What camber degree should I shoot for

[dattran86]

Originally Posted by TommyW

Lowering will automatically reduce camber. Since no tracking you should be fine with that

I though lowering a car will increase negative camber...especially the rear

[churchx]

Lowering will naturally gain some camber on ours, indeed. IIRC with reasonable lowering within inch with two camberbolts front i've heard about -2.5 max camber front, while at stock height it's about around -2.25 +/-.
Worth not overdo lowering/dropping though, as aside from reducing practicality/comfort/daily driving compliance one will need to spend much more to fix illeffects introduced by overlowering (mostly if dropping more then 1"), like need to get diff riser, parts to correct rollcenter changes and so on, it's not just about getting cheap china/taiwan coilovers and dropping to ground max they can go, so that ride becomes unbearable, handling awful and so that one can leave paint and plastic bits on speedbumps and steep driveways.
In general, for only daily driven car i'd keep stock height (already not too high) as is.

[cjd]

Originally Posted by dattran86

I though lowering a car will increase negative camber...especially the rear

Well, technically more negative camber and "reduce" are the same, though positive camber is almost never a thing so "reduce" might also be understood to mean "less negative camber"...

That said... lowering increases negative camber.

For the OP: Unless you're into a drift setup, I'd stay at -1.5° to -2° camber in the back. Front, for a good balance of wear/performance, over 2° up to -2.5° or as close as you can get. If your mix of spirited driving is reasonable, you won't be wearing tires faster than they age out unless you're on something in the one-lap-wonder category (e.g. RE71-R...)

[TommyW]

Originally Posted by dattran86

I though lowering a car will increase negative camber...especially the rear

Same thing. Increasing negative camberor reducing camber

[dattran86]

Originally Posted by TommyW

Same thing. Increasing negative camberor reducing camber

my misunderstanding,

usually I dont considered positive camber, so when you said reduce. you actually meant reduce the value from positive to negative.

[jamal]

The front end gains much less negative camber with bump travel than the rear. The result is that there's not enough up front and too much in the back. That's pretty much true for the stock settings at stock height, and then only gets worse with lowering. Why? It's safer, as it results in more understeer at the limit, and minimizes tire wear.

So anyway, if you're trying to maximize overall grip and improve the balance you'll want more negative camber up front than in the rear. Otherwise all those fancy suspension parts are kind of going to waste.

Not sure what camber bolts you have on the way but those STs should have some slotting at the front so you can add some negative camber without extra parts, or with just a second set of oem lower bolts.

[guybo]

Originally Posted by churchx

guybo: it's not "more weight" balance to the front with camber changes.
It's changing "grip" bias/balance. Adding more camber to one end, eg. front, adds grip to that end in curves, as due leaning on outside tire during turn static negative camber compensates tire sidewall flex and you get more even/better contact with that outside tire during turn, making that end less tending to loose traction. Reducing camber makes that contact patch worse during turn, reducing grip on that end.

That aside your camber settings do exactly that, with more camber (versus stock almost zero camber) in front.

Also increasing rear camber will not make car more tail happy, rather opposite, as now you are adding more grip mid turns to rear. Though due little change from -1.7 to -2, not by much.

Toe in adds stability and with to self-center to end too (and toe-out increases tendency to loose traction, to steer that end out) where it's dialed in. It impacts more tire wear and fuel economy though, so imho best would be to get wished balance by camber, thus zero toe front (if it's even, and camber is not at too high, imho not too much of lane wandering), and slight toe-in rear, like you have.

I said that I have done a lot of deletes and have shifted the balance of the weight of the car forward.

[Lust]

If it were me, I’d go with -2 camber up front with 0 toe and -1.5 camber in the rear with 1/32” - 1/16” toe in. Like what other people are saying, toe can kill tires if not setup properly. These settings are a good starting point for what you’re describing. On McPherson strut cars, the front wheels gain very little camber as load increases which is why you want more static camber up front. You can also increase caster to reduce static camber but it can be disadvantageous if you have too much caster. A good article can be found on the motoiq website where they go into some detail about setting up your suspension.

[cyin86x]

i personally wouldnt go more than -2 degrees. Tire wear starts to become an issue once you go any more than that.

[Dee]

Originally Posted by jamal

The front end gains much less negative camber with bump travel than the rear. The result is that there's not enough up front and too much in the back. That's pretty much true for the stock settings at stock height, and then only gets worse with lowering. Why? It's safer, as it results in more understeer at the limit, and minimizes tire wear.

So anyway, if you're trying to maximize overall grip and improve the balance you'll want more negative camber up front than in the rear. Otherwise all those fancy suspension parts are kind of going to waste.

Not sure what camber bolts you have on the way but those STs should have some slotting at the front so you can add some negative camber without extra parts, or with just a second set of oem lower bolts.

If I am wanting 1.5* front camber will I need camber bolts?

[8RZ]

Originally Posted by Dee

If I am wanting 1.5* front camber will I need camber bolts?

I did.

[Dee]

Originally Posted by 8RZ

I did.

Are you on ST coils?

[8RZ]

Originally Posted by Dee

Are you on ST coils?

Megan.

[Dee]

Originally Posted by 8RZ

Megan.

Oh, well I’m curious if I need them because the STs have slotted struts