PatrickGSR94

iTrader: (1)

I do not believe I ever said anywhere that tire wear would be completely perfect after lowering a car, with only a toe adjustment.

However, if you lower a Honda and do nothing for alignment, the tires WILL wear out within a few thousand miles at most. The premise of the thread is that MOST of that wear comes from toe-out due to the lowering. In the 90's and 00's I saw a bunch of import car magazines basically saying you MUST use camber kits to avoid that very fast tire wear that can result from lowering a car without an alignment. That is FALSE! Adjusting the toe to factory spec prevents MOST (not all) of the excessive wear that is possible from lowering a car, provided it's not lowered some crazy ridiculous amount. Many, many people have proved this premise correct time and time again.

Why is that so hard to understand?

ShaunRR

The premise of this thread is pretty clear to me in the original post. The author never claims or suggests that toe is the cause of 100 percent of tire wear. Only that it is the cause of the vast majority of it.

I can highlight the relevant areas of the first post if it is really that confusing to you.

slowcivic2k

What drew me to this thread was the title: NO YOU DO NOT NEED THIS!!!!

Posting like that causes threads like this tend to blow way out of control, and also gain a lot of hits, which draws attention, both good and bad.

Since most vehicles today are shipping with a much lower profile tire, the effects of camber on tire wear will increase as the surface area of the tire has also increased. Vehicles like the Chrysler Crossfire and Mini Cooper are notorious for camber related tire wear. You probably won't find too many happy customers on tire rack for these vehicles. There are many other examples like this that can have muted effects, like the Dodge Avenger, that have a lot of negative camber in the rear with only a fraction of the tire wear problem. The dynamic nature of that rear suspension helps mitigate some of the wear. Even on vehicles like the Grand Prix, which are notorious for settling and negative camber on all wheels. Its effects are relatively minor, with toe-out on turns being the primary wear factor on the front tires.

I think this thread should have a specific direction, performance, or conformance. You cannot have it both ways without a nuke going off in here. Traction ruins tires. Handling ruins tires.

94eg!

iTrader: (2)

It has been my personal experience that a camber kit is definitely not a "need" on my EG lowered 2.75". I support the thread title as is.

cruizinmax

iTrader: (2)

I concur. You do not NEED a camber kit. The title does not say "NEVER buy a camber kit!" Under 90% of the scenarios you can lower the car, set the toe and tire wear is negligible and performance is improved due to the increased negative camber. Imo adding a camber kit just gives more possible failure points, decreased suspension travel, and more of a chance your alignment guy will screw up your adjustments.

98civdx

He probualy works at an alignment shop and goes by what his computer tells him.

TunerN00b

Hondasfordays

Agreed. FWIW I had about 10,000 miles on my new tires before I saw any noticeable uneven wear. 95 Sedan lowered 2" on fat 5s. barely a 64th of uneven wear - not noticeable to the naked eye. NOT necessary to have a camber kit on these cars. (of course after a proper toe alignment)

ssmrico

Subd

DCFIVER

Didnt bother reading the whole thread only the first post.

If you want the maximum life out of your tires and you do not want the poor handling that is associated with too much negative camber,then YES you DO need camber kit. These are indisputable facts and it does not matter what kind of vehicle you drive.


The title of the thread is misleading. It is one persons opinion,it is not a fact when presented with all of the evidence

94eg!

iTrader: (2)

Next time read the whole thread.

DCFIVER

Why? So I can read a bunch of replies from kids/DIYers with zero training,education or knowledge on the subject?


What I wrote stands solidly on its merit of facts.

It cannot be disputed. The laws of physics and engineering cannot magically be undone because some dude on the internet says so.


Patrick seems to be a smart dude,I get the point he was trying to make,but his focus was too narrow, and the thread title is misleading.


***I should add that Im not only a 20 year professional in this field with an innate understanding of the subject matter but Ive also been tracking and autoX 'ing Hondas for this long as well.

I DD an RSX with RT615s -1.5 camber and 0 toe all the way around. Before that it was an H22 cb7 with with the older line of Azenis(I forget the name,but the tread compound and sipe design was different. ) MY DC5 is a McPherson set up and my CB7 was a double wishbone set up.

So save that bullshit that am just an "in the box" mechanic. I know more than most in this thread about this subject and my view is from both sides.

PatrickGSR94

iTrader: (1)

And what you do with your car is not what the point of this thread was for. I'll reiterate it once again for you. Lowering a car does NOT automatically REQUIRE a camber kit to prevent excessive tire wear. Most often toe adjustments will take care of it. There ARE cases where camber adjustment can be beneficial. But that's not what my original post was about. 20 years ago the magazines would say that when lowering a car that a camber kit was a MUST to prevent excessive tire wear, and that just is not true.

