GT350r Alignment Numbers

[ansibe]

Hi guys,

I have a 2016 GT PP with GT350r springs being installed. I want to align it to 350r specs, but can't seem to find the OE spec, does anyone know it?

If the 350r numbers aren't readily available, I'll go with -1.5 camber, 0 toe up front; and -2.0 camber, 1/8 toe in at the back. Any thoughts on that?

FWIW, I'm setting the car up for track use, but it will be used as my second road car. I drive it whenever I can, but I never have to.

Thanks.

Sponsored

 

[Optimum Performance]

I would shoot more for the FP settings to start.

 

[ansibe]

As soon as I post I find the spec ... :doh:

Front GT350R
Camber -1.5 degrees -1.75
Caster 6.83 6.92
Toe-Total 0.06 in 0.10 degrees out
Rear
Camber -1.00 deg -1.250 deg
Toe-Total -0.30 deg in -0.30 in

Does anyone think -2 deg is too much at the rear? -1 deg seems a little light for camber in the back.

 

[ansibe]

I would shoot more for the FP settings to start.

This is great! Thanks a lot.

 

[Ryan1112]

When I lowered with BMR handling springs I went with the 350r specs.
Front
Camber -1.5 (That's where mine ended up after lowering, no camber plates)
Total Toe .10 out
Rear
Camber -1.3
Total Toe .30 in

Do it. You'll like what you'll get. Steering response is so much better.

 

[ansibe]

When I lowered with BMR handling springs I went with the 350r specs.
Front
Camber -1.5 (That's where mine ended up after lowering, no camber plates)
Total Toe .10 out
Rear
Camber -1.3
Total Toe .30 in

Do it. You'll like what you'll get. Steering response is so much better.

Thanks Ryan. I may take your advise and run -1.5 at all 4 corners.

Do you track your car? Is it stable on corner exit?

 

[Rebellion]

It's surprising to see the rear camber to be so low...under 1?

 

[Ryan1112]

Yes, I track it. I ran Daytona with this and the rear stuck pretty well. Just take it easy for a couple laps to get used to the change. For me the more important part was it helped with corner entry and mid corner rotation. For me it was easier to put the car where I wanted it and make corrections.

 

[ansibe]

Yes, I track it. I ran Daytona with this and the rear stuck pretty well. Just take it easy for a couple laps to get used to the change. For me the more important part was it helped with corner entry and mid corner rotation. For me it was easier to put the car where I wanted it and make corrections.

Sounds good. Thanks.
Are you on OE PP sways? What tires are you using?

 

[BmacIL]

When I lowered with BMR handling springs I went with the 350r specs.
Front
Camber -1.5 (That's where mine ended up after lowering, no camber plates)
Total Toe .10 out
Rear
Camber -1.3
Total Toe .30 in

Do it. You'll like what you'll get. Steering response is so much better.

Agreed with all this, except I'd start with 0 toe up front.

 

[Ryan1112]

Glad to help. So far stock PP bars and tires. I've done 3 track days and almost through the stock tires but I'm trying to hold off until the new Michelins Sports come out. I think I'm going to get some BMR or Steeda bars soon. I've been waiting for the BMR 38mm bar and get some reviews on that before I pull the trigger.

 

[Ryan1112]

Agreed with all this, except I'd start with 0 toe up front.

I can see that. 0 won't be quite as touchy. I have toe plates so I've tested a few front toe settings. 1/16 out or .10 total out is what I prefer but I thought 0 was nice too. Toe out made the wheel feel lighter to me. The biggest thing is to get rid of the front toe in.

 

[Norm Peterson]

It's surprising to see the rear camber to be so low...under 1?

What's surprising to me is for the GT's OE specs to have rear camber more negative than the front at all. I assume that it's got something to do with corporate standards involving understeer budget requirements suitable for lowest common denominator drivers, but particularly with cars having tire size stagger that generates its own understeer contribution it's surprising.

I've seen rear cambers at or less negative than -1° being a common recommendation for reducing understeer over on Camaro5, for street-tired cars in uses up to and including track time. The car, or the details of its rear suspension configuration aren't going to change the value of this technique, only the specific static camber settings used.


Norm

 

[ansibe]

My BRZ is aligned at -1.5 all round, and it is brilliant. It's on Konis with OE springs and tires. I know, I know, the tires are crap, but I love sliding that thing around!

The GT has so much power I think I may want more camber at the rear.

 

[Rebellion]

What's surprising to me is for the GT's OE specs to have rear camber more negative than the front at all. I assume that it's got something to do with corporate standards involving understeer budget requirements suitable for lowest common denominator drivers, but particularly with cars having tire size stagger that generates its own understeer contribution it's surprising.

I've seen rear cambers at or less negative than -1° being a common recommendation for reducing understeer over on Camaro5, for street-tired cars in uses up to and including track time. The car, or the details of its rear suspension configuration aren't going to change the value of this technique, only the specific static camber settings used.


Norm

Cool, understood!

I sorta assumed that the rear camber could be more negative than the front seeing that a lot of consumer cars around have that (sometimes, the rear camber difference is visible, so it's quite a bit more).

I do want to have the rear camber to be lesser than the front...but a nominal value of -.70 just seems too vertical! (compared to typical suggestions, that is).

Sponsored