sticky thread, just in case you failed to read ALL of it:
The thread I made was intended STRICTLY to dispel the myth that a camber kit is REQUIRED to prevent tires from being destroyed within a few thousand miles after lowering your car from stock height. And it was also mainly directed to street-driven and/or daily-driven cars. That is all! Adjustable camber kits may be desired to dial in precise settings, hopefully to get the best handling characteristics possible, for track purposes. But people MUST understand that (especially for daily-driven street cars) that there WILL be some trade-offs to installing adjustable camber kits, the list of Cons I listed above.
As for suspension travel, no, the knuckle "angle" (you're referring to the camber angle I think?) isn't going to have an effect on it. But the knuckle HEIGHT WILL have an effect, absolutely! A replacement UCA with a taller balljoint and metal assembly effectively makes the knuckle taller, which reduces suspension travel because it's going to hit the shock tower much sooner. Same thing with an adjustable (taller) lower ball joint.
As for high-speed stability, I believe TunerN00b is still running his UCA's reversed side-to-side which gives him much more positive caster (moves the upper ball joint towards the rear of the car) which should impart more high-speed stability. However I recall him saying there were other adverse effects of reversing the UCA's, bump steer or something? He will have to comment on that.
On your comment about corner weighting and uneven camber angles, well guess what - NO car anywhere has equal corner weighting side-to-side, not even on stock suspension, and especially not with a driver and maybe passengers in the car. As a result, NO car with non-adjustable camber is going to have equal camber angles side-to-side. Zilch. They should be pretty close on stock suspension, but it won't be the same. Certainly not as close to being equal as you can get it with an adjustable kit. On a street-driven daily-driver car, having perfectly equal camber angles really isn't all that important.
Regarding my tires, I first lowered my car in February 2002. I was rolling the stock wheels then. I got 16" Rotas in 2004 and have used those most of the time since then. My stock wheels now mainly are just used as backups. Since 2002 I've had 3 sets of tires on the stock 15" wheels. The 3rd set is about done now. The inner edge is worn down a little more, but the tread is down to the wear bars all the way across anyway.
My 16" wheels I've had 5 sets of tires on, and am about to get the 6th set put on tomorrow. So that's 8 sets of tires in 230,000 miles. That is VERY good for V and W-rated summer high performance tires with at least -2° front camber.
You say you're in the tire business, so I know you know what toe wear looks like. Here's a pic for those who might not know:
If you lower a double-wishbone Honda and do nothing else, you will get tire wear like this due to the front tires' toe-out condition, likely in 5K miles or less. Yes there will be negative camber, and uninformed people might look at a tire like this and think the negative camber caused that tire wear, when that is incorrect. The toe-out caused the wear, and if you simply get an alignment where the toe is adjust back to spec, it will prevent MOST if not nearly all of the uneven tire wear, despite having more negative camber than stock.
I really don't understand what your problem is with what I've posted. What I have posted has been proven to be true by myself and many others here.
2 March 2010 edit: Just to be clear, I made this thread to disspell the myths perpetuated by magazines and other sources since the mid-1990's that a camber kit is REQUIRED to prevent excessive tire wear after a car is lowered. This is a flat-out LIE! Please read on to see why.
-------------------------------------------
Well I guess this thread is long overdue, as I've had several requests to make a thread like this.
Despite the myths that have been perpetuated since the mid-90's, camber kits ARE NOT required to prevent uneven tire wear after lowering a Honda. Even the very first issue of Super Street magazine in 1996 talks about installed camber kits to prevent tire wear.
Here's what really happens. When you lower your Honda, especially those with double-wishbone suspension, the camber angle goes negative, but the front tires also toe out. That toe-out condition is what is important. Toe-out will destroy the inside edge of a tire MUCH faster than negative camber ever will, because the tire scrubs on the pavement as it rolls in a toe-out condition.
So the myth has been that you need a camber kit to bring the camber angle (non-adjustable on most Hondas) back to stock specs. So you install a kit, take the car to alignment shop, and *poof* no more tire wear. However, what really happened is that along with adjusting the camber, the shop also adjusted the toe. That toe adjustment is what REALLY saved your tires.
