Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[TheBoy]

We know WIM use a baseline of 1'10 for camber for standard Omegas, was wondering what the recommendations would be for an Irmscher sprung car.

Irmscher springs are obviously stiffer, and lower by approx 30mm...

[VXL V6]

Irmscher quote something like -1'30 don't they?

[Marks DTM Calib]

Interesting.

Its the stiffer bit that I suspect may have the bigger impact (although the different static wishbone angle may well affect the KPI slightly.

So given that we are trying to limit the max camber yet camber is good for cornering, I would guess at a little more static camber than a standard setup e.g. the -1.30 previously mentioned.

Would be interesting to hear Tonys thoughts.

[feeutfo]

Indeed. Irmscher quote -1.40.

I suspect you'll end up near that figure. Maybe not immediately...But once a set of tyres get half worn

[feeutfo]

Indeed. Irmscher quote -1.40.

I suspect you'll end up near that figure. Maybe not immediately...But once a set of tyres get half worn

Although having said that, the suspension fitted is used.

[wheels-inmotion]

Good topic TheBoy

Lowering the car one would assume the coil rates are higher than OEM, in this case you can afford a deeper camber because the dynamic camber gains will be less, but there's a problem.

The end position for the front camber depends on where the rear is sitting. Lowering the car will naturally migrate the rear camber negative ( top leaning in toward the car ) A 30mm drop will add around 45' leaving the non-adjustable rear camber around -2 degrees 20' +- 30'.

Setting the front depends on where the rear is, if in this case the rear is -2 degrees 20' the front needs to be around -1 degree 40' +- 10'. This allows the front camber migration during a turn better control under thrust, less camber under thrust will push and the car understeer.

The end camber positions are for handling balance only, tyre wear may be an issue because on a lock the front camber gains will be very deep.

It has to be said no modification is without consequence.   

[2woody]

as said, it's all about the utilisation of camber-thrust.

Part of the reason why I'd never consider lowering one of these.

[feeutfo]

So we have a 30 mill lower car. What tyre wear will we expect to see? Assuming something like -1.40 is dialed in.

[TheBoy]

So we have a 30 mill lower car. What tyre wear will we expect to see? Assuming something like -1.40 is dialed in.

Guessing that amount of camber would give inner shoulder?

[wheels-inmotion]

Problem with my type of reply is it's a global assessment of worst case. I don't know what the coil rates are so unless i can test "bump and droop" camber migration then at the moment i'm speculating.

Historically -30mm is not end of days but as said the rear camber being fixed is the dictator for where the front will be set ( for handling )

If there's an expectable element of front inner tyre wear then welcome to the modified world.

[feeutfo]

My thinking being weather the  driver actually needs the set up for the benefit of performance, rather than purely appearance.

If appearance then I'd expect to see all inside edge wear, but if he chucks it about to a level that's worthy of the set up, will we see more even shoulder wear on the outside edge as well, or merely increase the inside edge more...?

[feeutfo]

Btw we're talking 15 mill lower than the factory spec face lift mv6 with lowered sports chassis... Which might sag that much over time anyway.

[feeutfo]

 :-/

[TheBoy]

My thinking being weather the  driver actually needs the set up for the benefit of performance, rather than purely appearance.

Are you implying something there Mr G?

You know the roads around my way - I do cover a lot of motorway/dual carriageway.

After a disappointing, albeit extreme fun, 7000 miles from a set of Sport Maxx TT's, I need a more durable compromise I think  . And no, Michelin do not make anything useful to anyone.

[feeutfo]

My thinking being weather the  driver actually needs the set up for the benefit of performance, rather than purely appearance.

Are you implying something there Mr G?

You know the roads around my way - I do cover a lot of motorway/dual carriageway.

After a disappointing, albeit extreme fun, 7000 miles from a set of Sport Maxx TT's, I need a more durable compromise I think  . And no, Michelin do not make anything useful to anyone.

Implying? Me?  :-?

It's a difficult conversation to have without imPlying something.

We know camber can be set according to wear.
Driver a can have vary differant tyre wear to drivet b for the same base setting. Same as the vast majority of drivers will find Michelins suit their purposes fine. Thing is their purposes are vey differant to yours/mine/and anyone else who drives, well,  like a tw@. (sorry but there we are)

Mine is currently set to -1.20 on 30 mill drop. I am experiencing outside edge wear as well as slightly less inside edge wear. This was apparent very early on in fitting the current tyres. Seems to me 1.40 would be more appropriate.

But then somebody who just plods around bring patient and not upsetting their passengers may not have the same issue. Thereby -1.20 might be fine for them...?

So q is, given I have outside edge wear at -1.20 will 1.40 give more even tyre wear ? Or all on the inside edge wear?