Re: [Amc-list] Front End Alignment

[adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Sandwich Maker)]

" From: Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx
" 
" What I do for all my cars takes a willing alignement man and good shop, or yourself and a few gauges!
" It's very simple.
" Max castor. run both struts to max, check both sides then reduce the longest side to match the shortest.
" Camber 0 to -.5 neg is my choice.
" DD I typically run right side -.5 and left at 0. Makes it track real sweet with normal road crown in this area.
" Handling is good even with the very slight missmatch side to side, keeping the left tire at 0 to .5+ reduces inside wear due to road crown.
" Toe, 1/8" in.

these are fine settings for high profile tires, but armand's rubber-band
steamrollers won't take kindly to any camber, either static or dynamic
- eg. caster-induced when steering, or roll-induced when cornering.

tires roll themselves when subjected to cornering forces, but wide low
profile tires roll less than high profile radials or bias-plys.  [rim
width is also a factor here]  less camber is needed to offset this.

you can obviously adjust the caster to control steering-induced camber
- a little will help cornering, but too much will effectively turn those
steamrollers into bicycle tires, producing massive understeer when you
least want it while grinding one edge of the tire away - but you can't
easily alter suspension geometry to fix roll-induced camber.

a massive antiroll bar will solve that problem by resisting any body
roll, but creates other problems like pothole and bump reaction.
well, you won't be risking those wheels in potholes...

i would go with reducing toe in, especially if you've replaced the
rubber control arm bushings with something stiffer.  i'd go with zero
camber, and modest caster which i'd gradually increase while watching
tire wear patterns and cornering response.

i can also add that i ran with -0.5 camber in my american with
205/70r14s on 6" rims and noticed definite tapering of the tread wear
from inside to outside edges.  it did help cornering, but i wouldn't
do it again.  and i was warned about it by the shop that did my
alignment...

"  -------------- Original message ----------------------
" From: "Armand Eshleman" <aje1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
" > OK, here's the scoop,
" > 
" > New set of Ansen polished aluminum wheels coming in next week......
" > 
" > Front will be 17 x 7 with 235/40R-17 tires
" > 
" > Rear to be 17 x 8 with 255/45R-17 tires
" > 
" > Tires will be radials of course.
" > 
" > 70 Javelin all new front suspension bushings, spring pads, tie rod ends,
" > idler arm, etc.
" > 
" > Should I Have the alignment match 1970 Javelin factory specs for a bias ply
" > tire??

if you have nothing better...

" > Or should I request the alignment specs for a 1974 Javelin??  Would this be
" > for radial tires then??

more likely, but the suspension geometry in an '82 concord is
essentially the same and definitely radials by then.  still relatively
high profile though.

" > Or if anyone has a good experience to relate about front end alignment on
" > these cars and the specs they used, please respond.
________________________________________________________________________
Andrew Hay                                  the genius nature
internet rambler                            is to see what all have seen
adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                       and think what none thought
________________________________________________________________________
Andrew Hay                                  the genius nature
internet rambler                            is to see what all have seen
adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                       and think what none thought
_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list