I'm trying to get dialed in a pretty specific and mildly aggressive alignment for my '91 MX5. I tried taking it to Frank Allen Tyres, but couldn't get them to do a proper job, like ballasting the driver's seat, getting left/right numbers the same, maximizing caster and all that.
The numbers I'm looking to try are approximately...
Rear toe: toe in, +0.15 degrees per side, +0.3 degrees total
Rear camber: -1.1 degrees
Front caster: +4.7 degrees to +5.5 degrees (whatever the maximum possible is)
Front camber: -0.6 to -0.8 degrees (maximum possible, influenced by above caster value, maintain a 0.5 difference between front and rear camber)
Front toe: toe out, -0.15 degrees per side, -0.3 degrees total, or less, towards zero front toe is also fine
The figures are basically culled from these two:
http://www.miata.net/garage/align.html
http://www.hummingbirds.net/alignment.html
I'm kind of favoring the first since it seems more stock-oriented, the second link is for a car that's got lowered suspension and aftermarket swaybars.
I was originally going to bump this thread, but it's locked...
http://www.mx5forum.co.nz/viewtopic.php ... =alignment
Guess maybe I'll try that Tyre Tech place that's mentioned in the thread linked above, I also saw Centreline Suspension recommended in another thread around here. But I figured I'd also make a new thread and ask if anyone has any other suggestions/experiences?
having trouble finding a good alignment shop in Auckland
Moderators: Growler, jif, Born_disturbed, punkoutnz
-
- Tentative sideways sliding....
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 8:58 pm
-
- Why yes, actually I do run this site.
- Posts: 470
- Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 10:03 pm
- Location: I'm a JAFA and I'm OK
having trouble finding a good alignment shop in Auckland
if that's the one by the motorway then yeah I'd second Wairau .
Though I'd personally go for a smaller f/r camber difference , as I
found it frustratingly not-oversteerish (ie not-fun ;] with f -1.5* r
-2.0* ... also that much neg camber reduced traction a tad as well.
So maybe -1.0 / -1.2 F/R .
-j
[Posted via external email]
Though I'd personally go for a smaller f/r camber difference , as I
found it frustratingly not-oversteerish (ie not-fun ;] with f -1.5* r
-2.0* ... also that much neg camber reduced traction a tad as well.
So maybe -1.0 / -1.2 F/R .
-j
[Posted via external email]
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 98 guests