Alignment Specs - CEG Archives

Originally posted by Ed98.5SVT:

Originally posted by hmouta:
ed, what are the caster readings? do u have the camber/caster kits installed?

No, the suspension is stock. No kits installed.

Jim,

The rear toe specs were closer to the target specs on the sheet after the alignment. Is this not correct?

The car is now smooth as silk.

If it is within spec (not close, but within), then leave it alone. It is not what I would call ideal though.

Lol yeah "within spec". My alignment for my Cougar said within spec for camber was from .7 degrees to -1.89 degrees. WTF that much negative camber would burn up tires. My camber is at approx -1.2 to -1.7 degrees all around and I have bad tire wear on the insides of all my tires and the alignment shop said it was from my tire pressures being off. I don't even have that bad of a drop I'm riding on Eibachs.

Originally posted by Blackcoog:
Lol yeah "within spec". My alignment for my Cougar said within spec for camber was from .7 degrees to -1.89 degrees. WTF that much negative camber would burn up tires. My camber is at approx -1.2 to -1.7 degrees all around and I have bad tire wear on the insides of all my tires and the alignment shop said it was from my tire pressures being off. I don't even have that bad of a drop I'm riding on Eibachs.

Camber doesn't really eat tires up unless the toe setting is off (in which case they get chewed in a hurry) or the car exhibits poor toe control.

Originally posted by MFE:

Camber doesn't really eat tires up unless the toe setting is off (in which case they get chewed in a hurry) or the car exhibits poor toe control.

Sure it does in street cars. Just takes a little longer. Toe can effect the whole tire, by feathering, while camber is just the inner or the outer.

Yes...on street cars with sloppy components that don't provide proper dynamic alignment control, and on street cars that don't have a proper toe setting to begin with, which if you slam a strut equipped car and get increased camber, trust me, you do NOT have the proper toe setting anymore.

I've run what many people would consider "excessive" negative camber for a long time, and paying careful attention to the toe cured 95% of all inner-edge tire wear issues. The rest was cured by making the aligment more stable with better components.

Show me the uneven wear on these tires...at the time the pictures were taken they had been run with 2.5 degrees negative camber for 10,000 miles of street driving, 2 open track events, and dozens of autocross runs. The key is the toe was carefully set and the suspension has good toe control.

MFE,
So how much negative toe do you run at front?

-2.5 degrees on those tires. I should point out this particular case is not on a contour, it's on a Mustang. I have a stock suspension on my contour. But I have a GTP lowered to the point of about -1.5 camber on all 4 corners and again, no inside-edge wear issues on that either, because the toe is spot-on.

I need to object to running -2.5 degree front total toe in a rear wheel drive vehicle. It will be tiring/uncontrollable. I have hard time believing that was the setting during your street driving. Please comment.

Originally posted by MFE:
-2.5 degrees on those tires. I should point out this particular case is not on a contour, it's on a Mustang. I have a stock suspension on my contour. But I have a GTP lowered to the point of about -1.5 camber on all 4 corners and again, no inside-edge wear issues on that either, because the toe is spot-on.

Some cars are more forgiving than others when it comes to camber. Its no surprise you don't see much wear. Impala police cars are pretty much the same suspension and they run -1.5 on there setups. Cadillac cts runs -1.4.

You can object all you want but that's the setting I'm running as I type. I used to run -1.5 on the street and max it out to 2.5 for autocross events, taking the toe change that came with it, but one time I took it to an open-track event, set it to -2.5 (where I did correct the toe because I didn't want the high-speed braking instability caused by toe-out), and got lazy after the event and just left it there. I've run it that way ever since, with the exception of a 1200-mile round trip on the highway, where I backed it down to -1.5. It's back to -2.5 now and will remain that way. I put over 10k a year on this car. It's no more "tiring" or uncontrollable than any other Mustang.

I'm not objecting to anything. I was agreeing with you. But not all cars can run around with that much camber with no were. Sorry. Thats all

Camber doesn't really eat tires up unless the toe setting is off (in which case they get chewed in a hurry) or the car exhibits poor toe control.

I strongly disagree.

Camber is a wear angle. If the toe is off too then you have two things working against tire wear.

I talked to my brother about this some time ago, he was a master front end and brake mechanic. Between conversations with him and reading some of his textbooks and looking into a variety of sources, I totally understand that it's physically impossible for negative camber to NOT affect tire wear due to what's happening to at the interaction between the tire and the surface as the tire rolls.