The truth of the matter is that you have made your car handle worse with straight-up zero camber (or close to it). It is also truth you can easily run -1.5, -2, -3, even close to -4 camber up front with very little tire wear issues. You just need to be sure to keep your alignment in check and rotate your tires every 5K miles or so. You should get an alignment at least once a year, or better twice a year if possible. All you need to do is get the toe adjusted back to stock specs. If the shop tries to sell you a camber kit, tell them no, just adjust the toe. If they say they can't do the alignment until you get a camber kit, then leave immediately and go to another shop because that is 100% COMPLETELY FALSE!
So let's talk about the "cons" of camber kits:
What are the "pros" of camber kits? Well you can add MORE negative camber than what you get from lowered suspension geometry alone, which can be good for track use. Other than that, I can't really think of anything.
One exception: A few relatively newer Honda models, such as the 96-00 Civic, the rear suspension has a pretty steep camber curve, and could benefit from slightly reducing the negative camber in the rear from what you get from a drop alone. I would recommend the replacement rear upper arm-type camber kits. Those use a turnbuckle-type adjustment that will not slip.
And now for some personal experience. I lowered my car back in early 2002 and had about -2* camber up front. I've been on various suspension setups since then with anywhere from -1.5* to -2.8* front camber and have NEVER used a camber kit. Since then I've driven about 230K miles (updated for current numbers), and I've only been through a total of 8 sets of tires between 2 sets of wheels (updated). I've always used V or W-rated summer tires, and they always last 30K-35K miles.
Now I do get a slight bit of inner wear, but I attribute that to my worn stock bushings that aren't keeping the toe in check like they should. I have all new bushings waiting to go in and I expect tire wear to be even less than before. But my tires do usually wear down past the wear bars before the inner edge shows any belts, so at that time it's time to replace the tires anyway.
I know there are many others on this site who can relate similar personal experiences. I'll let them chime in if they want.
Well that's about all I can think of to say. Hopefully this will help to dispel some of the myths. Hopefully I can help some people keep some extra money instead of wasting it all on camber kits and expensive alignments.
*edit* something else to add - lower profile tires will tend to wear a bit more on the inside edge with negative camber, even with proper alignment. I do get a bit more inner wear on my 205/45-16's than I did on my 195/55-15's or 205/50-15's. I would imagine 40-series tires would be worse. A taller sidewall can flex more, therefore more even pressure is maintained across the tread even with negative camber.
-------------------------------------------
Well I guess this thread is long overdue, as I've had several requests to make a thread like this.
Despite the myths that have been perpetuated since the mid-90's, camber kits ARE NOT required to prevent uneven tire wear after lowering a Honda. Even the very first issue of Super Street magazine in 1996 talks about installed camber kits to prevent tire wear.
Here's what really happens. When you lower your Honda, especially those with double-wishbone suspension, the camber angle goes negative, but the front tires also toe out. That toe-out condition is what is important. Toe-out will destroy the inside edge of a tire MUCH faster than negative camber ever will, because the tire scrubs on the pavement as it rolls in a toe-out condition.
So the myth has been that you need a camber kit to bring the camber angle (non-adjustable on most Hondas) back to stock specs. So you install a kit, take the car to alignment shop, and *poof* no more tire wear. However, what really happened is that along with adjusting the camber, the shop also adjusted the toe. That toe adjustment is what REALLY saved your tires.
The truth of the matter is that you have made your car handle worse with straight-up zero camber (or close to it). It is also truth you can easily run -1.5, -2, -3, even close to -4 camber up front with very little tire wear issues. You just need to be sure to keep your alignment in check and rotate your tires every 5K miles or so. You should get an alignment at least once a year, or better twice a year if possible. All you need to do is get the toe adjusted back to stock specs. If the shop tries to sell you a camber kit, tell them no, just adjust the toe. If they say they can't do the alignment until you get a camber kit, then leave immediately and go to another shop because that is 100% COMPLETELY FALSE!
