Is the Camber Worth It?

[KnuckleSandwich]

I have been looking at photos and looking at the extreme camber that is run when a car is lowered. I have a 97 Kouki and go pretty low but haven't had to adjust camber too much.
My question is, do those who run extreme camber to lower their car find that they have to buy tires more often?

[AZhitman]

Welcome aboard!

"Extreme" camber is often done for looks, as you might have imagined. Sometimes, it's done to "tuck" tires under the bodywork (which still isn't a good reason).

If you're looking for optimum handling (which you should be), then any of our folks here who track their S14 can tell you about good alignment settings that won't ruin tires and still allow plenty of lowering.

[flohtingPoint]

I ran 3 degrees front on the AE86 (solid rear so 0). On the FRC I run 2.7 front, .5 rear.

[KnuckleSandwich]

I guess I just cant understand intentionally adjusting to that much camber, my car sits in the garage most of the time because I only drive it on special occasions and I still wouldn't want to risk burning up tires in that manner.

[float_6969]

As AZHitman said, the crazy negative camber you see if for aesthetics and nothing else. We could talk about handling all day, but basically, the stiffer the car is the LESS negative camber you need. In a perfect world with perfect suspension, you wouldn't need negative camber. Negative camber is used to offset the positive camber that is usually gained when a vehicle corners. Ideally, you only run enough negative camber so that when you corner hard, the tire doesn't go past about -.5°. For most vehicles that have been modified, they are running stiffer springs, and anti-sway bars. Both of these things help to reduce sway, and so reduce the need for negative camber.

[Bubba1]

My question is, do those who run extreme camber to lower their car find that they have to buy tires more often?

The answer is yes, if they try to drive their cars like that. The "slammed" look is strictly for show, not go.

[flohtingPoint]

In a perfect world with perfect suspension, you wouldn't need negative camber. Negative camber is used to offset the positive camber that is usually gained when a vehicle corners. Ideally, you only run enough negative camber so that when you corner hard, the tire doesn't go past about -.5°. For most vehicles that have been modified, they are running stiffer springs, and anti-sway bars. Both of these things help to reduce sway, and so reduce the need for negative camber.

You must know something Adrian Newey doesn't because RBR got their camber levels relegated in 2011, as they were running in excess of 4+ degrees. Considering the RB7 was the most dominant vehicle on the planet since we were graced with the F2004, and Adrian and Rory are probably the the two best vehicle engineers since the invent of such, you probably have race teams beating down your door =P

[Bubba1]

In a perfect world with perfect suspension, you wouldn't need negative camber. Negative camber is used to offset the positive camber that is usually gained when a vehicle corners. Ideally, you only run enough negative camber so that when you corner hard, the tire doesn't go past about -.5°. For most vehicles that have been modified, they are running stiffer springs, and anti-sway bars. Both of these things help to reduce sway, and so reduce the need for negative camber.

You must know something Adrian Newey doesn't because RBR got their camber levels relegated in 2011, as they were running in excess of 4+ degrees. Considering the RB7 was the most dominant vehicle on the planet since we were graced with the F2004, and Adrian and Rory are probably the the two best vehicle engineers since the invent of such, you probably have race teams beating down your door =P

To translate, flohtingPoint is saying that the Red Bull Formula One team had some success pushing the limits of negative camber. But that was a fairly specialized application for severe cornering on a race car. An application where tires are replaced after x number of laps. But in terms of an ordinary street vehicle used on the street, without a big budget for tires, the manufacturer's recommendation for caster/camber settings will almost always provide the best tread wear. Any drastic camber changes will definitely shorten the tire's life.

[gwoods]

That extreme camber on the street is reserved for Honda S2000's only

[elwesso]

The people who run extreme camber might as well motor cycle tires.. At least on a motorcycle tire there's tread up the sides..

[Ace2cool]

That extreme camber on the street is reserved for Honda S2000's only

Ha, I see what you did there. I've actually never seen a cambered out S2000. Maybe people where I'm from just have class? I always see the VIP guys cambered to the max.

