Abs and traction light activating on hard turn

[Decep]

when i changed control arms my alignment got out of wack and it was about a degree of toe out. the car was very nervous on the way home, obviously. a degree of toe is way out of line. once i aligned it, it drove great obviously.

i would probably look for a new alignment shop...

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by jslack

Hi group. Hoping you can help me out. I recently just added a new front and rear sway bar, front ends links and rear lower control arms. As soon as I got done with it the abs and tcs light activate when going around curves mainly going over 50 mph. I didn’t like the feel of the rear sway bar and removed that but the car does seem to still activate the abs and tcs when driving. Could I have done something to an abs sensor? I also have 17 BRZ and I did have to disconnect the hi low level sensor to replace the lca’s. Could that have caused the issue too? Thanks for any help guys.

your problem is you need to get an alignment. and since you already got one, you need a new alignment shop that is more competent.

or do pedal dance every time you drive.

[timurrrr]

Originally Posted by finch1750

That seems strange. I have been much lower (along with many others) and OEM toe arms are plenty of adjustment. Any damage in the rear?

He installed LCA to presumably get some extra negative camber in the back, which is known to affect toe in.

[finch1750]

Originally Posted by timurrrr

He installed LCA to presumably get some extra negative camber in the back, which is known to affect toe in.

I understand. Many people have LCAs and are lowered 2" or more (like I was) and/or running -2.5 or more rear camber. OEM toe arms were plenty to get within spec.

I was going down the line of I think he just needs a quality alignment place vs more parts.

[norcalpb]

I’ve found you only need adjustable toe arms in the rear if you are trying to DECREASE camber.

[timurrrr]

Originally Posted by finch1750

Many people have LCAs and are lowered 2" or more (like I was) and/or running -2.5 or more rear camber. OEM toe arms were plenty to get within spec.

Interesting data, thanks!

[maslin]

Originally Posted by norcalpb

I’ve found you only need adjustable toe arms in the rear if you are trying to DECREASE camber.

Lowered an inch I got the toe in and camber up to -1*24”. I would have needed the bushings to get the camber closer to 0*.

I installed LCAs to get less negative (closer to 0*) camber.

[timurrrr]

Originally Posted by maslin

I installed LCAs to get less negative (closer to 0*) camber.

Why on Earth would you want less/zero camber in the rear on a RWD car though?

[maslin]

Originally Posted by timurrrr

Why on Earth would you want less/zero camber in the rear on a RWD car though?

Understeer sucks? I needed less than I had, not zero. My rear camber was -2* and -3* after lowering. Front camber maxed on bolts and a little less in the rear. Lowered twins with 0 front camber and -4* in the back look ridiculous.

[churchx]

There are several options to dial even more front camber then just with camberbolts. Camberbolts in both holes & lowering probably worth upto -2.5, pedder topmounts -0.75, powerflex bushings also can net similar amount. Those all together imho may net even -4, and that's without going to pillowball camberplates.
Imho to reduce understeer it's preferable to add grip front then to reduce it rear.
Also worth work more with mass-transfer technics to reduce understeer.

[timurrrr]

Originally Posted by maslin

Understeer sucks?

Bad traction on all four corners sucks even more.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by timurrrr

Bad traction on all four corners sucks even more.

He's limited to bolts in the front which is like -1.x
Putting the rear at -1.4 is reasonable to better balance the car, you're blowing his poor phrasing way out of proportion.

[maslin]

Originally Posted by maslin

Understeer sucks?

Let me clarify. This sucks.




0* front camber, -3* rear camber is not a correct alignment. For any reason. Adding a bit of front negative camber with bolts and pulling the rear closer to zero not only looks better, but actually works.

I wouldn’t recommend -4*front, -3* rear camber to a car driven on the street. It just isn’t necessary. I think people should be honest about how they drive their cars. I’m a hard (driveway) parker, who commutes 2 or 3 times a month and sometimes gets out an hour or so on Saturday. My alignment works well for me.

Pretty clear here as well, they aren’t dumping the rear camber to gain grip. https://speed.academy/track-alignment-specs-scion-frs/



Mine, degrees and minutes, not decimals. 1.66* front, 1.38* rear.

[churchx]

Of course, -3.5F/-2.2R is certainly excessive camber for something daily driven. Then again, if you want to argue with practical reasoning, overlowering car, putting widest possible wheels/tires is also making it way less compliant and practical for daily driving. But if it's for those specific weird looks only, such people going for that are willing to sacrifice practicality/comfort/handling anyway. Imho they should only be told against only if they try suggest weird setups for people that are not of their kind but happen to ask advise in same forum.
BTW, imho oversteer/understeer balance also matters way less for daily driving. If one pushes enough on public roads for that to matter much .. imho one's driving is of type to quickly loose license anyway.