payaya wrote:koolio1234 wrote:Im running 0 camber at the rear because of:
1. the rear is not driven and doesnt need the grip (FWD)
2. any camber not serving a specific purpose will wear away your tires
3. Less under-steer due to reduced traction
If I was to take it to the track i'd camber the rear to 0.5-1.0
hopefully they'll get their sh*t together mate. Hate to say it but i doubt they will finish by friday.
1. the rear is not driven and doesnt need the grip (FWD)
Yes it does.
2. any camber not serving a specific purpose will wear away your tires
Camber keeps your rear end stable and maximises rear end grip. Going around a corner with no negative camber will cause your rear tyres to lean on their sidewall causing tyre wear and less grip.
3. Less under-steer due to reduced traction
Elaborate.
These recommendations are for an fto that will be used as an everyday car.
1. Rear wheels in an fto aren't going to be breaking traction unless your cornering real hard (which you would never need to on PUBLIC roads). Also, you have forgotten that about 75% of the fto's weight will be at the front so the rear will have very little momentum during the transfer of weight.
2. Again, camber will maximize your rear end grip when you corner at HIGH SPEEDS where there is significant weight transfer. This is not something you would come across in everyday commuting.
3. Simply put, if you increase grip at the front you improve the turn-in steering response, this is done by increasing negative camber on the front wheels. If you have very little camber in the rear, there will be less grip in the rear and will have a tendency to want to over-steer (thereby reducing under-steer).
I stick by my earlier statement, serious negative camber is unnecessary in suburban driving conditions. You do not need to hit every corner @ 80km/h so you do not need to camber the rear more than -0.5 and the fronts -1.5

[img]http://i710.photobucket.com/albums/ww104/thekrevolution/FTOFINALSIGNATUREcopy.png[/img]