the corner is downhill, the slight camber is apparent and i know I'm way off the apex. The inside rear is just starting to get load. A few meters back it was almost fully unloaded with occasional lockup but never fully lifted. Tyres are 195/50/15 BFG street tyres.

what bothers me is the bad dynamic camber of the inside wheels.
I wander if anyone is willing to brainstorm a bit on what is seen on the photos and what may possibly be wrong with the setup.

here's the almost exact same place but the outside tires are visible.


I'd like to preserve further details of the setup for later as I don't want to affect anyone's ideas.

Thanks in advance


Modified by 1net at 7:21 PM 8/8/2008

 

It's a bit hard to tell from the pics, do you think you're getting positive camber gain on the inside in a corner? The rear I could kind of see that, but the front not so much. You certainly don't have oodles of camber, but the car doesn't look that low either. If you ARE getting positive camber in the rear, I'll dig around. User MadFrog (I think still on here) had a similar problem with his ITB Civic, and I think it wound up being related to busted bushings.

Edit: I don't know if the archives were cleared out or what, but I can't find **** related to it. Even just searching for "camber" in the archives returns only 20 posts in the RRAX subforum, and that just can't be right.


Modified by Stinkycheezmonky at 5:02 AM 8/8/2008

 

Outside tire camber seems ok. The rear wear pattern is almost perfect and I'm not concerned about it even though it seems i can dial in some more camber in both front and back. This second photo is just for reference that the outside tires seem at a reasonable angle.
The first photo is what I'm bothered by. The tires have quite a lot of camber in respect to the chassis, but in relation to the road they both look like they are hanging on the inside edges. Is this normal?

I had minor concern about bushing flex bit i though "Energy suspension should be stiffer than OE" and decided to look elsewhere.
So do you thing it's normal for the inside tires to stay like that or should i be looking into bushing compliance issues?

 

I don't see anything wrong with your camber in the first pics.....it's still pretty negative....and don't assume the contact patch isn't fully on the ground with a bit of negative camber

I would pay less attention to what it looks like on film, and more about what is actually occuring with your tires. Next time you hit the track ask someone if they have a pyrometer (to see if tire temps are even across the contact patch) to get some objective data about how much of your tire you're actually using......only then will you have a clearer idea of what to adjust to/from.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 1net &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">but in relation to the road they both look like they are hanging on the inside edges. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Ok, so wait, you think you might have too much NEGATIVE camber on the inside? No, you don't. If wear pattern is fine (and you say it is), don't worry about it. dyingwish's suggestion is another good one if you're still concerned.

 

I've been trying to use the pyrometer money for something else... ok, I'll get one. I've been counting on chalking up to now and maybe it's time to upgrade to a pyrometer
Thanks for the reassurance about how the wheels look.

btw, didn't honda design the suspension so that it gains camber on bump and looses camber on droop. That's what made me think that the inside tire should be loosing camber, but I'm not sure if this amount of droop is enough for a perceptive camber loss.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 1net &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I had minor concern about bushing flex bit i though "Energy suspension should be stiffer than OE" and decided to look elsewhere.
So do you thing it's normal for the inside tires to stay like that or should i be looking into bushing compliance issues? </TD></TR></TABLE>

Are you sure you want to do some adjustments to your car when your offline by a photo? There is some you are able to do but aren't the tires and suspension working alot differently then when you are perfectly on line? I would look at the issues concerning yourself as to why you did not hit the apex before looking at adjusting a slightly negative camber in front. the rears look fine and the front seems to be alittle more negative then you would want on a perfect turn(unless tread wear is even), BUT like Dyingwish said the best way to make the adjustments is when you can actively check tire temps and be consistant with your lines.

Also are you sure that is the type of corner that you want to tune your suspension for? you should take into consideration the track and other turns that may be effected by your camber in that turn. just cause your slightly more negative there doesn't mean your slightly positive somewere else.

Just a few things to consider. I would say try to get a wheel cam on both sides if you want to do this by looks if not get a lazer pyrometer (probably better if your tires are being 2 stressed).

 

Stinkycheezmonky, i didn't see your last reply, and YES, this is exaclty what I'm concerned about. I just went to check the rear tires again and the wear patter is very evenacross the thread.

unrealwrc,
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by unrealwrc &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Are you sure you want to do some adjustments to your car when your offline by a photo?</TD></TR></TABLE>
This same behavior is seen in different corners, ON and OFF the line, up and downhill. I got the point though. I'm mostly working on my driving and trying to minimize the stuff i touch on the car.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by unrealwrc &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Also are you sure that is the type of corner that you want to tune your suspension for?</TD></TR></TABLE>
There is very little tracks around here and most of the corners are close to the one represented in the photo. For now I can only race on go-cart tracks.
for the wheel-cam! I'm working on a cam system to analyze the car and my control usage.

