Butt Dyno

iTrader: (10)

So the Clubsports have adjustable camber slots, like so


And they attach to the car like so


(more detail here:
http://www.motoiq.com/magazine_artic...ix-part-3.aspx)

I'm looking to get just a hair more camber adjustment in the front so I can do some testing - I'm at negative 3 currently and the plates can't really go much further. Looking for maybe -3.3.

Am I right thinking that I want to use the "3" brackets so that the upper bolt on the strut is closer to the engine compartment and thus pulls the top of the wheel in? I just want to make sure I'm not somehow thinking about this backwards.

(The previous owner of the suspension said that he put the middle ones on)

Thanks
John

211Ratsbud

iTrader: (1)

Yes. You want the top of the knuckle to be pulled to the centerline of the car. 3 looks like it would do the trick. What is the difference between 1 and 2 though? Tuning camber this way instead of the strut top will move the wheel closer to the strut. Alters slightly the motion ratio of the absorber.

Butt Dyno

iTrader: (10)

Thanks! The difference between 1 and 2 is subtle but you can definitely see it with the brackets in hand.

Good point about moving the wheel closer to the strut. I'm waiting for my new CDR spacers to get here and I'll double check wheel clearance once I have em...

211Ratsbud

iTrader: (1)

How would SAI be effected by changing camber in two different ways?

More knuckle based camber would lead to a more verical turning axis, more strut based camber would incline the axis, giving you more dynamic camber in a corner.

does that sound correct>?


How much caster are you aiming for? I remember with the subies we liked ~6ish. I dont see it discussed on here EVER!

Butt Dyno

iTrader: (10)

There was a lot of discussion on the Subaru boards about this - whether it's better to get camber at the plate or at the hub. I think this is the longest thread on the subject:
http://www.iwsti.com/forums/gd-suspe...-analysis.html
Unfortunately the graphs are missing... people were arguing that unless you add a lot of caster, you'll lose camber dynamically with a lot of static camber... or something like that.

Another one
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2286034

It seemed like much ado about nothing, but I'm not one of those math people. I just always try to get a lot of negative camber *and* a lot of caster.

One of the side benefits to making the adjustments from the first post, is that I should actually be able to get more caster. Right now, I am pretty much maxed out because the bolts in the slidey-plate in my camber plates are pretty much touching the inside of the strut tower. If I had less negative camber at-the-plate, I might have additional clearance at the plate to dial in more caster. (CDR camber plates)

mouseIX

There are some awesome unspoken (in the Evo community) advantages with more caster. I have been planning on ways to increase caster without upper plates and making the adjustment down low, to get more wheel base. Sorry to go off subject. This peaked my interest.

Cheers

211Ratsbud

iTrader: (1)

I used the caster adding sti control arms over my wrx aluminum ones and had noltec plates .. i had i think 6.x something. I woldnt mind noltec or similar for the evo. Butt dyno let us know what your alignment comes in if you get it racked!