So, fair enough, it's a fact that camber wears tires to at least some extent (no argument from me), but how do those of you who insist it's a primary wear factor explain the fact that, for instance, I personally have two cars driven 10-15k per year with moderate to excessive negative camber and yet both exhibit virtually even tire wear?

The explanation is, and what I said was, the effect of negative camber absolutely pales in comparison to what happens when the toe is wrong, and if the toe is wrong AND the camber is excessive, look out, bye-bye tires.

Toe is in fact the primary wear determinant, and if it's off, then the camber is a wear accelerant. Not the cause in and of itself. Take care of the toe, take care of any major instability of the toe under dynamic conditions, and the wear will largely take care of itself. Minimize negative camber and you can mask the wear issues caused by toe, but they'll still outpace the wear you'd get with even large amounts of camber if it's tied to proper toe setting and proper toe control.

You can, and I do, run fairly dramatic amounts of camber with no significant wear effects, and toe control is the reason why that is.

i certainly have to agree with you. toe is a major, major wear factor, 90 percent of tire issues are always because of toe. camber does wear, but it does depend on how much camber. the only difference between 0 degrees camber and negative 2.5 degrees is that the weight of the car is riding on less tire. therefore that portion of the tire will wear faster because of more heat and friction caused by improper weight distribution.

Excessive camber, either negative or positive, make the tire want to conform to the shape of a conical section.

Toe is the primary tire wear angle. Unfortunitely too many alignment techs have taken the attitude that all they need to do to set an alignment is "set the toe and let it go". In so doing they all to often miss additional significant problems.

One of the most critical factors to this discussion is that alignment is not a static thing. Alignment is dynamic. The attempt to setting alignment is to somewhat guess at what will end up being appropriate when the car is in motion, not sitting on an alignment rack. Toe changes with road force and drivetrain power. Caster and camber changes as the vehicle bounces up and down and as it corners. Alignment also changes some just from the additional weight load in the car and how it is distributed. One of the most critical lessons taught in a basic alignemnt class is that if you are aligning a car that has a very heavy driver, it is best to have the driver in the car while making adjustments so you can compensate weight induced pull or wear.

So why do you have good luck with some cars with fairly extreme camber settings? I don't know. Maybe you spend most of your driving time taking hard corners at higher than normal speed? Maybe you carry 500 lbs of mountain rescue gear in the trunk that wasn't there when it was aligned? Maybe the alignment gods have taken a liking for you and have given you special dispensation? Whatever it is, I can clearly say that it is uncommon to have so much negative camber and not have tire wear. After all, your tires don't start life shaped like a conical section.

Originally posted by Big Jim:
Excessive camber, either negative or positive, make the tire want to conform to the shape of a conical section.

Toe is the primary tire wear angle. Unfortunitely too many alignment techs have taken the attitude that all they need to do to set an alignment is "set the toe and let it go". In so doing they all to often miss additional significant problems.

One of the most critical factors to this discussion is that alignment is not a static thing. Alignment is dynamic. The attempt to setting alignment is to somewhat guess at what will end up being appropriate when the car is in motion, not sitting on an alignment rack. Toe changes with road force and drivetrain power. Caster and camber changes as the vehicle bounces up and down and as it corners. Alignment also changes some just from the additional weight load in the car and how it is distributed. One of the most critical lessons taught in a basic alignemnt class is that if you are aligning a car that has a very heavy driver, it is best to have the driver in the car while making adjustments so you can compensate weight induced pull or wear.

That's why I keep harping on good toe control too. If your [censored]'s worn out, camber will increase the wear rate, but the camber isn't as much the cause as the toe is.

Of course, we can't forget camber control too. If the control arm bushings are allowing lateral movement under side loading, they'll make a tough camber setting worse on the inside tire in a turn (the one that's also being dragged across the pavement by crappy ackerman, poor toe setting, or poor toe control), and it'll cause positive camber gain on the outside tire, causeing OUTside edge tire wear. I understand that. I also understand that camber curves on strut-suspension cars are less than optimal, especially when they're lowered, but that's another reason for MORE negative camber; negative camber is gained at a decreasing rate as the suspension compresses past a certain pont.

My main point in all of this is to temper the usual fear-mongering over running desirable levels of negative camber. People just blurt out that that kills tires. It does not, unless there's an underlying issue causing the wear in the first place, in which case yes, the wear will be significant.

