[200q20v] Alignment problems and Bilstein inserts

Derek Pulvino dbpulvino at hotmail.com
Thu Oct 11 16:55:04 EDT 2001


I agree about not sending on everything I hear, some of it's just garbage.  
As to the camber comment, it made sense to me, and from what I've heard, it 
has been experiencialy verified.

With toe vs camber tire wear, well I don't have the desire to run the 
experiment, nor to sit down and mathematically calculate the end result.  As 
it stands, sounds like were dealing with opinion vs opinion...camber 
preferentially wearing portions of the tire, toe resulting in a constant 
angular dragging of the tire (the root of tread cupping?).

Which is worse with tire life as the criteria?  In lieu of experiment, do we 
do an informal pole?  "Hello, Gallup..."

Makes sense with the Igor camber plate too, ie a d.i.y. job. Are you sure 
however that the positive limit is related to spring and not upper spring 
perch to strut tower intereference?

Derek P

ps, I think we're limited for camber adjustment in the negative direction 
too :)  If the tower doesn't provide interference, then I'm sure a lack of 
slotable (a new word) metal on the camber plate will.

>From: Bernie Benz <b.m.benz at prodigy.net>
>To: Derek Pulvino <dbpulvino at hotmail.com>
>CC: 200q20V mailing list <200q20v at audifans.com>
>Subject: Re: [200q20v] Alignment problems and Bilstein inserts
>Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 13:15:45 -0800
>My camber is set to zero with a Benz strut brace.  Zero is best for street
>use.  -0.5 better for track, as harder on tires.
>44 chassis cars are only limited in positive adjustment.  The Igor camber
>adjustment plate is limited to the point at which the spring hits the strut
>tower, only about an 1/8 inch beyond the stock adjustment limit.  Easier to
>slot out the stock adjustment holes by that much.
> > From: "Derek Pulvino" <dbpulvino at hotmail.com>
> > Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 10:22:29 -0700
> > To: 200q20v at audifans.com
> > Cc: t44tq at mindspring.com, SuffolkD at aol.com, sjagernauth at att.com
> > Subject: RE: [200q20v] Alignment problems and Bilstein inserts
> >
> > Hey all,
> >
> > What is your front camber set too?  I believe it should be dialed to 0.5
> > negative camber.  As to why you can't get them even on both sides, I 
> > front end straightness could come into play.  Another thing I thought 
> > when I was having alignment woes was whether or not the front subframe 
> > centered on the front of the car.
> >
> > If your car is limited in camber adjustment (either pos. or neg.) on the
> > front end, did you look and see whether the bolts that go through the 
> > adjustment plate are at the end of the adjustment range on either end?
> > Along these lines, if the Igor camber adjustment plate is what I'm 
> > of (elongated camber adjustment slots on camber adjustment plate), can't 
> > wahy that wouldn't work on the 200 as well.  Be more of a band-aid, 
> >
> > As to tire wear, I believe misadjustment of toe will lend itself more to
> > premature tire wear than camber.
>Not true IMO.  And don't believe and pass along everything that you hear.
> > As an aside, also recently heard that a
> > more positive camber adjustment will help decrease tramlining (for those 
> > you affected).
> > Derek P

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

More information about the 200q20v mailing list