Getting more camber on front 84-87
Moderators: The Dark Side of Will, Series8217
Getting more camber on front 84-87
What have people done to get more negative camber on the front suspension of the 84-87 Fiero's? My Fiero is lowered, I have new MOOG Problem Solver upper ball joints with the extra degree adjustment, poly bushings, and 17" rims with P205/45R17 tires. When I autocross, the inside edge of my front outter tire is lifting off the ground, my dad can actually see daylight under 1/3 of the tread when I am cornering hard, and you can see where only the outter 2/3 of the tire is wearing after a race (the tread is not smooth, but slightly lumpy from cornering hard, but the inside of the tread is still smooth).
As it sits, I can get my front camber to within factory spec's, which is what I have, but I need more negative, like 2 degrees or something. The stock front suspension gets more positive camber as it compresses.
As it sits, I can get my front camber to within factory spec's, which is what I have, but I need more negative, like 2 degrees or something. The stock front suspension gets more positive camber as it compresses.
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
Moog used to make a problem solver upper CA bushing set that had the center sleeve offset to one side, you installed the bushing so you got the extra gains where you wanted them.
Part No. Moog K6250, RareParts 10338, if it's still available.
Part No. Moog K6250, RareParts 10338, if it's still available.
-
- Peer Mediator
- Posts: 15750
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:13 pm
- Location: In the darkness, where fear and knowing are one
- Contact:
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
Have you dinged your crossmember? I have hard bushings and Moog ball joints and I can get -1.5 degrees on the front of my Northstar car.
Were the crossmembers really made that poorly?
Were the crossmembers really made that poorly?
-
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 1:36 pm
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
If you can find dropped lower ball joints, that'll give you a better camber curve. If you find them, let me know. I want 2 sets.
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
Think those balljoints came from a caddy if I recall. Yeah that should add more negative caster as it will effectively shorten the UCA length in a loaded position.
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
Well, I just replaced the front springs. I now have stock length springs on the front, 1 degree to in allignment, and still have positive camber. The ball joints are a few years old and not worn, 2 year old poly bushings, crossmember does not appear to be dinged. I have the upper moog ball joints with the flat side out, and pushed all the way in to give maximum camber. I guess I will have to measure crossmember to see if it is bent, I can't think of anything else.
-
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 1:36 pm
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
What's needed is to raise the inner pivots of the lower arms.
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
You mean move the mounting point for the lower a arms up? Wouldnt that just screw with the geometry? Right now the distance between both a arms at the frame is the same as the distance between the upper and lower ball joints.
Would having the upper a-arms swapped (left side on right, right side on left) cause this? I know my car is annoyingly twitchy on the highway, it doesnt consistantly pull any direction, it follows the cracks in the roads, pulls to the left, then to the right depending on where on the road you are. If I pass someone, the car wants to stay in the same lane, but once I start getting it into the passing lane, it just snaps over. It feels like the front end of the car pulling everywhere. I have 1 degree toe in on the front and 1/2 a degree toe in on the rear.
Would having the upper a-arms swapped (left side on right, right side on left) cause this? I know my car is annoyingly twitchy on the highway, it doesnt consistantly pull any direction, it follows the cracks in the roads, pulls to the left, then to the right depending on where on the road you are. If I pass someone, the car wants to stay in the same lane, but once I start getting it into the passing lane, it just snaps over. It feels like the front end of the car pulling everywhere. I have 1 degree toe in on the front and 1/2 a degree toe in on the rear.
-
- Peer Mediator
- Posts: 15750
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:13 pm
- Location: In the darkness, where fear and knowing are one
- Contact:
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
That'll screw up the bump steer AND add more pro-dive.Atilla the Fun wrote:What's needed is to raise the inner pivots of the lower arms.
What is your caster? Having the A-arms swapped L-R could give you negative caster, which would create the situation you describe.befarrer wrote:You mean move the mounting point for the lower a arms up? Wouldnt that just screw with the geometry? Right now the distance between both a arms at the frame is the same as the distance between the upper and lower ball joints.