So let's talk about the "cons" of camber kits:
- Cost, plus the extra cost of alignments every time (could be $150 or more)
- Usually made of sub-par materials that rust, corrode, and seize up
- Greatly reduces suspension travel clearance, both UCA replacements and just the bolt-type kits
- Bolt-type kits are nearly impossible to keep straight and adjust correctly without throwing caster off
- UCA-replacement kits often use POS ball joints and have even more reduced clearance under the fender
- Likely to slip out of adjustment, requiring another expensive alignment
What are the "pros" of camber kits? Well you can add MORE negative camber than what you get from lowered suspension geometry alone, which can be good for track use. Other than that, I can't really think of anything.
One exception: A few relatively newer Honda models, such as the 96-00 Civic, the rear suspension has a pretty steep camber curve, and could benefit from slightly reducing the negative camber in the rear from what you get from a drop alone. I would recommend the replacement rear upper arm-type camber kits. Those use a turnbuckle-type adjustment that will not slip.
And now for some personal experience. I lowered my car back in early 2002 and had about -2* camber up front. I've been on various suspension setups since then with anywhere from -1.5* to -2.8* front camber and have NEVER used a camber kit. Since then I've driven about 230K miles (updated for current numbers), and I've only been through a total of 8 sets of tires between 2 sets of wheels (updated). I've always used V or W-rated summer tires, and they always last 30K-35K miles.
Now I do get a slight bit of inner wear, but I attribute that to my worn stock bushings that aren't keeping the toe in check like they should. I have all new bushings waiting to go in and I expect tire wear to be even less than before. But my tires do usually wear down past the wear bars before the inner edge shows any belts, so at that time it's time to replace the tires anyway.
I know there are many others on this site who can relate similar personal experiences. I'll let them chime in if they want.
Well that's about all I can think of to say. Hopefully this will help to dispel some of the myths. Hopefully I can help some people keep some extra money instead of wasting it all on camber kits and expensive alignments.
*edit* something else to add - lower profile tires will tend to wear a bit more on the inside edge with negative camber, even with proper alignment. I do get a bit more inner wear on my 205/45-16's than I did on my 195/55-15's or 205/50-15's. I would imagine 40-series tires would be worse. A taller sidewall can flex more, therefore more even pressure is maintained across the tread even with negative camber.
As for suspension travel, no, the knuckle "angle" (you're referring to the camber angle I think?) isn't going to have an effect on it. But the knuckle HEIGHT WILL have an effect, absolutely! A replacement UCA with a taller balljoint and metal assembly effectively makes the knuckle taller, which reduces suspension travel because it's going to hit the shock tower much sooner. Same thing with an adjustable (taller) lower ball joint.
As for high-speed stability, I believe TunerN00b is still running his UCA's reversed side-to-side which gives him much more positive caster (moves the upper ball joint towards the rear of the car) which should impart more high-speed stability. However I recall him saying there were other adverse effects of reversing the UCA's, bump steer or something? He will have to comment on that.
On your comment about corner weighting and uneven camber angles, well guess what - NO car anywhere has equal corner weighting side-to-side, not even on stock suspension, and especially not with a driver and maybe passengers in the car. As a result, NO car with non-adjustable camber is going to have equal camber angles side-to-side. Zilch. They should be pretty close on stock suspension, but it won't be the same. Certainly not as close to being equal as you can get it with an adjustable kit. On a street-driven daily-driver car, having perfectly equal camber angles really isn't all that important.
Regarding my tires, I first lowered my car in February 2002. I was rolling the stock wheels then. I got 16" Rotas in 2004 and have used those most of the time since then. My stock wheels now mainly are just used as backups. Since 2002 I've had 3 sets of tires on the stock 15" wheels. The 3rd set is about done now. The inner edge is worn down a little more, but the tread is down to the wear bars all the way across anyway.
My 16" wheels I've had 5 sets of tires on, and am about to get the 6th set put on tomorrow. So that's 8 sets of tires in 230,000 miles. That is VERY good for V and W-rated summer high performance tires with at least -2° front camber.
