i have been doing a lot of twisty road driving for a while and i was wondering if i plan on doing autoX or trackracing, should i correct my camber to 0degrees? my car is currently lowered 1.5 inches ( eibach prokit) so i m guessing i have a -1 degree camber right now. i want my tires to last a little longer, but at the same time, i want performance. its a love hate relationship. what would you guys do?

 

You're fine as it is. Make sure to at least get a toe alignment.

 

how would i go about aligning the toe?

 

Go to a shop to get an alignment, set your toe to factory specs or a little closer to zero. The closer to zero the the longer your tires will last.

 

you should make your camber slightly positive so that your tires will have maximum footprint in the corners because when you lower the car onto its weight, the camber will become closer to zero camber

 

slightly positive? i know what you mean when u say i will become 0 degree when hitting a corner, but is that a good idea in general? i always thought a little negative was better for stability, but never heard of people going positive on purpose.

btw, just so i dun ahve to start another thread. what should i do about my caster? i current have my left and right UCA swapped. should i keep it that way? pros and cons?

 

You want negative camber. Not positive.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by crazyasnboy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">you should make your camber slightly positive so that your tires will have maximum footprint in the corners because when you lower the car onto its weight, the camber will become closer to zero camber</TD></TR></TABLE>

This is nearly the dumbest thing I have ever read. Dont post here again.

Your camber is fine. Anything up to -2.5 or -3 is fine... camber does not wear out tires, excessive toe (in or out) does. The problem is, when you lower the car you gain camber - and when you change camber, that also affects toe. Any alignment shop should be able to set your toe to zero.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Any alignment shop should be able to set your toe to zero.</TD></TR></TABLE>

And the alignment shop will be able to tell you what your caster is at. I have 4.5 degrees of positive caster in my EF, and it works great.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Jaker &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

And the alignment shop will be able to tell you what your caster is at. I have 4.5 degrees of positive caster in my EF, and it works great.</TD></TR></TABLE>

how in the hell did you get 4.5* positive? Did you loosen your front subframe/crossbeam bolts and slide it forward? Swap the UCAs side to side? What else did you do? How are your outer CVs holding up?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by LX4CYL &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

how in the hell did you get 4.5* positive? Did you loosen your front subframe/crossbeam bolts and slide it forward? Swap the UCAs side to side? What else did you do? How are your outer CVs holding up?</TD></TR></TABLE>

I installed some spherical bearings in the front crossmember from a company called SBMS Motorsports, and threaded the radius arms fully. Now I have a nut on both sides of the mount in the crossmember, as well as some short sleeves to keep the arm/bearings from binding. I can set my caster pretty much anywhere from about 6 degrees to stock or less. However, 4.5 is pushing the limits of keeping the wheel centered (or close to centered) in the wheel well. (89 Civic hatch)

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Jaker &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I installed some spherical bearings in the front crossmember from a company called SBMS Motorsports, and threaded the radius arms fully. Now I have a nut on both sides of the mount in the crossmember, as well as some short sleeves to keep the arm/bearings from binding. I can set my caster pretty much anywhere from about 6 degrees to stock or less. However, 4.5 is pushing the limits of keeping the wheel centered (or close to centered) in the wheel well. (89 Civic hatch)</TD></TR></TABLE>

hmm, my radius rods look kind of like this:


The stock bushings and caster shims (red) press right up against where the diameter of radius rods increases. Am I correct in believing that threading the rod further will not pull the rod any further than it is now?

 

Pic busted, but I think I know what you mean. There's a metal sleeve inside the bushing. Cut that sleeve shorter and you'll be able to put more shims wherever you want to alter the caster further. Beware the rule mongers though. It might be illegal in your class.

 

I think I get it now, kinda.

Shortening the collar will allow me to compress the gummy rubber bushings even more, allowing me to pull the radius rod forward toward the crossbeam and increasing caster (every 1/8" of movement is equal to 0.583* of caster). Threading the rod a little further will allow me to turn the frontmost nut (in front of the crossbeam, like in the diagram) even further to take up the slack created by the shorter sleeves.



However, why would I want to put another nut between the radius rod end, and the bushing <U>behind</U> the crossmember? wouldn't the additional nut act like a big shim and reduce caster? I guess the SBMS/OPM bearings are much shorter than stock-type bushings, allowing you to do that, and still have tons of caster?

I myself wold love to pick up a pair of those bearings, but I don't think they are legal for STS/FSP.

 

We've totally jacked this poor guy's thread. I threaded the full length of that smaller diameter, right up to the step that stops the backing washer. Yes, the SBMS bearing is quite a bit shorter than the metal sleeve. I also only used small pieces of the sleeve to prevent binding between the rod/nuts and the bearing. I no longer have the big round washers, which allows more adjustment still.

You might be surprised to find that this would be STS illegal too. I'm not sure about FSP.

 

yeah, I started another thread

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1039523

I understand everything now, just need to see if its legal to at least shorten the collar and thread the rods. The metal bearings are way illegal for STS/SP

 

it's not a radius rod , it's a tension compression rod
caster helps with turn in
run as little as poss while still having straight line stability

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by LX4CYL &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

hmm, my radius rods look kind of like this:


The stock bushings and caster shims (red) press right up against where the diameter of radius rods increases. Am I correct in believing that threading the rod further will not pull the rod any further than it is now?</TD></TR></TABLE>

i have absolutely no idea what that part is lol!! my helm is at home. can some one please explain to me where that piece goes and what it does? i am sure i can make sense of all of it if i had a garage to rip my car apart to look at.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by icarp &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">it's not a radius rod , it's a tension compression rod
caster helps with turn in
run as little as poss while still having straight line stability</TD></TR></TABLE>

argh, the service manual and the Honda parts database refers to it as a Radius Rod, just like they both call them Shock Absorbers while everyone here calls them Struts

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by LX4CYL &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

argh, the service manual and the Honda parts database refers to it as a Radius Rod, just like they both call them Shock Absorbers while everyone here calls them Struts </TD></TR></TABLE>

I agree that its considered a radius rod. And anyone that calls those things attached to the wheels on any 88-2000 Civic, 90-2001 Integra or alot of other Hondas, struts, needs to do a little more studying of the design of Honda suspension. They ain't struts. They are shock absorbers, or dampers.

Tekstyle,

You don't have these radius arms or bushings (photo) on your GSR.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Jaker &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I agree that its considered a radius rod. And anyone that calls those things attached to the wheels on any 88-2000 Civic, 90-2001 Integra or alot of other Hondas, struts, needs to do a little more studying of the design of Honda suspension. They ain't struts. They are shock absorbers, or dampers.

Tekstyle,

You don't have these radius arms or bushings (photo) on your GSR.

</TD></TR></TABLE>

ahhh, makes a lot of sense now.