Sponsored

BMR SP080 Alignment Specs?

tza888

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2016
Threads
3
Messages
149
Reaction score
104
Location
NoVA
First Name
Tony
Vehicle(s)
'16 Ruby Red GT
@BmacIL Thanks. I just cancelled my alignment appt and ordered the camber bolts. Better safe than sorry. Camber plates are out of the question since i just dropped a pretty penny on the new wheels and tires. My gut tells me that my drivers side camber is a bit more positive than 1.5 currently which is why i am having more rub on that side.

@TheLion I already have everything installed. Ive been running the SP080 springs for over a year now but they were on the OEM black accent wheels. I only noticed the rub when I installed the new wheels and tires a couple weeks ago. I was moreso looking on recommendations on if i can get to the needed camber without buying the camber bolts and if i should be looking more towards at -1.5 or -1.7 once i do get it aligned.
Sponsored

 
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
@tza888 If your just barely rubbing on occasion I would think a little more camber might do the trick. You could also get a fender flare tool and flare the fenders out just a smidge to get that extra clearance, but I would think the camber plates should give you the adjustment range you need.

Also not all 285/35R20 tires are the same width. Some have much more muscular shoulders than other so their actual tread width is wider despite having the same profile / size specifications. Every mfg. is different and that's why Tire Track actually measures all the tread widths using their own standard method and tool so it's an equal comparrison.

You might get away with simply using a tire that's a little less tread width even in the same size spec. Just look at their measured tread width specification. Take the Continental Extreme Contact tires for example. In 275/40R19 they are 9.6 wide tread width, but the Pilot Sport 4S from Michelin in the exact same size produces 10.1 tread width. So the Michelins shoulders are broader than the Contis, if your just at the edge of rubbing, the Contis might give you that slight clearance without any other modifications.
 

Dave_6

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2017
Threads
0
Messages
56
Reaction score
49
Location
Alabama
Vehicle(s)
2017 LB Mustang GT PP
Got mine back on the rack yesterday. Much better than the day before but still not accurate to Kelly's specs. Once I get new tires I'll hopefully get it close to perfect.
28757071427_17ee0554bc_k.jpg
 
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
Rear camber is a bit much but the front looks fine in all regards according to BMR's specs and their tolerances. Kelly suggested 0.25 to 0.50 less camber in the rear than in the front. I was thinking of running -1.60~-1.70 front and -1.25 rear camber as a good street setup. Most of the tire wear in daily driving occurs on the rear tires and the camber gain is more in the rear than in the front during the compression arch as is weight transfer. Running 1 and 1/4 rear should help keep inner edge tire wear to a minimum.

The GT350R runs a -1.12 front and -0.70 rear factory spec. So the difference in camber front to rear is 0.42, right in the middle of Kelly's range of difference front to rear of 0.25 to 0.50. My slightly altered spec offers nearly the same difference front to rear while staying within their recommended range.

BTW, do you find the car to wander a lot on the highway with 0 toe? I know 0 toe will be more responsive in the twisties for sure and that's what I enjoy the most of all types of driving, like the foot hills of PA or back roads of Ohio, but just wondering how much it will affect highway stability, I don't want the car to be constantly wandering for 2-3 hour highway hauls. I don't mind it being a bit sensitive to on-center, just wonder pulling left and right with every little road imperfection.
 

Dave_6

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2017
Threads
0
Messages
56
Reaction score
49
Location
Alabama
Vehicle(s)
2017 LB Mustang GT PP
I was using a big pry bar and felt like I was pushing the upper arm out as far as it would go, but maybe it still can move just a tad further.

I drive on the interstate to and from work and I didn't notice it wandering. To me at least, it feels the same as it did when it was stock. The short interstate drive I take though isn't the smoothest and isn't straight for long stretches either.
 

Sponsored

BmacIL

Enginerd
Joined
Sep 21, 2014
Threads
69
Messages
15,010
Reaction score
8,920
Location
Naperville, IL
Vehicle(s)
2015 Guard GT Base, M/T
Vehicle Showcase
1
Mine doesn't wander with 0.00 toe. It will also result in less inside edge wear even at higher camber.
 