You say you're in the tire business, so I know you know what toe wear looks like. Here's a pic for those who might not know:
If you lower a double-wishbone Honda and do nothing else, you will get tire wear like this due to the front tires' toe-out condition, likely in 5K miles or less. Yes there will be negative camber, and uninformed people might look at a tire like this and think the negative camber caused that tire wear, when that is incorrect. The toe-out caused the wear, and if you simply get an alignment where the toe is adjust back to spec, it will prevent MOST if not nearly all of the uneven tire wear, despite having more negative camber than stock.
I really don't understand what your problem is with what I've posted. What I have posted has been proven to be true by myself and many others here.
03-13-2014, 09:52 PM
#35
Honda-Tech Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Nowhere and Everywhere
Posts: 29,530
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
47 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
Here's a typical scenario: you bought a decently reliable Honda as a daily driver, and you want to make it look a little better and perhaps a bit more fun around corners, so you lower the car a bit (not drastically) with the suspension of your choice. But being frugal, you still want the tires to last as long as possible and not have to worry about the reliability of aftermarket control arms, ball joints, etc.
So get the toe fixed after lowering the car, with the camber ending up wherever it ends up. Now you can enjoy the upgraded looks and handling of the car, and by retaining the stock (extremely reliable) upper control arms and ball joints, there's nothing to slip out of alignment. The UCA's are less likely to smash into the shock towers. Alignments (which you should get at least once a year) cost less. And the fewer adjustment points there are means fewer possibly corroded and seized up adjustment points you have to deal with.
On a daily driven street car not running that stupid@$$ stretch/stanced/poke garbage, it just makes sense to not have to mess with adjustable camber kits.
So get the toe fixed after lowering the car, with the camber ending up wherever it ends up. Now you can enjoy the upgraded looks and handling of the car, and by retaining the stock (extremely reliable) upper control arms and ball joints, there's nothing to slip out of alignment. The UCA's are less likely to smash into the shock towers. Alignments (which you should get at least once a year) cost less. And the fewer adjustment points there are means fewer possibly corroded and seized up adjustment points you have to deal with.
On a daily driven street car not running that stupid@$$ stretch/stanced/poke garbage, it just makes sense to not have to mess with adjustable camber kits.
03-14-2014, 06:52 AM
#36
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-14-2014, 07:32 AM
#37
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
Okay, so lets go to http://falkentire.com/tires/car-tire...is-rt615k-tire straight from Falken's website. DOT legal race tire. Moving on.
There are lower ball joints that allow for camber adjustments for our cars. Besdies, the knuckle angle when changed due to the increase of negative camber isn't any different of travel in the strut, the strut isn't connected to the knuckle so there is no difference in sprung weight nor travel.
Thought I'd start a fire with your Koni/GC set up:
More people prefer KSport for racing these days simply because they are better designed. I know I'd rather be able to adjust my ride height with out affected my shock travel or adding top-hats to restore my rebound and dampening. But to each his own.
More people prefer KSport for racing these days simply because they are better designed. I know I'd rather be able to adjust my ride height with out affected my shock travel or adding top-hats to restore my rebound and dampening. But to each his own.
Here's a typical scenario: you bought a decently reliable Honda as a daily driver, and you want to make it look a little better and perhaps a bit more fun around corners, so you lower the car a bit (not drastically) with the suspension of your choice. But being frugal, you still want the tires to last as long as possible and not have to worry about the reliability of aftermarket control arms, ball joints, etc.
So get the toe fixed after lowering the car, with the camber ending up wherever it ends up. Now you can enjoy the upgraded looks and handling of the car, and by retaining the stock (extremely reliable) upper control arms and ball joints, there's nothing to slip out of alignment. The UCA's are less likely to smash into the shock towers. Alignments (which you should get at least once a year) cost less. And the fewer adjustment points there are means fewer possibly corroded and seized up adjustment points you have to deal with.
On a daily driven street car not running that stupid@$$ stretch/stanced/poke garbage, it just makes sense to not have to mess with adjustable camber kits.
