Please assist with specifications for front and rear wheel alignment for an early 944 non turbo, ordinary road use car. Toe in, castor etc.
Thanks......Malcolm.

 

Here are the specs that I had done. THe shop called it a performance alignment, and my experience with it is that it's very neutral and easily controllable at the limit. The stock suspension will give your but a nice notice before the rear steps out on you.

The attached .Zip has a .BMP file which is a scan of the report the alignment machine printed out with before and afters.

 

If you're driving a lot on the road, I would do something like -1 degree camber all around, and 0 toe. Caster up front of about 3 degrees.

If the car does quite a bit more auto-x and track days, and you don't worry about tire wear, then go -2 degrees camber and a slight bit of toe out, like -0.05 degrees.

 

Thanks for your help.
Malcolm.

 

For street driving, I would recommend at least 1/8 inch of Toe-in at the front and rear (0.275 deg for 25 inch tire). Although 0 deg of Toe is recommended for the track, you will feel every bumb and pothole at the steering wheel. My 86 951 track/street car is set with 1/16 inch toe-in (0.15 deg) front and rear, steering is still reasonably conformatble on the street.

 

You also dont want the caster to be even. The car will wander all over the damn road. You need a small split due to the road crown (not greater than 0.5 deg). Frankly, I am at a loss for why you dont just use the factory specs which should be set in nearly ever alignment machine produced in the last 15 years.

There is a MASSIVE difference between what you want for the track and what you want for the street.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote

 

This is far from a "performance alignment". I wouldn't trust the recommendations of the shop that said that.

 

I second that. Factory specs will give the best tire wear for an ordinary road use car.

 

It was explained to me like this: There are three standards for alignments for Porsches.

• There is engineering intent - delivers the best performance
• There is European OEM standards - what their legal eagles do to engineering intent
• There is American OEM standards - what our legal eagles do to the engineering intent

So why all of this? The American legal eagles from the OEM want to have an alignment such that should the car break lose or loose traction, it's obviously the drivers own fault. This standard is setup such that a Porsche suspension engineer can be sworn in and unequivocally state that the driver is 100% at fault for the car going out of control. This specification also includes a ride height higher than the others.

The German OEM standards are to comply with their legal system, of which, the particulars I don't know. But I was told that the European OEM standards were different from the engineering intent, mainly with regard to ride height, which is lower, by the way, than the US standards.

I was told that the alignment and ride height adjustments were best for my intended use, which was more focused on the fun factor, the track for DE's and learning, as opposed to street or tire wear.

What I will say is that when I first got the car, it was snappy at the limit. It broke the rear end loose with no warning, snapped the entire rear end around in an uncontrolled and uncontrollable fashion. I don't know if this was the US OEM standard alignment or not, and I've not located the records yet so that I can scan and upload them to see the before and after settings.

After this alignment was performed, the car would give a little wiggle just short of the limit, just short of breaking the rear end loose so that you would notice it in your butt, take note and be prepared for what you wanted to do, either back off slightly to be safe, or press on and perhaps deal with the back end coming around. Very much more controllable. Very much more fun to play with.

So whom told me all this? He was a Porsche master technician, typically working on 911's, 944's, Boxters, and Carreras. Previously he had been a tier 1 automotive suspension engineer for some 15 years, and let me tell you, he could tell stories about cars and their suspension developments. Yes, I'm afraid that took him at his word.

Tire wear? I barely put 4K miles on the car each year, so the fun factor is more important to me.

Set it to US OEM standards? I think that's what I had at first, and I was not pleased with it.

Now that I've put the coil over suspension on it, I'm beginning to wonder if the needs of the alignment have changed. Too bad that he's not working at the shop anymore, I would have valued his input into this suspension upgrade as well as his input into what the best alignment setting would have been. But alas, that was not to be.

You don't believe/trust this shop? You don't think that this alignment is the best one? Why? Why not? What would you change? Let's get to brass tacks on this, and really wring out the topic. I'm always open to new information and new reasoning. However, that doesn't mean that I'm going to end up changing anything, but it still would be an interesting and stimulating discussion.

I'll admit right up front that I'm far from an expert on this. I know what the basic terminology are but that's about it. I placed my trust in the technician to evaluate my needs and wants, and translate that into a set of alignment settings that would help be achieve my goals. From my impressions, he did that.

 

You are running -0.3 degrees of camber. That's not a typo of -3.0, it's at -0.3.

If your intended use is for limited street and track/autox as stated, you should be running much more negative camber. You don't have to believe me, reread Dmitry's post and do a search for alignment setting recommendations.

Without question, you should be running much more negative camber. I run in the neighborhood of -3.0 to -3.5. If I ran your settings on the track, the car would eat it's front tires for a snack before the afternoon lunch break.



I don't have to trust/believe your shop, you do. All I am saying is that what you got is not an aggressive performance setting. Something must have gotten lost in the translation. You don't have to trust/believe me either. Go educate yourself with other sources and make your own decisions.

Again, do a search. This has been discussed on numerous occasions. I'm running about -3 camber in front and -1.75 in back. Zero toe in front and a touch in at the rear. Caster at close to max with a slight L/R difference to compensate for crown as Matt stated previously. I drive very aggressively on R compound tires, YMMV, but it works great for me.

 

Fiar enough Chris.

 

-.3 deg would be fine for the street but would be a few degrees too few on the track. Chris is right, that would eat tires and net slow lap times. Between -3.0 and -3.5 would be right for a track setting.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote

 

i believe im running -2 up front and -1.25 or -1.5 rear. I would have to look at my paperwork again. Agressive enough for street/autox/de stuff IMO. No problems w/ tire wear on or off track. If i ever make it a dedicated track ***** i'll put -3 up front etc etc. Yeah -.3 is alittle lame, may as well have a straight axel!