Go Back   MustangForums.com > Ford Mustang Tech > 2005 - 2014 Mustangs > S197 Handling Section
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?
Search


S197 Handling Section For everything suspension related, inlcuding brakes, tires, and wheels.

Welcome to Mustang Forums!
Welcome to Mustang Forums.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!


Reply
 
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-29-2012, 08:13 AM   #11
Norm Peterson
6th Gear Member
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Vehicle: 2008 GT Premium
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 6,840
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcieutat View Post
I just hate the look of the negative camber on my car. It reminds me of these kids that drop a honda civic and then do not get it realigned!
There's a difference between having more than stock negative camber and understanding why . . . and looking at visibly negative camber as strictly a matter of appearance simply because some other group of look-alikes can't be bothered to correct it is putting appearance above function for no good reason.

Consider this. When you're cornering hard, you want the outside front tire to be no worse than at zero camber. Very slightly negative is better still for cornering, but zero is a good enough target up to pretty serious driving. It's also what you want for the occasional situation where you might need the extra cornering grip (poo does happen, sometimes).

Here's where -1.8° ends up when you're driving the car to the point where you need it. Note that the driver side front tire is actually standing up straighter than the rear tire (which has cambered over the "wrong" way due to tire deflection tilting the whole axle almost 1°). Up front, the static camber has been very nicely balanced out by the body roll, which would other wise have pushed the left front tire out into positive camber (which is truly ugly to look at, if you stop to think about it).

Click the image to open in full size.

Edit (because I got interrupted and you snuck a reply in before I could submit the original part of this) - Yes, it's daily-driven at that setting and yes, I get very even wear across the tire treads. The driving you describe isn't nearly as hard as mine, but I wouldn't be at all afraid to run -1° if I were driving no harder than you. I'd set it at least that much negative even if it was my wife's car and I didn't drive it very often (hint: she's in her early 60's).


Quote:
I am going to go ahead and keep the MM caster camber plates. It just sucks that I literally just paid to have this suspension put on. I am going to install them myself and unfortunately pay for another alignment to get it around -.5 camber.
Good choice on the parts, but only -0.5° camber should be reserved for the very mildest of drivers who live in areas where the roads aren't any curvier than the nearest Interstate highway.

Seriously, camber set that low is less performance-oriented than the way even the 2005 - 2010 4.0L V6 cars came stock, and the extra spring rate of your Pro-kit is not going to be enough to completely cover you for having it set that low. The only exception I can think of is if you're strictly a straight-line guy with no interest whatsoever in cornering, where zero camber with the nose up under acceleration is about where you want it to be.


Anyway, once you've got the C-C plates on, there's a half decent chance you'll realize that alignment isn't nearly as scary of an adjustment as the $$$$$ shop racks and the $$.99 alignment expenses imply. All you have to do is move the strut tops in to make camber more negative, out for less. There are several ways to measure camber, and none of them have to cost you more than $50, once. Then check and possibly adjust toe, which isn't very difficult either.


Norm
This ad is not displayed to registered or logged-in members.
Register your free account today and become a member on Mustang Forums!
__________________
'08 GT/5MT (mine)
'10 Subaru Legacy 2.5GT/6MT (hers)
'01 Maxima 20AE/5MT (spare, my occasional winter driver)

'95 626/V6/5MT (still in the family but not at this address)

Last edited by Norm Peterson; 05-29-2012 at 08:42 AM.
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2012, 08:35 AM   #12
Norm Peterson
6th Gear Member
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Vehicle: 2008 GT Premium
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 6,840
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcieutat View Post
Do the rest of the specs on the alignment photo look right to you?
If you'd posted them as text instead of a photobucket picture I'd be able to comment (Internet filters block photo hosting sites).

But anyway, caster should be around +7.1° (with up to ±0.75° tolerance either side from there as long as the difference side to side is no greater than 0.75°) and toe should be something like +0.10° (meaning 'in').

I edited the above post possibly after you read it.


Norm
__________________
'08 GT/5MT (mine)
'10 Subaru Legacy 2.5GT/6MT (hers)
'01 Maxima 20AE/5MT (spare, my occasional winter driver)

'95 626/V6/5MT (still in the family but not at this address)
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2012, 12:56 PM   #13
jcieutat
2nd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Vehicle: 2012 Ford Mustang GT
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 212
Default

Looks like the specs are:

Caster L 7.2 R 7.2
Camber L -1.4 R -1.4
Toe L 0.0 R 0.05

There are some other things on the sheet but I honestly don't know what they are even after doing a google search! Thanks for the help.
__________________
2012 Mustang GT Premium Kona Blue
Brembo Pkg, 3:73 Gears, Ceramic tint, Boss Front Valance, Saleen Grille, Boss Rear Diffuser, GT500 Rear Decklid Spoiler, Corsa Sport Exhaust w/ Corsa X Pipe, Eibach Pro Kit, J&M APB
jcieutat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2012, 01:04 PM   #14
Whiskey11
2nd Gear Member
 
Whiskey11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Vehicle: 2009 Candy Apple Red Mustang GT
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcieutat View Post
Looks like the specs are:

Caster L 7.2 R 7.2
Camber L -1.4 R -1.4
Toe L 0.0 R 0.05

There are some other things on the sheet but I honestly don't know what they are even after doing a google search! Thanks for the help.
The second value in your toe description is actually the steer ahead IIRC and at .05 degrees that is basically nothing. Your Toe has been set to zero at both sides which is fine.