Would having the upper a-arms swapped (left side on right, right side on left) cause this? I know my car is annoyingly twitchy on the highway, it doesnt consistantly pull any direction, it follows the cracks in the roads, pulls to the left, then to the right depending on where on the road you are. If I pass someone, the car wants to stay in the same lane, but once I start getting it into the passing lane, it just snaps over. It feels like the front end of the car pulling everywhere. I have 1 degree toe in on the front and 1/2 a degree toe in on the rear.
I'm pretty sure both early and '88 upper arms are handed.
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
Would this also cause it to be very twitchy at highway speeds, it just feels wierd, and steering inputs seem wierd.
-
- Peer Mediator
- Posts: 15750
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:13 pm
- Location: In the darkness, where fear and knowing are one
- Contact:
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
"weird" is probably the minimal term to describe how a car with negative caster drives.The Dark Side of Will wrote:which would create the situation you describe.
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
I'll maybe look into that. How do I know which side goes on which by looking at it. I wonder if they were reversed when the poly bushings were put in, or even earlier when I replaced the upper a arm rubber bushings.
-
- Peer Mediator
- Posts: 15750
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:13 pm
- Location: In the darkness, where fear and knowing are one
- Contact:
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
If reversing them would move the ball joint rearward, then you may have them in backwards.
Not *entirely* sure they're handed on the early cars.
Not *entirely* sure they're handed on the early cars.
- Series8217
- 1988 Fiero Track Car
- Posts: 6078
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2005 9:47 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
They definitely look handed on the early cars:
http://www.2bluesc.com/pictures/front-suspension.jpg
http://www.2bluesc.com/pictures/front-suspension.jpg
-
- Posts: 290
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 12:14 pm
- Location: Alberta
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
I was replacing the bushings on my 86 a while, and IIRC, my arms had L and R stamped into them?
Why would you eat bad ice cream?
-
- Posts: 290
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 12:14 pm
- Location: Alberta
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
That may have been the spindles, or the caliper brackets instead though..
Why would you eat bad ice cream?
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
Well, looked at the front a-arms, they are not on backwards, compared it to 2 other Fieros, they are also stamped L and R. I did grind the ball joint hole out alittle because the ball joint was hitting the large hole, preventing the ball joing from going all the way negative, now I am at about 0 degrees camber, and still alittle positive on the other side, the crossmember appears straight from all angles.
I dont know if this is bump steer or not, but when I drive over pot holes, man holes, etc that have a decent lip on them (which is every 12 feet in Edmonton), I can feel the car pull to that side, well, more like steer to that side. It also does this if one side of my car goes over an icy section of road, or a more slippery section (like a painted arrow that is wet). I did have it on the road last October when we started getting snow, and on an icy road, I had a hard time keeping the car straight on a straight road coasting at 20MPH, but I then had a few degrees toe out on the front, and a degree or two toe out on the rear, and all season tires, so that is probably why.
I dont know if this is bump steer or not, but when I drive over pot holes, man holes, etc that have a decent lip on them (which is every 12 feet in Edmonton), I can feel the car pull to that side, well, more like steer to that side. It also does this if one side of my car goes over an icy section of road, or a more slippery section (like a painted arrow that is wet). I did have it on the road last October when we started getting snow, and on an icy road, I had a hard time keeping the car straight on a straight road coasting at 20MPH, but I then had a few degrees toe out on the front, and a degree or two toe out on the rear, and all season tires, so that is probably why.
-
- Peer Mediator
- Posts: 15750
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:13 pm
- Location: In the darkness, where fear and knowing are one
- Contact:
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
How have you been measuring your alignment settings?
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
For toe, I use a straightedge the length of the car that rests against the car at the axle, then measure the difference between the front of the rim and the straightedge and rear of the rim for both wheels. For camber, I use a level that is a few inches longer than the rim, I can make it touch the outter lip of the rim on the top and bottom.
-
- Peer Mediator
- Posts: 15750
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:13 pm
- Location: In the darkness, where fear and knowing are one
- Contact:
Re: Getting more camber on front 84-87
How do you make sure the straight edge is parallel to the centerline of the car (the bodywork is not)?