Notices
Brakes & Suspension 350Z stoppers, coils, shocks/dampers

Alignment spec sheet help

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 7, 2009 | 09:19 AM
  #1  
chrisjersey06's Avatar
chrisjersey06
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (35)
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
From: Long Island, NY
Default Alignment spec sheet help

Hey guys, just got an alignment done after installing Swift Spec-R springs (1" front, 1.2" rear), and Ichiba rear camber arms and toe bolts. I was just curious to see if they were able to get everything into spec. The guy said they didn't have any problems with the alignment but I have no experience reading these, so I trust you guys to tell me the truth based on the numbers. If there's a problem with anything please let me know. Thanks


Last edited by chrisjersey06; Aug 7, 2009 at 09:25 AM.
Reply
Old Aug 7, 2009 | 10:31 AM
  #2  
Brrcats's Avatar
Brrcats
Registered User
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,370
Likes: 0
From: Westerville, OH
Default

your front camber is -0.1 out of spec. its such a small amount I'm not sure if it will cause a problem, but still, its not within specification.
Reply
Old Aug 7, 2009 | 10:36 AM
  #3  
WhiteNoiz's Avatar
WhiteNoiz
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
From: Boise, Idaho
Default

I started a thread about being .1 degree out of spec on my right rear camber. The guy at the tire shop wouldnt give me a solid yes or no if it an allignment was needed, or if it would cause excess tire wear. The conclusion to my thread was to watch for abnormal tire wear after 3k, allign if needed. In my case, I didnt want to spend 80 dollars to have the adjustment. The Z's camber spec already wears the tires unevenly (always wears the inside, for the rears anyway). So I decided I would just watch for excess tire wear, but I dont expect to see a difference with such a small degree of fault.
In your case though, since you just had the allignment done, I would take it back and make them put it within the spec range.

Last edited by WhiteNoiz; Aug 7, 2009 at 10:40 AM.
Reply
Old Aug 7, 2009 | 12:24 PM
  #4  
guitarist's Avatar
guitarist
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 180
Likes: 1
From: Little Rock
Default

Originally Posted by WhiteNoiz
I started a thread about being .1 degree out of spec on my right rear camber. The guy at the tire shop wouldnt give me a solid yes or no if it an allignment was needed, or if it would cause excess tire wear. The conclusion to my thread was to watch for abnormal tire wear after 3k, allign if needed. In my case, I didnt want to spend 80 dollars to have the adjustment. The Z's camber spec already wears the tires unevenly (always wears the inside, for the rears anyway). So I decided I would just watch for excess tire wear, but I dont expect to see a difference with such a small degree of fault.
In your case though, since you just had the allignment done, I would take it back and make them put it within the spec range.
Without adjustable A-arms or ride height up front, they won't be able to change the front camber setting. There is no adjustment capability in the OEM setup.
Reply
Old Aug 7, 2009 | 12:35 PM
  #5  
WhiteNoiz's Avatar
WhiteNoiz
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
From: Boise, Idaho
Default

Originally Posted by guitarist
Without adjustable A-arms or ride height up front, they won't be able to change the front camber setting. There is no adjustment capability in the OEM setup.
Good to know.
Reply
Old Aug 7, 2009 | 12:54 PM
  #6  
Zoom750's Avatar
Zoom750
New Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 111
Likes: 1
From: New Jersey
Default

Couldn't they even out the rear toe? That would bother me to no end. What is your goal with this alignment? i.e. track, DD, tire longevity, simply stay within OEM specs, etc.

Last edited by Zoom750; Aug 7, 2009 at 12:55 PM.
Reply
Old Aug 7, 2009 | 01:27 PM
  #7  
Thermal1's Avatar
Thermal1
Registered User
iTrader: (23)
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
From: Georgia
Default

The only thing they could have done better is even out the rear toe like Zoom750 said.
See how the front is even? Final toe front is .05 on the left and the right
The final toe in the rear is 0.1 left and 0.0 right.

Not a huge deal, but in a perfect world, the numbers would match
Reply
Old Aug 7, 2009 | 06:30 PM
  #8  
chrisjersey06's Avatar
chrisjersey06
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (35)
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
From: Long Island, NY
Default

Thanks everybody for your help, I appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Zoom750
Couldn't they even out the rear toe? That would bother me to no end. What is your goal with this alignment? i.e. track, DD, tire longevity, simply stay within OEM specs, etc.
I just wanted to get it back as close to stock as possible after lowering it.

Originally Posted by Thermal1
The only thing they could have done better is even out the rear toe like Zoom750 said.
See how the front is even? Final toe front is .05 on the left and the right
The final toe in the rear is 0.1 left and 0.0 right.

Not a huge deal, but in a perfect world, the numbers would match
Will that noticeably affect performance or tire wear any?

Last edited by chrisjersey06; Aug 7, 2009 at 06:33 PM.
Reply
Old Aug 7, 2009 | 07:09 PM
  #9  
binder's Avatar
binder
New Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,457
Likes: 7
From: terre haute, IN; STL, MO
Default

looks good

-1.4 in the front is fine. It's not the camber that destroys the tires, it's the toe. When toe is off you could have a car at 0 camber eat tires like crazy.