So get the toe fixed after lowering the car, with the camber ending up wherever it ends up. Now you can enjoy the upgraded looks and handling of the car, and by retaining the stock (extremely reliable) upper control arms and ball joints, there's nothing to slip out of alignment. The UCA's are less likely to smash into the shock towers. Alignments (which you should get at least once a year) cost less. And the fewer adjustment points there are means fewer possibly corroded and seized up adjustment points you have to deal with.
On a daily driven street car not running that stupid@$$ stretch/stanced/poke garbage, it just makes sense to not have to mess with adjustable camber kits.
I think most can agree that it would be nice to have adjustable camber in some cases but it's not necessary for every scenario. My competitive '91 Si, I need it. My slightly competitive '95, I don't NEED it but would like it but not worth it to me since I don't compete anymore with it. My daily driver '99, not necessary..
Last edited by civexspeedy; 03-14-2014 at 07:51 AM.
03-15-2014, 04:42 PM
#38
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: In tha hood.
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
You say you're in the tire business, so I know you know what toe wear looks like. Here's a pic for those who might not know:
If you lower a double-wishbone Honda and do nothing else, you will get tire wear like this due to the front tires' toe-out condition, likely in 5K miles or less. Yes there will be negative camber, and uninformed people might look at a tire like this and think the negative camber caused that tire wear, when that is incorrect. The toe-out caused the wear, and if you simply get an alignment where the toe is adjust back to spec, it will prevent MOST if not nearly all of the uneven tire wear, despite having more negative camber than stock.
I really don't understand what your problem is with what I've posted. What I have posted has been proven to be true by myself and many others here.
This is toe wear.
As far as the upper control arm hitting the shock tower - wtf kind of suspension do you use? You need to seriously rethink your spring rates if you're having that issue. In 2007 when I had a free set of ebay coils on stock struts with skunk2 UCA even bottoming out doing 60mph over huge bumps i never hit the shock tower.
As far as Koni's and GC set ups. Are you fing kidding me??? You're saying adjusting the shock height by using the coil sleeve, which is in my opinion stupid, is better than having a shock tower dropped in the mount to retain rebound, damping and spring rates? GTFO of here. I don't know ANYONE running a Koni/GC cheap set up to win races, certainly not championships.
Koni yellows, 600
GC 220+
Top hates to retain rebound dampning XXX
Ksport, Fortune Auto, D2, Raceland - ANY properly built set up would be cheaper, or the same. With better design, better adjustments and ride... really? The trade off of the 100 bucks saved for that set up, I'd get a proper set up in which case I can change ride height without affecting spring rate, the shocks ability to dampen and rebound.
I also never disproved you're theory of "not requiring" camber kits. The way your text was written made it seem like they are "NOT NEEDED" to do a PROPER alignment. So get it straight broski.
03-15-2014, 06:36 PM
#39
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: PA, US
Posts: 3,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
As far as Koni's and GC set ups. Are you fing kidding me??? You're saying adjusting the shock height by using the coil sleeve, which is in my opinion stupid, is better than having a shock tower dropped in the mount to retain rebound, damping and spring rates? GTFO of here. I don't know ANYONE running a Koni/GC cheap set up to win races, certainly not championships.
.
you don't get out of da hood much, do you?
how old are you?
03-16-2014, 04:36 AM
#41
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
Ksport, D2 and Raceland are bottom the barrel quality and cost. They are good for slamming your ride.... That's about it.
Fortune Auto. Yeah those are solid. Have a set on my S14 with the swift springs. I love them, running 13k/11k. They feel like koni / gc which I have on my EG at 12k/9k.
Koni can provide you with shock dyno's which have been proven many times over and over by independent tests. Or they can be valved to match any spring rate you want. Eibach springs are pretty linear and are super close to their advertised rates.....
Could you show me some Raceland shock dyno's or tell me how the springs are made anything like Eibach or Fortune Autos?
