Question about adjustable LCA's vs Camber Plates vs Camber Bolts
 

I'm sure something like this has been discussed on some forum at some point but I'm having a hard time finding it through search. My previous car was not prone to drastic camber change after lowering so I have no experience with this sort of stuff so bear with me please. I'm also not a suspension guru so if what I'm saying makes you cringe then I apologize in advance :happy0180:

I'm trying to visualize how the camber adjustment works, and is there any effect on the hub's position when adjusting camber? I'm trying to figure out if you can effectively adjust the offset of a hub by adjusting the camber via the different methods. Is the position of a hub set in stone by something else on the car that is fixed?

I imagine it differs from front to back, where on the front of the car you don't have a driveshaft. I'm assuming on the back the position of the hub is determined by the driveshaft? But on the front would it not be positioned based on the lower a arm?

And if hub position is affected by adjusting camber, is there a difference between adjusting camber on via the camber plate vs a camber bolt on the A arm, in terms of effect of hub position.

http://cdn.hondanews.com/photos/b964...92-500x353.jpghttp://www.raw4x4europe.com/images/macpherson_strut.gif
I picture that if I make the control arm shorter to reduce camber, I will move the hub inboard more, effectively pulling the wheel into the fender more? Conversely, I would imagine if you try and reduce camber from the top you will effectively push the wheel outboard instead.

Another thing I am not quite fully understanding, is there any advantage to replacing the LCA vs simply using a camber bolt? Aside from the possibility of the camber bolt coming loose and affecting the alignment?

Lastly, if I am extremely particular about banging/clunking/rattling - should I be staying away from camber plates? I have been debating the KW's vs the eibach multipros and I am worried that camber plates are going to make me hate the car if I get noises as a result. I can deal with harshness, but noises are a no go.


Anyways if anyone managed to make it through this whole post, I apologize if it sounded crazy just trying to learn a bit :)
:respekt::thanks:

GC makes a pretty nice camber plate that uses poly bushings instead of spherical bearings.

If you get quality bearings, you shouldn't have to worry too too much about banging/clunking/rattling. It will be harsher and a bit more vibration will come through, but the former symptoms come from cheap bearings that have play between the parts.

Nathan

For the front, it is advantageous to get more of your camber from a camber bolt at the hub rather than up top with a camber plate. Increasing camber up top means an increase in SAI, which you don't want. Still a net positive effect due to the increase in static camber, but ideally you want more of your negative camber to come from the hub mounting point. If you need a lot of camber, yes you'll likely need to get some of it from up top, plus you'll gain some tire clearance.

Replacing the front LCA would be done to increase strength, decrease unsprung weight, replace rubber bushings, and/or add extra adjustability. Good for a dedicated track car, but may not be necessary for a DD.

Yes, camber plates can make noise and a regular OEM, GroupN, or Whiteline COM C top may be a better choice for a noise-free daily driver. On our RCE T2 clubsports (based on KW) with camber bolts and Group N top mounts...we can get plenty of negative camber up front (well over -2).

- Andy

So what would you need to do to get rid of any negative camber in the rear after you drop it? Say a 1.5 inch drop and you get -2* of natural camber, and i'd like to bring it back to as close to stock as possible.

Adjustable rear lower control arms are easy to install and adjust.

Whiteline has a rear camber bushing that goes in the upper arm. It's cheap, but a pain to install and more difficult to adjust. It does replace a soft squishy bushing with a stiffer poly bushing, so there's an advantage there.

Both will get you back to where you need to be after a drop. I'd recommend -1.5 to -2.0 depending on tire choice and intended use. A little more than -2 in the rear for track cars on sticky tires works well, but for the street closer to -1.5 to -1.8 is good. It will depend on your overall set-up.

- Andy

To clarify for future readers, when you say "camber bolt," you are referring to the 14mm OEM crash bolt that goes in the upper hole on the strut housing, correct?

That or even an aftermarket cammed bolt. The latter will result in more of a change.

So your goals are to get closer to factory camber specs after dropping the car, not gaining camber for performance reasons, correct?

Don't forgot about the additional changes to track width as you shorten control arms, etc. It may not be drastic, but it's just another variable to be aware of.

This.

For me, correct. I would like the wheels to be as " straight up" and not cambered as possible after a considerable drop.

In that case, you would want to figure out a way to put the top of the wheel out rather than pulling the bottom of the wheel in. You can achieve camber adjustments from the top or bottom as stated in the original post, but one is more ideal than the other.

I was able to get -1.4 with OEM suspension and OEM Subaru crash bolts. Do the Group N top mounts add some more camber, or was camber added from the shorter KW shocks?

Group-N tophats are homologation pieces. They do not alter geometry, only offer a higher durometer rubber compared to stock.