Alignment specs

Phil and Judy Rose pjrose at
Tue May 22 12:55:28 EDT 2007

At 8:37 AM -0700 5/22/07, Bernie Benz wrote:
>Ingo, Mike,
>My spec, (zero camber,  zero toe) is designed for max tire life under 
>hiway cruising and around town conditions, and is probably not the 
>best for the track where one may be willing to sacrifice tire life
>for cornering performance at the extreme.
>Even with my strut brace I can not get camber more positive than 
>about 0.5deg. negative. So my next step is to see how much I can move 
>the lower control arm inward by slotting the mounting bolt holes in 
>the subframe. Should be able to pick up another 0.5deg. positive by
>doing this.

Your comments remind me about my alignment results last summer (first 
one done since I've owned the car). The tech found he could get no 
better than about 0/-0.8 deg. camber (I don't recall if that was R/L 
or L/R) and he asked me: "Has this car been lowered?" It had not 
been--all stock suspension. Anyway, he managed to loosen the subframe 
and "persuade" it to move so as to equalize the negative camber error 
( now about -0.4 deg. on each side).  He said that would be OK for 
track use, and in fact that was OK with me. Inasmuch as I do not 
drive this car many miles per yr and tear the tires up on the track 
anyway, that camber situation is a "sleeping dog" I'm gonna let lie 
for a while longer. ;-)

*  Phil & Judy Rose           Rochester, NY  *      
*        mailto:pjrose at       *

More information about the 200q20v mailing list