I ran -2.0 camber on my fronts and they are still going after 15k miles
Reply
Old Aug 7, 2009 | 07:45 PM
  #10  
hatchboi's Avatar
hatchboi
Registered User
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,354
Likes: 0
From: New Orleans
Default

looks like your rear right side is at 2.2 while everything else in the rear is 1.3
Reply
Old Aug 7, 2009 | 08:19 PM
  #11  
chrisjersey06's Avatar
chrisjersey06
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (35)
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
From: Long Island, NY
Default

Originally Posted by hatchboi
looks like your rear right side is at 2.2 while everything else in the rear is 1.3
I believe those are the before numbers, unless I'm reading it wrong?
Reply
Old Aug 7, 2009 | 08:33 PM
  #12  
hatchboi's Avatar
hatchboi
Registered User
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,354
Likes: 0
From: New Orleans
Default

Originally Posted by chrisjersey06
I believe those are the before numbers, unless I'm reading it wrong?
you're right i read it wrong, my fault
Reply
Old Aug 8, 2009 | 10:42 AM
  #13  
davidv's Avatar
davidv
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 42,753
Likes: 11
From: Tucson, AZ
Default

EDIT: Toe in is a positive number. Toe in is good.

Last edited by davidv; Aug 8, 2009 at 08:30 PM.
Reply
Old Aug 8, 2009 | 04:01 PM
  #14  
binder's Avatar
binder
New Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,457
Likes: 7
From: terre haute, IN; STL, MO
Default

Originally Posted by davidv
Front toe spec is positive? Never heard of a sports car with positive front toe.
good catch. front spec is -.08 total toe. that would be decent if it was -.10 toe, not +.10 toe
Reply
Old Aug 8, 2009 | 04:17 PM
  #15  
chrisjersey06's Avatar
chrisjersey06
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (35)
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
From: Long Island, NY
Default

Originally Posted by binder
good catch. front spec is -.08 total toe. that would be decent if it was -.10 toe, not +.10 toe
Is that going to affect anything like performance or tire wear? I don't know enough about the specs to know what's a little and what's a lot.
Reply
Old Aug 8, 2009 | 06:52 PM
  #16  
binder's Avatar
binder
New Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,457
Likes: 7
From: terre haute, IN; STL, MO
Default

no, by the looks of it i think it should be labled "toe in"

your specs show .16 as fine so that probably means .16 "toe in" which would be -.16 toe....i think, i'm not sure. It just sounds funny. It should be pointed "inwards" which would be a negative number
Reply
Old Aug 8, 2009 | 08:09 PM
  #17  
davidv's Avatar
davidv
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 42,753
Likes: 11
From: Tucson, AZ
Default

Originally Posted by chrisjersey06
Is that going to affect anything like performance or tire wear? I don't know enough about the specs to know what's a little and what's a lot.
The toe setting is a trade-off between straight-line stability and quick steering response. Nobody wants a car to constantly wander over tar strips-the never-ending steering corrections required would drive anyone batty.

Racers are willing to sacrifice a bit of stability on the straightaway for a sharper turn-in to the corners. So street cars are generally set up with toe-in, while race cars are often set up with toe-out.
Reply
Old Aug 8, 2009 | 08:23 PM
  #18  
bimmertech's Avatar
bimmertech
Registered User
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 607
Likes: 0
From: kansas city
Default

Originally Posted by binder
no, by the looks of it i think it should be labled "toe in"

your specs show .16 as fine so that probably means .16 "toe in" which would be -.16 toe....i think, i'm not sure. It just sounds funny. It should be pointed "inwards" which would be a negative number
Positive toe is toe in, negative toe is toe out.



the only issue with that alignment is the cross-toe in the rear. it's not a huge deal as the one side is in spec and the other is at 0, but its always a good idea to have that stuff sorted out. on your next alignment i would suggest the following specs:

front camber--not adjustable, yours is fine. with proper toe settings you won't see accelerated tire wear caused by camber until you go past -3 or so.
front toe--0 to 0.02 positive toe

rear camber--what you have now in relation to your front is good. if you buy front camber arms then make another thread.
rear toe--i like to run 0.06 positive toe
Reply
Old Aug 8, 2009 | 08:27 PM
  #19  
davidv's Avatar
davidv
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 42,753
Likes: 11
From: Tucson, AZ
Default

Originally Posted by binder
no, by the looks of it i think it should be labled "toe in"

your specs show .16 as fine so that probably means .16 "toe in" which would be -.16 toe....i think, i'm not sure. It just sounds funny. It should be pointed "inwards" which would be a negative number

Toe in is generally annotated as positive.
Reply
Old Aug 8, 2009 | 08:33 PM
  #20  
davidv's Avatar
davidv
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 42,753
Likes: 11
From: Tucson, AZ
Default

Originally Posted by bimmertech
Positive toe is toe in, negative toe is toe out.



the only issue with that alignment is the cross-toe in the rear. it's not a huge deal as the one side is in spec and the other is at 0, but its always a good idea to have that stuff sorted out. on your next alignment i would suggest the following specs:

front camber--not adjustable, yours is fine. with proper toe settings you won't see accelerated tire wear caused by camber until you go past -3 or so.
front toe--0 to 0.02 positive toe

rear camber--what you have now in relation to your front is good. if you buy front camber arms then make another thread.
rear toe--i like to run 0.06 positive toe
Thanks for the simple "toe" explanation. I thought about it for a couple of hours, and realized that my original comment was in error.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:47 PM.