Fortune Auto. Yeah those are solid. Have a set on my S14 with the swift springs. I love them, running 13k/11k. They feel like koni / gc which I have on my EG at 12k/9k.
Koni can provide you with shock dyno's which have been proven many times over and over by independent tests. Or they can be valved to match any spring rate you want. Eibach springs are pretty linear and are super close to their advertised rates.....
Could you show me some Raceland shock dyno's or tell me how the springs are made anything like Eibach or Fortune Autos?
03-16-2014, 09:33 AM
#42
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: In tha hood.
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
I was making a point that everyone ELSE is doing what in the industry is the new standard. Its not even an argument to say that
That design is inferior to
This design. Put the weed pipe down brotha.
Last edited by red96turbols; 03-16-2014 at 09:34 AM. Reason: fix
03-16-2014, 09:57 AM
#43
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: In tha hood.
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
Hmm, so far everything I've looked at from Ksport, KW, Fortune, Cusco, Ohlins, Penske..... the list goes on, all use the same kind of adjustable height design. Two who don't are Koni and Bilstein.
Arguably not the best.
In my opinion KSport has come a long way since they first came out. I've never used Raceland or D2 and those were mentioned just to show they also followed in the footsteps of the larger manufactures listed here on better design of a coil over system.
I have used KSport and Koni and prefer the KSport design over Koni's due to the monotube design and the adjustable height.
Not to mention you can order KSports with custom valving, just so you are aware of that.
Back on topic though. Camber kits are useful and the denial of such statements is preposterous. Which was the original focus of this thread. If we want to discuss who has a better coilover DESIGN, we can make a new thread.
Arguably not the best.
In my opinion KSport has come a long way since they first came out. I've never used Raceland or D2 and those were mentioned just to show they also followed in the footsteps of the larger manufactures listed here on better design of a coil over system.
I have used KSport and Koni and prefer the KSport design over Koni's due to the monotube design and the adjustable height.
Not to mention you can order KSports with custom valving, just so you are aware of that.
Back on topic though. Camber kits are useful and the denial of such statements is preposterous. Which was the original focus of this thread. If we want to discuss who has a better coilover DESIGN, we can make a new thread.
03-16-2014, 09:58 AM
#44
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: In tha hood.
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
Ksport, D2 and Raceland are bottom the barrel quality and cost. They are good for slamming your ride.... That's about it.
Fortune Auto. Yeah those are solid. Have a set on my S14 with the swift springs. I love them, running 13k/11k. They feel like koni / gc which I have on my EG at 12k/9k.
Koni can provide you with shock dyno's which have been proven many times over and over by independent tests. Or they can be valved to match any spring rate you want. Eibach springs are pretty linear and are super close to their advertised rates.....
Could you show me some Raceland shock dyno's or tell me how the springs are made anything like Eibach or Fortune Autos?
Fortune Auto. Yeah those are solid. Have a set on my S14 with the swift springs. I love them, running 13k/11k. They feel like koni / gc which I have on my EG at 12k/9k.
Koni can provide you with shock dyno's which have been proven many times over and over by independent tests. Or they can be valved to match any spring rate you want. Eibach springs are pretty linear and are super close to their advertised rates.....
Could you show me some Raceland shock dyno's or tell me how the springs are made anything like Eibach or Fortune Autos?
Here you go.
Last edited by red96turbols; 03-16-2014 at 09:59 AM. Reason: ed
03-16-2014, 10:13 AM
#45
Honda-Tech Member
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
So, are you saying something like this:http://www.ebay.com/itm/96-00-CIVIC-EK9-JDM-ADJUSTABLE-RIDE-HEIGHT-COILOVER-DAMPER-SYSTEM-SUSPENSION-RED-/390646301005?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&fits=Model%3ACivic&hash=item5af455814d&vxp=mtr is better than Koni/GC? Just because of how you adjust the height??? lolololololololol
03-16-2014, 12:51 PM
#46
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
The more you post, the more proof you are providing that no one should believe you. You're spitting out so much misinformed information it's ridiculous.