[MinisterofDOOM]

The people who run extreme camber might as well motor cycle tires.. At least on a motorcycle tire there's tread up the sides..

I honestly can't believe there aren't tires made for this. You can get colored-smoking drift tires and other niche stuff. The curtain-having VIPtards would be all over tires like that.

[float_6969]

In a perfect world with perfect suspension, you wouldn't need negative camber. Negative camber is used to offset the positive camber that is usually gained when a vehicle corners. Ideally, you only run enough negative camber so that when you corner hard, the tire doesn't go past about -.5°. For most vehicles that have been modified, they are running stiffer springs, and anti-sway bars. Both of these things help to reduce sway, and so reduce the need for negative camber.

You must know something Adrian Newey doesn't because RBR got their camber levels relegated in 2011, as they were running in excess of 4+ degrees. Considering the RB7 was the most dominant vehicle on the planet since we were graced with the F2004, and Adrian and Rory are probably the the two best vehicle engineers since the invent of such, you probably have race teams beating down your door =P

I assumed we all knew we were referencing street driven passenger vehicles that might seem some track time on the weekends.

As with all things automotive, what you do with a street car is generally the opposite of what you do with a dedicated race car. I'm not claiming to be any kind of suspension expert, but I have enough race experience with street cars (autoX mostly) to know what you're trying to achieve.

Thanks for derailing the convo though

[flohtingPoint]

I assumed we all knew we were referencing street driven passenger vehicles that might seem some track time on the weekends.

As with all things automotive, what you do with a street car is generally the opposite of what you do with a dedicated race car. I'm not claiming to be any kind of suspension expert, but I have enough race experience with street cars (autoX mostly) to know what you're trying to achieve.

Thanks for derailing the convo though

You're the one who said, "In a perfect world with perfect suspension, you wouldn't need negative camber." Street cars don't exist in a "perfect world" and definitely DO NOT have "perfect suspensions". I provided a perfect world/perfect suspension, and that utilized a significant amount of negative camber.

Want a "street car (autoX mostly)" reference, I get my setup for my vehicles from a seven time SCCA National Champion's dial-in suggestions, and he definitely believes that you require negative camber...

Either way you look at it, you're severely wrong if you think you dont need negative camber.

[Bubba1]

Jim. I think you two are simply talking about different applications. In autocross or Formula 1, where tight turning is a key component and long term tire wear is not, you are correct that extra negative camber past manufacturer's settings is a good thing in the right amount. But in a normal street application, which is what Float, the OP and the rest of us were discussing, where tire wear IS a factor, that additional negative camber will wear out the tires prematurely.

[gwoods]

That extreme camber on the street is reserved for Honda S2000's only

Ha, I see what you did there. I've actually never seen a cambered out S2000. Maybe people where I'm from just have class? I always see the VIP guys cambered to the max.

Nothing says Hon DUH like +8 degrees yo shout JDM and give me a double fist pump

[flohtingPoint]

Jim. I think you two are simply talking about different applications. In autocross or Formula 1, where tight turning is a key component and long term tire wear is not, you are correct that extra negative camber past manufacturer's settings is a good thing in the right amount. But in a normal street application, which is what Float, the OP and the rest of us were discussing, where tire wear IS a factor, that additional negative camber will wear out the tires prematurely.

Got none of that from his post Joel. He's even the one who brought up autocross.

In a perfect world with perfect suspension, you wouldn't need negative camber. Negative camber is used to offset the positive camber that is usually gained when a vehicle corners. Ideally, you only run enough negative camber so that when you corner hard, the tire doesn't go past about -.5°. For most vehicles that have been modified, they are running stiffer springs, and anti-sway bars. Both of these things help to reduce sway, and so reduce the need for negative camber.

That doesn't have tire wear anywhere in there, just misguided facts about modified vehicles and camber effects in hard cornering, not daily driving. Sway and pitch of a car isn't normal driving, nor is the squat from such, which is one of the things you're looking for when you upgrade your swaybars/springs. Normal street applications have nothing to do with cornering hard, not pulling 1G going to Safeway. You are talking about tire wear Joel, but float_6969 certainly was not.

