wheelbase v. toe settings
Currently, I run:
-2 degrees of camber fr &rr;
1/32" total toe out front
3/32" total toe in rear
Tein HA's w/ 12kg front springs, and 8kg rear springs
This is on a 1999 Prelude
These settings were reccomended by the shop that did the cornerweighting and alignment. Now, looking through the archives, everyone running an ef/eg etc run 0 or very close to 0 toe in on the rear; would anyone car to point out the difference in toe settings as they apply to different wheelbase lengths?
For reference:
1992 Civic HB wheelbase: 101.3"
1999 Prelude wheelbase: 101.7"
Not a huge difference, but I'm curious.
-2 degrees of camber fr &rr;
1/32" total toe out front
3/32" total toe in rear
Tein HA's w/ 12kg front springs, and 8kg rear springs
This is on a 1999 Prelude
These settings were reccomended by the shop that did the cornerweighting and alignment. Now, looking through the archives, everyone running an ef/eg etc run 0 or very close to 0 toe in on the rear; would anyone car to point out the difference in toe settings as they apply to different wheelbase lengths?
For reference:
1992 Civic HB wheelbase: 101.3"
1999 Prelude wheelbase: 101.7"
Not a huge difference, but I'm curious.
When I was autocrossing my del Sol I ran
1/8th toe out in the front
1/2 toe out in the rear and the car rotated great now that I run on track I run 1/8th toe out in the front and 0 in the rear cause I don't what it to be to tail happy.
The differnce between the Ef/and eg could be a weght thing more than a wheel base issue.
1/8th toe out in the front
1/2 toe out in the rear and the car rotated great now that I run on track I run 1/8th toe out in the front and 0 in the rear cause I don't what it to be to tail happy.
The differnce between the Ef/and eg could be a weght thing more than a wheel base issue.
Are those toe settings you're listing TOTAL or per side?
And, you're also right in saying that the issue may very well boil down to weight rather than wheelbase lenght; as the wheelbase difference isn't as pronounced.
[Modified by bb6h22a, 1:56 PM 3/11/2003]
And, you're also right in saying that the issue may very well boil down to weight rather than wheelbase lenght; as the wheelbase difference isn't as pronounced.
[Modified by bb6h22a, 1:56 PM 3/11/2003]
Wheelbase can have some to do with it but weight won't particularly. The longer the wheelbase, the easier it is to catch a slide (witness lurid but catchable slides oin a Neon, but a F440/500 will spin on a dime) so you can afford to induce rear rotation. Stock class autocrossers may run sill amounts of rear tooe out to get the car to rotate but remember they are not going that fast and run stock springs with no additional rear sway bar so they are desperate to get the car to rotate. That kind of to will bite you in the *** at speed plus if the rear wheels are very far off straight forward you will scrub a lot of speed in a straight line.
A little toe in is a conservative setting to try to keep the tail behind you but again can make the car scrub speed if excessive. O am in the zero toe group as I'd prefer no scrub and no general inducing of rotation by pointing the rear tires in different directions but again i run classes where you can change springs rate, swasy bars, etc.
A little toe in is a conservative setting to try to keep the tail behind you but again can make the car scrub speed if excessive. O am in the zero toe group as I'd prefer no scrub and no general inducing of rotation by pointing the rear tires in different directions but again i run classes where you can change springs rate, swasy bars, etc.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
psegs80
Road Racing / Autocross & Time Attack
24
Jul 13, 2009 07:18 AM
brokenojoke
Road Racing / Autocross & Time Attack
7
Jun 19, 2007 06:55 AM