This is a VERY common issue. Has little to do with the type of suspension and more to do with the design of the suspension/shock tower and ride height. At a certain point, even with overly stiff springs, you'll slam the UCA into the shock tower. Some people who want to slam the crap out of their cars have even resorted to cutting/rebuilding the shock tower for more clearance. Stupid IMO but clear evidence that this happens and is a know common problem..
And why in the world would you put ebay coilovers on stock shocks? If someone gave them to me for free I'd throw them away... I wouldn't even put them on if someone PAID me to..
Maybe you should call up Monroe and tell them they have it all wrong...
http://www.monroe.com/en-US/support/Symptoms/Tire-Wear/
^^"Camber Wear
Camber wear results when the tire is not vertically aligned properly with the surface of the road. Camber wear can be caused by a weak, broken, or incorrect spring. Excessive negative camber typically results in inside edge wear. Excessive positive camber typically results in outside edge wear. "
^^"Toe Wear
Toe wear results when the tire is not aligned parallel to the center-line of the vehicle. Basically, the tire may point "Toe In" or "Toe Out." Since toe can cause rapid wear, it is considered the most important alignment angle. Excessive toe results in a "saw toothed" pattern of wear across the tread surface. "
There is nothing wrong with using the spring perch to adjust height. And adjusting by the collar OR the body does not change the spring rate, particularly if you're using linear spring rates which most adjustable coilover springs are..
You don't know anyone using Koni/GC to win races? Guess what, I have that setup on both of my race cars. I won DC Pro Solo past 2 years in a row. Beating out cars with Moton's and whatnot on. Oh, and my friends who run a CRX in STS, use Koni/GC. Guess what? One of them WON a National Championship on them and BOTH of the drivers won trophies at Nationals last year, one came in second. My sponsor has won countless events with his SMF Civic and won a National Championship with this suspension. He loves it so much he has them on his competitive STR S2000 now. If you don't know people who competitively race on these then you must not know very many people...
Lowering the car does not change rebound or spring rates!
No one will argue that a camber kit isn't useful. That's obvious. The argument is in which circumstances are they NECESSARY. And the answer is that it is not necessary for every situation.
Get off your high horse and quit digging your own grave..
As far as the upper control arm hitting the shock tower - wtf kind of suspension do you use? You need to seriously rethink your spring rates if you're having that issue. In 2007 when I had a free set of ebay coils on stock struts with skunk2 UCA even bottoming out doing 60mph over huge bumps i never hit the shock tower.
And why in the world would you put ebay coilovers on stock shocks? If someone gave them to me for free I'd throw them away... I wouldn't even put them on if someone PAID me to..
No, thats not JUST toe wear. Thats toe and camber. Theres no way toe angle alone would wear half the tire only.
This is toe wear.
As far as Koni's and GC set ups. Are you fing kidding me??? You're saying adjusting the shock height by using the coil sleeve, which is in my opinion stupid, is better than having a shock tower dropped in the mount to retain rebound, damping and spring rates? GTFO of here. I don't know ANYONE running a Koni/GC cheap set up to win races, certainly not championships.
Koni yellows, 600
GC 220+
Top hates to retain rebound dampning XXX
Ksport, Fortune Auto, D2, Raceland - ANY properly built set up would be cheaper, or the same. With better design, better adjustments and ride... really? The trade off of the 100 bucks saved for that set up, I'd get a proper set up in which case I can change ride height without affecting spring rate, the shocks ability to dampen and rebound.
This is toe wear.
As far as Koni's and GC set ups. Are you fing kidding me??? You're saying adjusting the shock height by using the coil sleeve, which is in my opinion stupid, is better than having a shock tower dropped in the mount to retain rebound, damping and spring rates? GTFO of here. I don't know ANYONE running a Koni/GC cheap set up to win races, certainly not championships.
