Is this too much negative camber? (picture and measurements)

[TeeLew]

Needs more camber....

Nevermind the camber, I'm curious how you achieved a 50-50 weight distribution.

Sponsored

 

[WildHorse]

Isn't there a compensation for the crown built into all roads ?

 

[WildHorse]

I'm curious how you achieved a 50-50 weight distribution

move (in my case) 5% of the weight in the front to the rear. Or, take weight off the front. Simple.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Its zero at zero, but it doesn't measure the small angles well. IDK, something something Harbor Freight.

You do have to be kind of careful to set the angle finder "vertical" as seen in side view. It helps to make multiple measurements as well.


I just checked mine using vernier calipers, the length of the metal portion, and some spreadsheet math . . . no guarantee that yours will match mine but it might be worth the trouble to at least find out.

1.0° indicated measured 1.05°
2.0° indicated measured 2.14°
3.0° indicated measured 3.24°


Norm

 

[Norm Peterson]

Isn't there a compensation for the crown built into all roads ?

I'm not aware of rear alignment settings being used to compensate for road crown.

Front alignment settings, on the other hand, have used either cross-camber or cross-caster for that reason. In those cases, RF camber would be set slightly more negative than LF camber, or RF caster more positive than LF caster.


Norm

 

[TeeLew]

I'm not aware of rear alignment settings being used to compensate for road crown.

Front alignment settings, on the other hand, have used either cross-camber or cross-caster for that reason. In those cases, RF camber would be set slightly more negative than LF camber, or RF caster more positive than LF caster.


Norm

I agree with you on the rear settings, but I think pretty much everyone monkeys with the front to make a car track straight on a crowned road, as you say, camber or caster.

 

[TeeLew]

move (in my case) 5% of the weight in the front to the rear. Or, take weight off the front. Simple.

It might be simple to write, now go do it.

 

[Norm Peterson]

NightmareMoon said:
Its zero at zero, but it doesn't measure the small angles well. IDK, something something Harbor Freight.


I later re-checked those numbers using mechanical vernier calipers (I used a digital caliper for the first set)

1.0° indicated measured 1.16°
2.0° indicated measured 2.16°
3.0° indicated measured 3.25°

Still seems close enough for most DIY purposes - especially since 'actual' = more negative than 'indicated'.

FWIW.


Norm

 

[NightmareMoon]

NightmareMoon said:
Its zero at zero, but it doesn't measure the small angles well. IDK, something something Harbor Freight.


I later re-checked those numbers using mechanical vernier calipers (I used a digital caliper for the first set)

1.0° indicated measured 1.16°
2.0° indicated measured 2.16°
3.0° indicated measured 3.25°

Still seems close enough for most DIY purposes - especially since 'actual' = more negative than 'indicated'.

FWIW.


Norm

Yeah, mine is off about 0.25° in the same range. I put some tape down on the inside and made my own marks. Its useful for relative measurements when backed up by an alignment sheet, and if you're measuring larger angles (like the angle of attack on a DIY lexan spoiler) its a pretty darn useful tool

Sponsored