Quote:
Originally Posted by churchx
And why again F1 argument is being brought up. :/
Why not bring up alignment settings of monster trucks? They should be as applicable then F1's.
And 1-2 deg neg. camber rear, zero camber front for street? Oh, yes, of course there will be a bit oversteer due mass transfer from lift off & it's not hard to get power oversteer with stock low-grip tires, but it's driver inputs induced behaviour, car is understeer-ish with stock zero camber all around, why make it much more understeery than it is? Maybe rather worth be more mindful how one drives then simply mash up accelerator everywhere and steer with .. ehemm, alignment to compensate wrong control inputs.
|
Not an F1 argument, just an illustration that more camber isn't necessarily better. Wider tires need less camber. Basically, the stiffer your suspension the more static camber you can generally benefit from. Street suspension moves around a lot compared to competition suspension so camber needs to be carefully considered.
The object of static camber settings is to optimize contact patch pressure (and thus tread temperature) for the driving you intend to do. Camber is very track specific. For road use less camber will be better than for track use. Wide tires need less camber. Stiff suspension can tolerate more static camber because dynamic camber doesn't vary as much.
For road use rear camber of about 1.5 degrees and front camber of about zero is probably ideal.