Thanks a lot guys

 

Unreal, on-line or off-line won't matter. The suspension and tires don't care where the car is. If you're thinking you want the suspension to be doing a particular thing for a particular area of the track, ok, but that's impossible to set up, given the constantly changing dynamics of driving and given the variety of corners.

Likewise, the "type" of corner shouldn't matter in this case. In competitive racing, sure, but driver ability will play a big part before 0.3* more camber on the right front wheel will.

Lastly, a probe pyrometer will be more accurate than a laser one. Go with that instead.

1net, just to give you an idea, my rear doesn't have enough camber (currently at ~ -2*) for the tires I'm using. The wear is very noticeable with the outside being more sloped than the inside. If you're not seeing a similar (but opposite) pattern, I wouldn't be worried.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Stinkycheezmonky &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Unreal, on-line or off-line won't matter. The suspension and tires don't care where the car is. If you're thinking you want the suspension to be doing a particular thing for a particular area of the track, ok, but that's impossible to set up, given the constantly changing dynamics of driving and given the variety of corners.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

1net got what I was trying to say.

Depending on if there is more sliding or a higher rate of turnin then needed for a corner that can effect the suspension characteristics at that corner and the camber for that portion of the turn. If its a smooth line through the turn either way it should act the same but when you factor into the other problems caused by going more offline "driver error" thats when the correct set-up gets missused.

Also I wasnt saying to tune for a corner but to tune for a course/courses where the best set-up overall is better then the best set-up in 1 turn, again it seems like 1net understood what I was trying to say.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 1net &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">This same behavior is seen in different corners, ON and OFF the line, up and downhill. I got the point though. I'm mostly working on my driving and trying to minimize the stuff i touch on the car.

There is very little tracks around here and most of the corners are close to the one represented in the photo. </TD></TR></TABLE>

since the corners are familiar it should be relatively easy for you to dial in the right set-up then (just don't forget to look at the whole course performance rather then just sector performance). Good luck with everything.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 1net &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">need comments on this photo</TD></TR></TABLE>
Its too big for the interweb.

Resize to fit 800x800 (or even 1000x1000 if you must) but 1280x1280 is just plain rude...

 

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

Depending on if there is more sliding or a higher rate of turnin then needed for a corner that can effect the suspension characteristics at that corner and the camber for that portion of the turn. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Yeah, but the range of possible camber is finite. To look at that, all you have to do is load up the suspension, regardless of what else is going on. Since all he's looking at is camber, the rest of everything else ("proper setup for the course") doesn't matter. That means it doesn't matter if he's off-line in that pictured corner or on-line in some other corner, the suspension will still be loaded up and the camber will be what it is.

Unless somehow you're looking at the relationship between the tire and the pavement only, in which case I sort of see what you're saying. That still doesn't have anything to do with suspension behavior though, which will remain constant (loaded or unloaded to some degree).

I think the problem I'm having is your terminology. "Higher rate of turn-in" means what exactly, as an example? Do you mean a faster entry than you should be taking, or literally a turn-in that's done too fast, like moving your hands on the steering wheel too quickly (though I don't see how that's pertinent to the discussion)? Again, that's just an example. I'm trying to understand what you're saying, but am having difficulty.

 

Bare in mind that the image was quickly done on paint It was hard to portray exactly what I was mentioning but I think you can get the point.

I hope that works, trying to find a site that is SFW

I guess I used suspension when I probably shouldn't have, I miss used the term suspension. you see that due to the difference forces/ factors that are applied when different stresses are put on the wheels, the increased force on the car, during a more severe turn in, can create a different camber on the car. Although it doesn't appear that 1net was OFF line 2 much it still could give a slightly different camber (although with his off it might only be tenths/hundreths of a degree)

and yes I was talking about the wheel + pavement contact

and high rate of turn-in can be caused by a number of different things but the red line kindof illustrates that

 

O and either way with even treadware and even temperatures he is not in a bad cituationw ith his setup.

 

Ok, I need something else clarified here. "Turn-in" as I've always heard it used means the moment you, the driver, turn the steering wheel to initiate a turn. It is a moment or point on the track (the "turn-in point"). You're talking about severity of turn-in, and I'm not understanding.