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
Mine doesn't wander with 0.00 toe. It will also result in less inside edge wear even at higher camber.
It's settled then, sounds like with the geometry of the S550 front end, 0 toe is a really good balance of street practicality with responsive steering. Factory toe is around .10 per side and everyone says the S550 is particularly sensitive to toe changes. I'll shoot for 0 toe then. -1.6~-1.7 front camber, 7.21 caster (as per BMR's spec), -1.25~-1.35 rear camber and 0.10 rear toe per side.

Then I just need some decent tires that can actually hold in a corner as these pirelliles just don't feel like they can be pushed hard in corners. My All Season Pilot Sport AS3+'s could easily out do these P-Zeroes...that's sad.

In the reviews I recall many editors saying the 1/2SS felt so much more responsive than the GT (well at first they loved the PP GT's, but once the Alpha based SS came on to the scene the GT "suddenly sucked"). I agree with them that the stock PP GT setup is not really a true performance setup, it's more like a sport sedan setup with a V8 engine, hence it fits the "Grand Touring" aspect very well still with a bigger emphasis on ride comfort even in the PP GT. Forget the Base GT's handling....can anyone say RWD V8 Ford Fusion?

But that's what the majority of customers want. The nice thing is, that all of the real performance potential is built into the car. Very little really needs to be done to bring it out and the chassis architecture is surprisingly easy to modify. The S550 was has immense potential designed into it, the foundation is strong, but it's buried under compliant rubber bushings and mild suspension tuning everywhere. Chevy gave you a lot more of the SS's potential out of the box than Ford did with the GT.

1. Strut springs & caster / camber plates ($450~$500 total)
2. Cradle lockout ($215)
3. Differential bushings ($100)
4. Toe Link outer spherical bearings ($75)

Grand total: $890 plus labor and alignment costs

Those 4 changes on an otherwise stock PP GT makes an incredible difference in handling with a proper alignment and very little increase in the way of NVH, I'd have a hard time believing a 1SS or 2SS would have much of any handling advantage over a PP GT with those 4 (maybe 5 if you count the caster / camber plates as separate) cheap alterations on any handling metric if both cars are running the same tire on the same track, with the same driver on the same day.

All of the "wallowing" and "waiting for the chassis to take a set" disappears. The rear "lagging the front" of the car is gone. The grip issues where the car "suddenly" and "unexpectedly" lets go in the rear end disappears as well, you can "hang the tail out" on command with precision and ease if you so choose. Literally all of those handling quirks are due to IRS movement, differential movement, toe link deflection and the odd spring / strut damping rate combinations and even the factory alignment settings.

You could even leave out the FP toe link spherical bearings on the outer ends of the links for street use as long as the inner links are still spherical (cuts toe deflection in half with absolutely no NVH increase).

Then again the regular GT would get that much closer to the GT350. In fact the only real advantage the GT350 has is magnetic dampers, bigger power band of the Voodoo 5.2 and more track optimized gearing. I think a Power Pack 2 or 3 GT with some more aggressive suspension modifications than above can get pretty close to a GT350R and match or exceed a 1LE SS (which was slower than the GT350R).

Just like those few changes completely transform the handling, the Power Packs completely transform the engine, from response to power band and character. Thankfully they are very affordable, emissions legal and covered under warranty. The price difference between a similarly equipped 1/2SS and a lightly modified GT pays for those changes.

And your not stuck with a car that has an absolutely useless trunk and cramped interior with poor visibility. It still tours well, but with more "spunk". It truly becomes a Super Sport Grand Tourer.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
I was using a big pry bar and felt like I was pushing the upper arm out as far as it would go, but maybe it still can move just a tad further.

I drive on the interstate to and from work and I didn't notice it wandering. To me at least, it feels the same as it did when it was stock. The short interstate drive I take though isn't the smoothest and isn't straight for long stretches either.
By the way, if you ever do tune your engine, I would HIGHLY recommend Ford Performance Power Pack 2 or 3. Power Pack 2 is a little more practical and gives you a very nice mid-range with a little more top end and longer legs (revs out 350 RPM more than stock, a 7,150 rev limit vs. 6,800 stock).

Power Pack 3 is very linear and keeps pulling all the way up but lacks the mid-range, but has a higher average power if you rev it out. It is the most performance the 2nd gen 5.0 can offer and still be bullet proof with the stock internals. With Power Pack 3 your getting another 650 RPM of rev range over stock (7,450 rev limit).

