[s-cars] BMW Rear Camber

[Igor Kessel]

Evan Levine wrote:
> Well there's 2 major things going for them here....
> 
> 1. The cars are a lot lighter than quattros, and tire wear is significantly
> less overall regardless of other factors.
> 
> 2. Camber has a MUCH lesser effect on tire wear than people think. Toe is
> much harder on tires than camber, and when you lower a car, and think the
> camber is killing your tires, you've often changed the toe along with the
> camber without realizing it. You can run a good amount of camber as long as
> you don't have an aggressive toe setting without seeing terrible tire wear.
> 
> I run -3.4 in the front and -2.4 in the rear of my track car, and even with
> many street miles driven I have seen fantastic wear on the 200 treadwear
> summer tires.
> 
> Evan
> 
> On 10/6/06, Mark Pollan <mark.pollan at verizonbusiness.com> wrote:
>> To all better informed than I:
>>
>>
>>
>> How is it that BMWs running with what appears to be significant negative
>> camber on the rears do not chew up their tires in a few hundred miles?  So
>> many of the stock newer models look like they are 2 or 3 degrees negative.
>> Why can they do it and I will (actually have) ruined tires in 10K miles
>> with
>> about 1.5 degrees negative.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Mark


That is a very interesting observation, Evan. I heard the same thing. 
How much Toe do you have in the front?

-- 
Igor Kessel
two turbo quattros