Alignment specs

[Bernie Benz]

Ingo, Mike,

My spec, (zero camber,  zero toe) is designed for max tire life under  
hiway cruising and around town conditions, and is probably not the  
best for the track where one may be willing to sacrifice tire life  
for cornering performance at the extreme.

My son and I have simplified our DIY toe measuring procedure. Rather  
than transferring measuring points to the floor with a plumb bob and  
measuring total toe on the floor, we now do it directly at the wheel  
at an elevation of about 5” to clear the undercarriage. My fixture is  
two straight 1” x 6” x 2’ pine boards with slots 1” deep cut in the  
ends near the top edge to accept tape measure blades either side of  
the tires. The tapes can be read to within 1/16” which, over the 2‘  
separation, is as accurate as is the plumb bob razamataz over a 4‘ or  
5’ separation.

Even with my strut brace I can not get camber more positive than  
about 0.5deg. negative. So my next step is to see how much I can move  
the lower control arm inward by slotting the mounting bolt holes in  
the subframe. Should be able to pick up another 0.5deg. positive by  
doing this.

Bernie



On May 22, 2007, at 7:07 AM, Ingo Rautenberg wrote:

> Mike,
>
> I need to do an alignment myself soon and Mr. Cheapskate (and I mean
> that in the most admiring of ways right now) -- Bernie Benz -- uses
> this modus operandi (from a previous post on the 200q20v list) --
> same suspension pieces and track, as you know:
>
> "IMO, the factory nominals and tolerences are designed to accommodate
> the
> minimum wage alignment jockey having no understanding of the basics
> nor of
> his maybe sophisticated optical alignment system and of course, to
> sell more
> rubber.
>
> Beyond that of a sound, tight steering and suspension system, my DIY
> specs
> for optimum tire wear are, for both Front and Rear:
>
> Camber: zero, +/- 0.1, both sides must be identical, no measurable
> tolerence.
> Toe:  -0.1, +/-0.1 (Will pull to zero optimum under average drive
> torque.)
> Both sides must be identical with a centered steering wheel/rack.  
> Also,
> total toe must be centered on the chassis as measured at the B
> pillars, F
> and R. When C and T are dead on, if necessary I will adjust Caster to
> eliminate any slight consistent pull to a side. This being an
> initial, first
> time adjustment, not necessary thereafter.
>
> This is easily (but initially time consumingly) accomplished with  
> simple
> carpender¹s tools on a relatively flat garage floor and will hold
> without
> drift or changes for years. Been my modus operandi now for 10+ years.
>
> Bernie"
>
> I think that's a good place to start at the very least :-)
>
> Ingo
>
> On May 22, 2007, at 9:23 AM, Michele_Deltergo at KeyBank.com wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I did many new front suspension (and rear) pieces so an alignment
>> was in
>> order.  1,000 miles later I'm really wearing my front tires on the
>> inner
>> edges.  Neg camber problem.   Car goes down the road straight with
>> no pulls
>> what so ever.  I pull out the alignment measurements on the print
>> out and
>> all seem in spec.   Then I look at the Car model and it says 90
>> Quattro!
>> They aligned the V8 on 90 specs.  Interestingly only one front is
>> 'technically' out of proper spec (and the 2 rears slightly) and the
>> other
>> front just in, but even it is noticeably worn.  Tires and rims are
>> stock.
>> Does any one have a preferred alignment spec other than in the
>> middle of
>> the specified ranges for the V8?
>> thx
>> Mike
>>
>>