I've also been tinkering around with Hondas for nearly 20 years myself. My first suspension install on my own vehicle was in 1999, over 18 years ago. And while not a true certified mechanic, I do know a thing or two about cars and suspension.

DCFIVER

I wrote down what I do with my car so that the readers will know that Im not your local Pepboys mechanic who knows nothing about modifications,particularly with Hondas.
Yes ,I know what your point was,I acknowledged that.

My contention was the thread title. As it is written,it is not rue. Camber is a wear angle. Period. If it is not corrected,it will cause uneven wear. Properly adjusting the toe will extend the tire life,but it will not prevent uneven wear if the camber is excessive one way or the other.

Additionally, ride handling WILL suffer. Whether the vehicle is a DD or track car. Too much camber is detrimental.


So my initial response to this thread was "Yes you DO need a camber kit if you want MAXIMUM tire life and predictable handling characteristics."




I did not post to correct your thread,I posted to correct your thread title.

94eg!

iTrader: (2)

Becaaauuuuuse.......if you diiiiiid.....you would have realized there is no reason for you to make your post whatsoever, since what you have said has already been said 100 times prior in this very thread. Could have saved yourself (and everyone else) a lot of time reading & typing the same argument over and over. But.....

DCFIVER

Ok. You may be right.

As long as Ive been on HT I've always seen long threads devolve into name calling, pissing matches and "internet facts". I assumed the worse and had no intention of reading through that.

Apologize for the redundancy.

Accordian47

33 pages of this. Crazy, camber kits are a term/name that really feels good to say and think about, they bring piece of mind and IMO they are a wonderful piece of engineering most of the time. Personally I want my camber @ 0 degrees, I'm comfortable in my car and I have tried to run with and without them, I just like a straight up wheel and tire. For me, I can sort of get somewhere with it. I say that because I don't have enough racing/driving experience while experimenting with different alignment setups and with camber @ 0 degrees I can fully be masterful in my art of driving. I will say though that I kinda like the idea of maybe a degree to a degree and a half of negative up front, why exactly? I don't know, maybe I'd like it.

THe way I see it:
Honda designed their cars at a certain ride height along with alignment specs, the lowering of the car by an owner is going to be a hack, no matter how you look at it. So yeah, your going to NEED yet another part, made with love, taking hours of time, to try and remedy your now negative camber which is really one of the more beautiful attempts really. Its trying to bring together the people in the world. Problem in world=Need for more bringing together of people...Our own aspiration towards cars and the Honda brand, whether it be as simple as wanting your car to sit a little lower will inevitably cause you to try and cheat the very engineers who designed the car, may seem hard to understand or as though its good or bad thing but it's not. It's where the majic happens its just a un-avoidable aspect of taking anything from the world around you and "making" something (your touch, ideals, the particular thoughts you had, ya know, while making it.) Honda did not however actually make a "lowered car" so we don't see "lowered suspension designs", Honda would have, to their best ability, so selflessly see, that lowering the suspension via a change in spring/shock length is going to automatically be cause for a re-design of the suspension. WHICH is what we need, a camber kit, a not so perfect little bit of careful engineering that we can apply.

When your buying lowering parts, coilovers etc., your buying a product of intent, you got to be careful...no, it's not a threat

• When you change the effective length of your double wishbone's, position and control member, were lucky it's just two aspects of the geometry that are then different. Toe and Camber.
• Any aspect of your tires is going to be altered as a change in alignment occurs
• Toe outside of factory spec will wear tires faster and mainly unevenly (as opposed to factory spec)
• Camber outside of factory spec will wear tires faster and unevenly( as opposed to factory spec)
• If you want the best possible tire wear, get a camber kit, you have the ability to set it anywhere within it's adjustment range, that includes the factory spec of 0 degrees.
• Always get an alignment after lowering your car, toe changes and that wears tires the most unevenly.

94eg!

iTrader: (2)

So when Honda Motor Co took the standard EG/DC2 suspension and modified it for an ultimate performance application (Type R).....WHAT DID THEY DO???? Oh wait.....they lowered it. No geometry modifications whatsoever. Not one single control arm is geometrically different. The only other modifications were increased spring, damping, and roll-bar rates. Hmmmmm. Such HACKS!!

DCFIVER

They lowered the Type-R by millimeters. Not even half an inch.(They also increased front camber,which is where the real performance gains were had,not by lowering it)

These kids are dropping their vehicles by 2 -3 inches.

Big difference.....

94eg!

iTrader: (2)

The camber increase was a result of the lowering.

"Hacks" I say!