I would advise against any after market ECU calibrations unless you want to run E85 or use the car in competition and not daily. Why? 1. Because they cut into the safety margin and your chances of engine damage are far higher, especially when you throw in drastic temperature changes like summer / vs winter or altitude changes. 2. Because they are not emissions legal, if you do have e-check like I do your going to have to flash back to stock, drive the car for several weeks stock to complete a drive cycle, get it e-checked then go back to the tune assuming your cats are still ok and you can even pass e-check 3. Most of them are only making a few HP more at most with all of those issues / risk (some include drive ability issues). 4. Most of them can't get the GT350 TB to to work right so higher RPM power falls off faster than the Power Pack 2 calibration anyway. I think your giving up an immense amount of "quality" for a few and rather minuscule gains in power.

The Power Packs completely transform the 2nd Gen 5.0 in every way and it goes from a good engine to top notch performance engine. Some aspects of drive ability are actually better than stock, like rev the hang issue when cold. My stock calibration was super touchy when it was cold and had some significant hang. With the Power Pack it has improved quite a bit over stock when cold and while it's still touchy, it's much more manageable than it was.
 

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Threads
11
Messages
9,011
Reaction score
4,720
Location
On a corner barstool not too far from I-95
First Name
Norm
Vehicle(s)
'08 GT #85, '19 WRX
Mine doesn't wander with 0.00 toe. It will also result in less inside edge wear even at higher camber.
Perhaps for a true dual-purpose car you'd want one-sided tolerance (all on the "toe-in" side). I'm sure it could be held 'positive' but below 0.1° total.


Norm
 

BmacIL

Enginerd
Joined
Sep 21, 2014
Threads
69
Messages
15,010
Reaction score
8,920
Location
Naperville, IL
Vehicle(s)
2015 Guard GT Base, M/T
Vehicle Showcase
1
Perhaps for a true dual-purpose car you'd want one-sided tolerance (all on the "toe-in" side). I'm sure it could be held 'positive' but below 0.1° total.


Norm
Possibly. I'd be interested trying 0.03-0.05 deg per side.
 

Sponsored

Choking_Victim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2015
Threads
26
Messages
590
Reaction score
81
Location
Arizona
First Name
Justin
Vehicle(s)
2018 A10 GT PP
I went off Kelly's (from BMR) recommended specs. And these are my current alignment #s. Still have to install the camber bolts up front and not sure if it's worthwhile to get camber arms for the rear

Car handles a lot better than with stock alignment #s, grips the road so much better

Street Handling - BMR - Kelly.jpg
Most current alignment (lowered).png

where are Kelly's spec that you posted above located? couldn't find them
 

BmacIL

Enginerd
Joined
Sep 21, 2014
Threads
69
Messages
15,010
Reaction score
8,920
Location
Naperville, IL
Vehicle(s)
2015 Guard GT Base, M/T
Vehicle Showcase
1

rayban1

Rayban1
Joined
Jan 15, 2017
Threads
12
Messages
83
Reaction score
37
Location
Seattle
Vehicle(s)
2015 GT PP Premium Guard
BMR 089/082 lowering springs, with some advice from BmacIL for alignment, also making sure you clock the bushing,,,,,Very happy with results.
20180604_172557_resized.jpg
 

Choking_Victim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2015
Threads
26
Messages
590
Reaction score
81
Location
Arizona
First Name
Justin
Vehicle(s)
2018 A10 GT PP

BmacIL

Enginerd
Joined
Sep 21, 2014
Threads
69
Messages
15,010
Reaction score
8,920
Location
Naperville, IL
Vehicle(s)
2015 Guard GT Base, M/T
Vehicle Showcase
1
Thank you again for the reply. So if I have them mirror Kelly's config I should have fairly moderate performance and no adverse tire wear? Just looking for a decent compromise between performance without skinning tires in a matter of months..what would you suggest if you don't mind me asking?
Yes, have them set it to Kelly's specs. Do not be OK with 'in the green'...you can have a goofy handling car with every spec in the green. Make sure it's extremely close on toe angles and within +/- 0.1 on camber. You will not see adverse tire wear. Toe is what really wears tires weird, not camber unless it's very, very high. One modification I'd make is to go closer to 0.00 up front for toe on both sides, but 0.05 in will be fine too. For track use go up in camber to around -2.5 front, -1.75-2.0 rear.
Sponsored

 
 




Top