I would honestly leave the camber as is but that is just me.
__________________
Whiskey11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2012, 09:32 PM   #15
Norm Peterson
6th Gear Member
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Vehicle: 2008 GT Premium
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 6,840
Default

Those caster and toe numbers both look good for a daily driver. If anything, zero toe is just a little more aggressive than the 0.05° preferred, but it will probably shift slightly as the camber is corrected.


Norm
__________________
'08 GT/5MT (mine)
'10 Subaru Legacy 2.5GT/6MT (hers)
'01 Maxima 20AE/5MT (spare, my occasional winter driver)

'95 626/V6/5MT (still in the family but not at this address)
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2012, 12:27 PM   #16
UPRSharad
Sponsor
 
UPRSharad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Vehicle: 2011, Ford, Mustang GT
Location: FL
Posts: 2,374
www.facebook.com/sraldiris
Default

Here's my -1.8° camber pic:

Click the image to open in full size.

I'm certainly not an autocross expert, but I raced my car exactly how I daily drive it. Looking at the tires, it seemed like the front tires were more scuffed on the outsides than they were on the insides. I suspect that the car wanted a little more negative camber, but I'm on GT500 mounts so that's not an option without camber bolts. If UPR doesn't make a set of cc-plates this summer, I'll probably buy a set of Vorshlag plates so I can set my camber at -2°... and that's for daily driving.
__________________

Like us at www.facebook.com/TeamUPR
Follow us on Instagram @uprproducts
UPRSharad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2012, 02:09 PM   #17
Whiskey11
2nd Gear Member
 
Whiskey11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Vehicle: 2009 Candy Apple Red Mustang GT
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UPRSharad View Post
Here's my -1.8° camber pic:

Click the image to open in full size.

I'm certainly not an autocross expert, but I raced my car exactly how I daily drive it. Looking at the tires, it seemed like the front tires were more scuffed on the outsides than they were on the insides. I suspect that the car wanted a little more negative camber, but I'm on GT500 mounts so that's not an option without camber bolts. If UPR doesn't make a set of cc-plates this summer, I'll probably buy a set of Vorshlag plates so I can set my camber at -2°... and that's for daily driving.
Tire pressure plays an important roll there too on sidewall scuffing. If you are way over the shoulder block line then I would bump the PSI up. If you are driving and just absolutely destroying the outer edges a little more camber would help.

I'm no expert by any means but a touch more negative camber and I think you would be there. My car is just slightly less and in the picture in my signature I'm just barely past zero camber mid corner. I'm at -1.7º and probably on stickier tires and on a much grippier surface so I tend to get more body roll than others do on other concrete. I'm thinking with this set up, -2.0º is probably perfect, but the Steeda HD plates wont go that far with this set up. If (when?) I switch to coilovers, I hope to not drop the car any further, but up the spring rates which should help as well.
__________________
Whiskey11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2012, 03:50 PM   #18
Entaille
4th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Vehicle: 2012 Mustang GT
Location: WA
Posts: 1,514
Default

not going to rehash on the tech side since some very knowledgeable people have already spoken up .. but just to reiterate - wow, that is silly to be so against such a mild amount of camber. it is HARDLY visible and it improves handling, and isn't that hard on the tires at that amount.
Entaille is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2012, 07:56 PM   #19
jcieutat
2nd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Vehicle: 2012 Ford Mustang GT
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 212
Default

I definitely appreciate all of the replies to my original thread. I am beginning to think that the alignment shop I went to did not have a clue on how to properly align my car. The negative camber is definitely noticeable. I also remember when I went back into the shop seeing the tool (3 tips) that attaches to the wheel not sitting evenly around the wheel. I am out of state for work for a few weeks. When I get back in town, I am going to throw the MM Caster Camber plates on and then just bite the bullet and bring it to a Mustang shop to have the alignment done.
__________________
2012 Mustang GT Premium Kona Blue
Brembo Pkg, 3:73 Gears, Ceramic tint, Boss Front Valance, Saleen Grille, Boss Rear Diffuser, GT500 Rear Decklid Spoiler, Corsa Sport Exhaust w/ Corsa X Pipe, Eibach Pro Kit, J&M APB
jcieutat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2012, 07:56 PM
MustangForums
Ford Mustang




Paid Advertisement

 
 
 
Reply

Tags
95, align, alignment, body, bolts, camber, cobra, eibach, fox, gt, kit, mustang, pro, s197, specs, steeda, toe

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Forum Jump

Advertising

Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory
New Sponsors
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:20 PM.

© Internet Brands, Inc.


This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company
Emails Backup