Put another way, you can mitigate a poor tire-wear situation by running conservative camber settings, but that's treating the symptom, not the illness, and it's not the camber that's causing significant wear.

So to be safe, stick to less camber. If you want to run more camber, you can, but you have to make sure your componentry and other settings are good.

Everybody happy?

Well were getting some were. Out of curiousity, what size tires are you running, on the vehicle with the -1.5-, -2.5 camber?

Some what happy. But were starting to lean off the path. Good toe control is something we have no control over. Setting your toe and checking your componets for wear, are just maintence. OEM's spend hours on some very expensive and complex equipment, plotting toe/camber/caster curves for front and rear of the vehicle. Its pretty cool stuff and very complex. Camber control is the same way. Camber is and always will be a major tire wear angle and will effect tires. But there is alot of variances depending on strut/spring tuning, weight transfer and balance, tire size and compound. Problay one of the most asked questions in this forum is, "I just lowered my car and my inner tires are wearing out", hence camber. Toe is still playing effect as most people may not notice the feathering that excessive toe gives your tire. I have to say that I am surpised with some vehicles and how much camber they can run without wear. But on street tires, the Contour is not one of them.

Quote:

Put another way, you can mitigate a poor tire-wear situation by running conservative camber settings, but that's treating the symptom, not the illness, and it's not the camber that's causing significant wear

So this quote is not accurate. Depending on situation. Summary, get your car aligned every time change any suspension part, inluding tires. I can't stress that enough. On average people will get tire every 30,000 miles or so depending on the setup. Please just spend the extra $100, get your car aligned and make your tires last longer. You will thank yourself later.

I would like to chime in because I would love to get to the bottom of why some of us are chewing up the inside edges of the tires so quickly. As MFE indicated above, the alignment setting on our mustang can be far more aggressive without the tire wear problems on these fwd contours.

I've been rotating, remounting tires and getting alignments for 4 yrs now just to maximize the life of my tires. I have tried various toe settingsâ�?�¦ the latest being a 1/16â�?� total toe in. Itâ�?��?�s been about 6K miles with this particular setup and I did develop the saw toothed inner edge again on fresh BFG KDW tires.

So now I finally bit the bullet (as Big Jim recommended) and purchased the c/c kit to change the camber. My factory setting is about -1.1 degrees, which I donâ�?��?�t consider excessive. I hate like hell to change it, but Iâ�?��?�m likely to go for something between -.5 to -.25 degrees camber now. New LCA and struts will also go on at the same time. However, I donâ�?��?�t believe my car suffers from worn out suspension components either, since it has behaved this way since it was new.

I travel the highway to get to work (approx. 35 miles each way at speeds around 70mph) so the tires do heat up a bit. I can tell just by holding my hand on them that both edges are warmer than the middle. I tend to keep the front pressure up near 36psi as that seems to help reduce road noise. I just hope the new settings will rid this problem without losing the responsiveness that turned me onto this car in the beginning.

TomV,
Coutours require toe-out at the front and toe-in at the rear. Please reconfirm your front toe setting. The saw-tooth wear is due to camber and the toe-in condition on your vehicle.

TSIN03SE, I appreciate the reply. Yes, I know the Contours require toe-out at the front, but my 3-1/2 yrs of Toe-Out â�?��?in factory specificationâ�?� alignments haven't resolved my problem. The Toe-In setting was an experiment, and now after running that for a while, it didn't help either.

I'm just stumped that Ford didn't notice this in any early road tests under conditions similar to mine. It only takes 5-6K miles to notice the wear. My car ate the first set of tires early in its lifecycle. Perhaps I have had defective suspension components from the start?

Ed98.5SVT appears to have much better camber settings than I do. Can this be due to the different LCA design and different wheel that came on the earlier years? I am going to try to get a picture of my tire wear posted soon. Maybe that will help some visualize the problem easier.

P.S. sorry Ed98.5SVT I didnâ�?��?�t mean to highjack the post. You just managed to get the attention of some very knowledgeable people. Hopefully this is useful information to you also.

Here are a couple pics...

First Tire Picture

Second Tire Picture

Originally posted by TomV:

Ed98.5SVT appears to have much better camber settings than I do. Can this be due to the different LCA design and different wheel that came on the earlier years? I am going to try to get a picture of my tire wear posted soon. Maybe that will help some visualize the problem easier.