Either way, the OP says his car sits in the garage most of the time and hardly ever drives it. If that's the case, his tires will last him over a year even if he's running some obtuse alignment settings. I never dialed out any of my settings on the Corolla, drove it all over the place and had 140 treadwear tires AND ran on those tires (back when I used street tires), they lasted me about 15 months, with probably 60-75 autocross runs on them. I'm probably going to spend $8,000-9,000 on tires this year, I'd say getting over a year out of some 400 a set tires is pretty good.

[Bubba1]

Yeah, I see you're playing with Corvettes these days. very cool. Do you think you can make Carlisle this year?

[float_6969]

OK flohtingPoint, you're right. We should all run -8°so the car handles better. [/sarcasam]

My point is this. If you're running so much negative camber that in a corner, the contact patch doesn't utilize the entire tread width (which is what usually happens with too much negative camber) then you're running too much negative camber. Every car and setup is different, but maybe we can agree that the negative camber the OP was referencing falls into the "excessive" category?

And my brother-in-law, 3 time national champion, and generally finished in the top 5, helps me set up my car.

[AZhitman]

Needing negative camber doesn't mean EXCESSIVE negative camber.

Let's not let semantics get in the way of honest dialogue.

The bottom line is that radically-altered alignment settings can and will cause premature and unnecessary tire wear. It's simply factual.

[flohtingPoint]

And my brother-in-law, 3 time national champion, and generally finished in the top 5, helps me set up my car.

Who is your brother in law? I would love to talk to him and pick his brain on why you think "you wouldn't need negative camber" on "perfect suspension" and what "perfect suspension" is. I do just about every national event on this half of the USA, so I'm sure we'll bump into each other this year (in fact doing two events in Ohio and four in Nebraska, which is fairly close to Kansas if he lives near you). We may already know each other, who knows? It would be interesting to see a national level autocrosser (a three time champion at that) that says that negative camber is pointless.

OK flohtingPoint, you're right. We should all run -8°so the car handles better

Who is saying anything about 8 degrees? I said I run 2.7 on my FRC, that's a different planet of difference... We're having a legitimate discussion here, dont throw out asinine, flippant replies. Back up what you said, in a "perfect world" with "perfect suspension, you wouldn't need negative camber". What is the perfect world and perfect suspension?

Yeah, I see you're playing with Corvettes these days. very cool. Do you think you can make Carlisle this year?

It is all going to seriously depend on SCCA National Tour/Pro Solo scheduling and the funding of such. I had a blast in 2010 and would love to be back in 2013, but it's going to seriously depend on finances.

I'm very much enjoying the Vette, I had one of the front runners of the class nationally come out and drive it for me before I bought it and he said, "you need to buy this car". We've done some winter testing with the car and have another event setup for the third of next month to do more testing on it to further dial it in.

[300ZXttZMAN]

Exactly. Honda's always have like -5 camber.... So dumb.

[float_6969]

Needing negative camber doesn't mean EXCESSIVE negative camber.

Let's not let semantics get in the way of honest dialogue.

The bottom line is that radically-altered alignment settings can and will cause premature and unnecessary tire wear. It's simply factual.

This is what I'm trying to communicate. Maybe it's not coming across?

[float_6969]

And my brother-in-law, 3 time national champion, and generally finished in the top 5, helps me set up my car.

Who is your brother in law? I would love to talk to him and pick his brain on why you think "you wouldn't need negative camber" on "perfect suspension" and what "perfect suspension" is. I do just about every national event on this half of the USA, so I'm sure we'll bump into each other this year (in fact doing two events in Ohio and four in Nebraska, which is fairly close to Kansas if he lives near you). We may already know each other, who knows? It would be interesting to see a national level autocrosser (a three time champion at that) that says that negative camber is pointless.