Koni yellows, 600
GC 220+
Top hates to retain rebound dampning XXX
Ksport, Fortune Auto, D2, Raceland - ANY properly built set up would be cheaper, or the same. With better design, better adjustments and ride... really? The trade off of the 100 bucks saved for that set up, I'd get a proper set up in which case I can change ride height without affecting spring rate, the shocks ability to dampen and rebound.
http://www.monroe.com/en-US/support/Symptoms/Tire-Wear/
^^"Camber Wear
Camber wear results when the tire is not vertically aligned properly with the surface of the road. Camber wear can be caused by a weak, broken, or incorrect spring. Excessive negative camber typically results in inside edge wear. Excessive positive camber typically results in outside edge wear. "
^^"Toe Wear
Toe wear results when the tire is not aligned parallel to the center-line of the vehicle. Basically, the tire may point "Toe In" or "Toe Out." Since toe can cause rapid wear, it is considered the most important alignment angle. Excessive toe results in a "saw toothed" pattern of wear across the tread surface. "
There is nothing wrong with using the spring perch to adjust height. And adjusting by the collar OR the body does not change the spring rate, particularly if you're using linear spring rates which most adjustable coilover springs are..
You don't know anyone using Koni/GC to win races? Guess what, I have that setup on both of my race cars. I won DC Pro Solo past 2 years in a row. Beating out cars with Moton's and whatnot on. Oh, and my friends who run a CRX in STS, use Koni/GC. Guess what? One of them WON a National Championship on them and BOTH of the drivers won trophies at Nationals last year, one came in second. My sponsor has won countless events with his SMF Civic and won a National Championship with this suspension. He loves it so much he has them on his competitive STR S2000 now. If you don't know people who competitively race on these then you must not know very many people...
Get off your high horse and quit digging your own grave..
03-16-2014, 12:56 PM
#47
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
Is it better to be able to separately adjust ride height and preload? Yes, obviously.
Is a coilover with separate adjustment automatically better than one without? Absolutely not.
There are garbage coilovers with lots of "features" and high quality ones with very simple designs. As far as Koni Yellow, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the design. The circlip works with aftermarket sleeves (e.g. Ground Control) to enable preload-based ride height adjustment. You lose droop at low ride heights but you'd be stupid to ride that low anyways. Within the operating range they work, and marvelously for the price point. The amateur motorsports record of Koni/GC does not need to be questioned.
As far as K-Sport, D2 and Raceland, it's laughable to even mention those in the same breath as Koni. There is more to a shock than where you put the threaded perches. Look at shock dynos and adjustment ranges on the cheap coilovers. They speak for themselves. Reliability follows suit.
As far as Fortune Auto 500 series -- they cost over 50% more than Koni/GC. Apples meet oranges.
Whatever points you tried to make in your previous posts you are undermining by these uninformed rants. You are not putting across the impression that you know what you are talking about.
Is a coilover with separate adjustment automatically better than one without? Absolutely not.
There are garbage coilovers with lots of "features" and high quality ones with very simple designs. As far as Koni Yellow, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the design. The circlip works with aftermarket sleeves (e.g. Ground Control) to enable preload-based ride height adjustment. You lose droop at low ride heights but you'd be stupid to ride that low anyways. Within the operating range they work, and marvelously for the price point. The amateur motorsports record of Koni/GC does not need to be questioned.
As far as K-Sport, D2 and Raceland, it's laughable to even mention those in the same breath as Koni. There is more to a shock than where you put the threaded perches. Look at shock dynos and adjustment ranges on the cheap coilovers. They speak for themselves. Reliability follows suit.
As far as Fortune Auto 500 series -- they cost over 50% more than Koni/GC. Apples meet oranges.
Whatever points you tried to make in your previous posts you are undermining by these uninformed rants. You are not putting across the impression that you know what you are talking about.
03-16-2014, 01:28 PM
#48
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
I meant Raceland.
03-16-2014, 01:47 PM
#49
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Hayward, CA
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-16-2014, 03:04 PM
#50
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: In tha hood.
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Sticky This: Camber kit TRUTHS
Troll thread? Sure. How many trolls can assemble an engine and make it run 500hp over two years? Doubtful.
Besides, raceland was brought up because even the CHEAPEST of the cheap make their shocks with adjustable shock towers to retain piston travel.