P.S. sorry Ed98.5SVT I didnâ�?��?�t mean to highjack the post. You just managed to get the attention of some very knowledgeable people. Hopefully this is useful information to you also.

Ha, this post is very interesting. Keep it up. I was suprised to see where this ended up.

Specialty Products, the makers of the C/C kit has descent articles on Alignments and "Tire Wear Diagnosis"

Tire Wear Diagnosis

If I had to guess my problem is one part feathering, one part wear on one edge and a hint of cupping.

Originally posted by TomV:
Specialty Products, the makers of the C/C kit has descent articles on Alignments and "Tire Wear Diagnosis"

Tire Wear Diagnosis

If I had to guess my problem is one part feathering, one part wear on one edge and a hint of cupping.

This is a very good explanation of the common problems. You should be aware though that cupping can also happen from an alignment problem, usually toe but camber as well.

Treat the article as a guide but look deeper and make sure that it is all correct. No worn parts, toe setting correct, caster reasonable, and camber properly set.

I had cupping problems that did not go away until the negative camber was reduced by installing the caster/camber kits.

Ok, I finally got my new SVT struts, new front control arms and BAT C/C kit installed. Sort of a PITA job, but at least it is done. I now have an alignment scheduled for this Saturday and I have a couple questions.

Ford 1998 Front Wheel Alignment Specs on the CDROM are as follows...

Castor Nominal 2.7 deg
Castor Tolerance Range 1.3 deg to 3.31 deg
Camber Nominal -0.53 deg
Camber Tolerance Range 0.77 deg to -1.83 deg

The problem with the specs above, is that I have developed tire wear when within them.

1). Does 1/16" Toe-out, -0.25 deg Camber and whatever max "positive" Caster happens to fall at sound ok, for the front?

2). Since the weight is supposed to be off the suspension for the C/C kit adjustment, how do you get the car to settle back to normal ride height without pulling it off the rack and driving it around?

Thanks!

1. Those readings should be fine.

2. They should be able to lift the corner they are adjusting while still on the alignment rack. They will need to estimate how much to adjust, make the adjustment, then lower that corner and check the readings. There is no need to get the springs to settle between lifting and adjusting. Some alignment techs would bounce the car up and down on the rack before making the final readings, but I've been taught that it isn't necessary.

Originally posted by TomV:

1). Does 1/16" Toe-out, -0.25 deg Camber and whatever max "positive" Caster happens to fall at sound ok, for the front?

2). Since the weight is supposed to be off the suspension for the C/C kit adjustment, how do you get the car to settle back to normal ride height without pulling it off the rack and driving it around?

Thanks!

Those specs will work, but I prefer more camber and you should have no problem with tire wear provided everything is in shape and proper maintence, i.e. checking tire pressure 1-2 times a week and keeping up on rotations, provided you don't have directional tires. Which if you do I don't recommend rotating with a fwd vehicle, usualy causes problems down the road.

Originally posted by Big Jim:
1. Those readings should be fine.

2. They should be able to lift the corner they are adjusting while still on the alignment rack. They will need to estimate how much to adjust, make the adjustment, then lower that corner and check the readings. There is no need to get the springs to settle between lifting and adjusting.

Yes any modern alignment machine has a specfic "jacking" procedure for lifting the car during alignment and making necessary adjustment. When the car is lowered, realy the best way is to let the springs settle by driving but is realy not needed(read below).

Originally posted by Big Jim:

Some alignment techs would bounce the car up and down on the rack before making the final readings, but I've been taught that it isn't necessary.

Jouncing the car after lifting the vehicle is a Must , as well as when first begining alignment and/or making height measurements for adjusting, i.e. adjustable coilovers/torsion bars. The cars suspension must always be settled and at proper ride height before ajusting/measuring(with exception of the jacking procedure explained above).

Originally posted by livinsvt:

Those specs will work, but I prefer more camber and you should have no problem with tire wear provided everything is in shape and proper maintence, i.e. checking tire pressure 1-2 times a week and keeping up on rotations, provided you don't have directional tires. Which if you do I don't recommend rotating with a fwd vehicle, usualy causes problems down the road.

I agree on the negative camber and believe it contributes greatly to the cars handling characteristics. I really hate to reduce it and that is the reason I waited so long to buy the c/c kit. The conservative -0.25 deg is because I want to end the wear problem once and for all.