For the camber stuff, I understand what you're saying and it makes sense, but I don't know that it has much application here. Like you said, the difference in camber (if any) will be minute, and most likely undetectable to the eye.

 

Sorry about the image size. Frankly i thought the forums have auto-resize. My bad, I apologise. - FIXED

Here's some more info: I'm extremely please with the car. It's very well balanced and after dialing in some toe-in, it's very predictable, easyly turns in and is one of the top competitors in those events when I get the driving right. What I'm trying to say is that I'm almost there. I will soon need a bit more power, but who doesn't

Let me get to some specific ideas that I should be able to try next week in praparation for the next race.
First of all I was talking about even thread wear in the rear. The front's a different story. This is my DD and I now have a few races on those tires. In the front I HAVE pretty UNEVEN thread wear. The chalk tests during every event showed I was rolling over the front tyres quite badly. Having -3* front camber I started increasing the front pressure. During the last event I reached 48.5psi hot and decided to stop as the max pressure on the sidewall stated 51psi. Increasing the pressures helped the rolling over the tire situation to a point and it's actually visible in the second photo that the front right is not under the rim. With those settings however, the thread depth in the middle is now 5-6mm and about 1.5-2mm on the sides. I personally don't find that uniform, but I'm a much experience. What do you think? -3* camber, almost 50psi and still rounding off the edges?
btw, the inner edge is flat as it is caused from camber + a bit (1.4mm) of toe-in and the outter edge is much more round from the tire rolling under the rim.
so in 2 words: is this normal wear at those settings?

What I will try out on the skid pad is to raise the front a bit (loosing some camber) and removing the current 18mm front bar. The idea is to promote a bit more movement in the front. With more roll I should get pretty much the same outter wheel camber and a bit less inner wheel camber. This will probably produce a bit more rear wheel unloading but i can unload it a bit more before (approx 1-2cm) it completely lifts. What do you think? or

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Stinkycheezmonky &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Ok, I need something else clarified here. "Turn-in" as I've always heard it used means the moment you, the driver, turn the steering wheel to initiate a turn. It is a moment or point on the track (the "turn-in point"). You're talking about severity of turn-in, and I'm not understanding.

For the camber stuff, I understand what you're saying and it makes sense, but I don't know that it has much application here. Like you said, the difference in camber (if any) will be minute, and most likely undetectable to the eye.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Ok theres "turn-in point" and "amount of turn-in" I guess thats what I was refering to. with a later tun-in point the amount a driver has to turn the wheel(what i defined as severe turn-in) is increased. hope that clarifies that.

and I mentioned earlier that it could be a factor to cause inaccuracies not necessarily that it was huge in this application but for the perfect set-up it would be something to take into consideration.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 1net &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> Having -3* front camber I started increasing the front pressure. During the last event I reached 48.5psi hot and decided to stop as the max pressure on the sidewall stated 51psi. Increasing the pressures helped the rolling over the tire situation to a point and it's actually visible in the second photo that the front right is not under the rim. With those settings however, the thread depth in the middle is now 5-6mm and about 1.5-2mm on the sides. I personally don't find that uniform, but I'm a much experience. What do you think? -3* camber, almost 50psi and still rounding off the edges?
btw, the inner edge is flat as it is caused from camber + a bit (1.4mm) of toe-in and the outter edge is much more round from the tire rolling under the rim.
so in 2 words: is this normal wear at those settings?

What I will try out on the skid pad is to raise the front a bit (loosing some camber) and removing the current 18mm front bar. The idea is to promote a bit more movement in the front. With more roll I should get pretty much the same outter wheel camber and a bit less inner wheel camber. This will probably produce a bit more rear wheel unloading but i can unload it a bit more before (approx 1-2cm) it completely lifts. What do you think? or </TD></TR></TABLE>

have you considered trying to decrease the front camber alittle? if I read this right your having 2 high of "inner" treadware even with tires inflated so why not try to decrease tire pressure more(i think 48 is high) and decrease front camber first? might be easiest.

 

with less tire pressure it eats up the outer edges really fast. That's why I ended up with those high front pressures. I'll try less camber for sure though.

 

just saying you might be able to run a lower tire pressure when you adjust the camber, its not directly linked but its something you might want 2 play with. Good Luck!

 

What kind of tires are they?

 

BFGoodrich g-Force profiler
I think they just got stoped from production