OK flohtingPoint, you're right. We should all run -8°so the car handles better

Who is saying anything about 8 degrees? I said I run 2.7 on my FRC, that's a different planet of difference... We're having a legitimate discussion here, dont throw out asinine, flippant replies. Back up what you said, in a "perfect world" with "perfect suspension, you wouldn't need negative camber". What is the perfect world and perfect suspension?

Yeah, I see you're playing with Corvettes these days. very cool. Do you think you can make Carlisle this year?

It is all going to seriously depend on SCCA National Tour/Pro Solo scheduling and the funding of such. I had a blast in 2010 and would love to be back in 2013, but it's going to seriously depend on finances.

I'm very much enjoying the Vette, I had one of the front runners of the class nationally come out and drive it for me before I bought it and he said, "you need to buy this car". We've done some winter testing with the car and have another event setup for the third of next month to do more testing on it to further dial it in.

My brother-in-law is Ron Williams.

I never said you don't need negative camber in a real world situation. You do need it, because most common suspensions loose camber during travel (excluding solid axles). What I meant by "perfect suspension" is a theoretic suspension. One that I don't think exists unless it's a fully controlled active type. If you had a suspension that didn't change camber on travel, you would only need to run enough negative camber to achieve the optimal amount of traction for any given turn. What I mean by this is that the tires need SOME negative camber as it puts the tire at a better angle to resist lateral motion during a turn. How much negative camber is dependent upon multiple variables. But obviously you know this.

I think I did a poor job of communicating my point. There were things that I stated that you took in a way I wasn't anticipating. I'm not trying to argue with you, but it seems that my explanations to try and clarify my original post are being taken that way.

It boils down to this. You need some negative camber for handling. I never said you didn't. You DON'T need -8° on any street driven car that I can think of to improve handling. The "tucked" look the OP was referring to is for aesthetics, not handling, and my understanding is that was his question.

[flohtingPoint]

My brother-in-law is Ron Williams.

I know Ron, he's good folk, ran against him in a bump class at the Lincoln Pro Solo this past season. He still selling his red FSP car? Ask him to tell you about his 2011 Nationals experience, quite the exciting story with cars breaking and such, I was working in the announce vehicle during that time and had to track all the car hopping.

[float_6969]

Yea, he's a good guy. I think he's gone back to keeping it, at least for another season, but he changes his mind a lot when it comes to vehicles, or rather, I think he gets bored with them, LOL! Yea, we were listening to last years nationals live on the web when all of that happened. Not to make excuses for him, but he's been "robbed" of a few potential titles due to random vehicle problems. I think in 2007, back when Nationals was still here in Topeka, we were all watching as his car died to a stop in the middle of the course. The car had run flawlessly all season and then decided to randomly have the ignition coil fail. I think he was in the lead by over a second. Then another year he kept getting screwed over by the rain. It kept coming and going. His closest competitor stayed on R-comps and he went to wet tires. Every time the other guy would get up to the line, the track would be mostly dried off, but it would rain right after and Ron would have to run the track in the wet again. He still managed a podium finish IIRC.

[dre1507]

To answer the OP's question, negative camber has it's pros in cornering. The cons occur when there's so much negative camber that the full contact patch of the tires cannot be utilized, and also causes excessively uneven tire wear which basically render the tires useless a whole lot quicker. The latter is what we usually see on "cambered-out" street applications.

GWoods. Ace, myself, and many others know that EVERY fanboi car has good and bad owners. Here are some examples of nice and un-cambered-out s2000's. Whatever hate you may have for the manufacturer and its models, caused by bad owners, it's time for your generalizations to exclude the good.

[Ace2cool]

Dat hardtop in the last pic.

[float_6969]

Yea, I could almost tolerate an S2K w/a hard top.

[JTR32gtst]

My car has a tiny bit of negative camber, but it is hardly over the top. I love seeing those "stanced" cars bouncing down the highway with the goofiest camber ever seen. Stupid. My rears are cambered a little more but that is only so when I hit bumps, they don't bang against the fenders. GTSt's are not forgiving on tire width in the rear..