â�?��?should have no problem with tire wearâ�?� is what Iâ�?��?�ve been telling myself since the car was new. It came from the factory with directional tires and Iâ�?��?�ve also try an asymmetrical design as well. As far as rotation goes, Iâ�?��?�ve mentioned previously that I dismount and remount the tires twice a year to have a new inside edge again.

Big Jim,

I was playing around with the adjustments in the driveway last night. Iâ�?��?�m curious if you know the range of this kit? I still haven't determined if slight adjustments affect the caster/camber that much, or if it takes a decent rotation to effect things. I did try one quick test to maximum positive camber and the car cornered like an old Buick! So right now Iâ�?��?�m only about the strut shaft thickness off of straight back with them. Too bad that Specialty Products didnâ�?��?�t design a measuring decal to stick on top of the strut tower.

IMHO if you don't dial in more negative camber, you're going to wear the OUTside edges of the tires if you like to corner hard. That is not likely enough static camber to make up for what is lost to body roll even though the suspension gains neg camber as it compresses.

I have my camber set nearly at 0 although it may be very perceptably negative. I did it to correct inner edge tire wear. I'm happy to report that it has resolved the problem and edge wear is finally no longer an issue.

I agree that the car may handle slightly beter with a little more negative camber. My car had over 1 degree negative to bigin with. If you are after eliminating inner tire edge wear you most certainly need to keep it less that .5 degrees negative. If you do, you will sort of need to experiment to see how well the tires wear. I know that mine works great with 0 degrees.

I didn't try to see just how much camber adjustment there was, but others have reported that there was about 3 degrees of adjustment (1.5 degrees each way).

Don't try to make this adjustment with alignment equipment. It is very unlikely that you will end up with adjustments anywhere near correct.

If I used my car for racing only on a road course I would have the negative camber up close to 2 degrees and just remember that I would need to replace the tires often.

Ok, I got my tires remounted and the alignment performed this weekend. Seems to be an improvement and reduced tire noise. So now I just have to monitor the tires closely for a while.

The only strange thing I have yet to figure out is why one side differs from the other. He said the most he could get out of the passanger side for front camber was -.6 & 2.5 deg caster (plate is maxed). The driver side is at -.5 deg & 3.0 degrees caster while this side appears to have plenty of adjustment left.

Thats no good. A half a degree cross caster may creat a pull. Only chevy truck accomdate crown in the road with cross caster. I can't speak for his adjustment without seeing it. But it seems other people have been able to get alot closer. Maybe try somewere else

Actually, I think just I figured out what the deal is... the subframe was probably dropped during the precat replacement I had the dealer perform. I bet the subframe was rebolted off-center. Oh well, I didn't notice any pulling so I might wait a bit to correct that. Thanks for helping me remember!

Originally posted by TomV:
Actually, I think just I figured out what the deal is... the subframe was probably dropped during the precat replacement I had the dealer perform. I bet the subframe was rebolted off-center. Oh well, I didn't notice any pulling so I might wait a bit to correct that. Thanks for helping me remember!

That would make it pull under acceleration (and maybe decel) but not really in steady state cruising.

It will cause the axles and bearings to wear at an exponentially faster rate though!

I don't understand how this will increase the wear rate of axles and bearing?

The 1998 Ford CDROM Workshop Manual actually states the following for the Contour front suspension specifications:

Maximum variation - left to right-hand side - Castor 1.00�?° (1�?°00') Camber 1.25�?° (1�?°15')

Quote:

Don't try to make this adjustment with alignment equipment. It is very unlikely that you will end up with adjustments anywhere near correct.

how come? shouldnt the settings be made when get an alignment?

Originally posted by TomV:
I don't understand how this will increase the wear rate of axles and bearing? The 1998 Ford CDROM Workshop Manual actually states the following for the Contour front suspension specifications:

Maximum variation - left to right-hand side - Castor 1.00�?° (1�?°00') Camber 1.25�?° (1�?°15')

The subframe being out of alignment???

I was responding to "your" post not the caster/camber question.

To add: if you don't align the powertrain the effects are even worse. (i.e. OEM powertrain alignment tool)

Caster & camber within specs should not adversely affect either.
Significant caster or camber can though because it harshly changes the angle of the shaft's outer tripod housing and also increases the downward force applied on the inner edge of the bearings.

Thanks for the clarification, now I see your point. Looks like I've got some more scheduling to do.

It feels like this problem is never going to go away.