94eg!

iTrader: (2)

Look....On my 94 Civic CX I've run 205/40r16 lowered just shy of -3" with stock geometry from about 1999 to 2016. Camber was measured at -2.5* F and -1.5*R. From 2008 to 2016 I ran a set of Falken RT615's. This setup ran mostly freeway, commuting to and from work once or twice a week probably 20k miles total (my online records only go back to 2012).

Those tires got old and hard and worn so last year I switched to 205/45r16 Firehawk Indy 500 (rebadged Bridgestone RE003). This tire is taller so I raised the car about 1 inch to clear and be a little more comfortable. I can't remember off hand but I think camber now sits at -1.5* F (or -1.75) and -1.1*R (had to shim right-rear out to even it up L/R). Did a quick string alignment to reset toe to factory specs. Well I've had this setup for a year and a half now (3,551 miles) so this weekend I finally got around to rotating them. Once removed I checked each tire with a depth gauge and found them all perfectly even with 9/32 tread across the face of all 4 tires. BTW: Firehawk Indy 500 list at 9/32 tread depth when new on TireRack. I couldn't be more pleased.

DCFIVER

No,Honda intentionally increased the front camber for performance.

The rear camber is exactly the same for R and non R models.

Croc NZ

The DC2 R remains one of the best handling cars ever to come out of Japan, although the damper rates are pretty average. Change them to Konis and you really do have a great chassis, equal to anything made in Europe. Unfortunately you then need someone who knows what they are doing to get the rebound adjustment correct. It's not actually hard, but with Konis it can be time-consuming, and most get it wrong.

But the secrets of the DC2 R have nothing to do with its ride height. Firstly, there is adequate wheel travel in both directions. That's absolutely critical. Next, the spring rates are in the ballpark. But the single most important component is that big rear anti-roll bar. It balances the car in corners by transferring almost all of the weight of the rear of the car from the inside wheel to the outside. This in turn allows the two front wheels to share the weight of the front of the car more equally, reducing understeer by unloading the outside tyre. (The front bar, while even bigger in diameter, has geometry that makes it only one-third as effective as the rear.)

It's not perfect. The bar is attached to the lower rear arm at a mounting point projecting forward from the arm. So the bar twists the arm, and the torsional stiffness of the arm and the rubber bushes at each end of it are what ultimately determine how much force is transferred. But put a Type-R rear bar and mounting kit on your EG or DC2 and you will absolutely transform it!

The fastest way to destroy the handling of these classic Japanese cars is to lower them. It destroys their capability to cope with bumps in the road. And, depending on which wheel(s) run out of vertical travel first, it destroys the balance of the whole car, making it unpredictable at best and usually highly dangerous at speed.

I have just completed the suspension for a K-swapped EK9 tarmac rally car. For competitions run at high speed on real public roads (legally closed of course) it is vital to have as much wheel travel as possible. The car is not lowered, and possibly sits slightly higher than stock. Typically people will attempt to compete in such events in cars that are lowered, with far too much power. They are pretty much uncontrollable anywhere but on a smooth racetrack. And they break, or crash, and are slow and no fun at all on a real road with real corners and real bumps.

The springs in this car are probably very similar in rate to standard. The front subframe, steering and suspension came from a 98-spec DC2 R. It uses blade-type rear lower arms. The rear bar is now mounted to the stirrup on the bottom of the rear dampers, which means it is about twice as effective as even the stock bar. The front bar is now connected to the forks at the bottom of the front dampers, which makes it also far more effective. Thus the car has quite soft, compliant suspension with plenty of capability to soak bumps, but is very stiff in roll. It's predictable and fun to drive. And it's not slow!

94eg!

iTrader: (2)

To say it more correct-er........"Honda intentionally lowered it for performance." Increased camber may have been their "goal" (or maybe not), but the only ACTUAL change made to the geometry was reduced ride height.

BTW: The rear camber is NOT exactly the same. Yes the "spec" is the same......but the "actual" will always be slightly more negative on an R vs the Others. This is because lowering Increases camber.....as I'm sure we all agree. The rear camber "spec" on the R didn't need to increase like the front because the rear EG/DC geometry doesn't have as much of a camber curve as the front.

The EK is a different story.

DCFIVER

The ride height was changed by 10-15mm, You are not going to gain 20* negative camber from that. The front camber was intentionally changed from 10*to 30*

The vehicle was not simply lowered, it was more than that.

It is exactly the same. The specifications exactly are the same.

You dont seem to comprehend the fact that lowering a vehicle by 10-15mm isn't going to have a dramatic affect on the alignment angle.


Try aligning a few hundred vehicles and you may gain an appreciation for how it actually works.....