Shout out to Rad (NJ-GT) and his alignment magic
11-08-2010, 05:47 PM
#16
Rennlist Member
Just want to clarify. Swapping the strut mounts gains you 0.8 degrees camber without sacrificing any castor? Good to know as swapping the strut mounts clears up some room for wide rubber up front.
I was under the impression that the rear uprights are the same between .1 and .2, but the fronts are different.
-Dino
I was under the impression that the rear uprights are the same between .1 and .2, but the fronts are different.
-Dino
- The 997.1 and 997.2 front strut mounts (camber plates) keep the caster when rotated, but gain 0.8 degrees of negative camber. The 996 GT3 camber plates lose about 0.5 degrees of caster when rotated.
- Porsche changed the rear wheel carriers in the 2010 GT3 (and RS likely), it is tough to torque them to 74 lbs, I used a 4 ft long bar to tighten them.
- Porsche changed the rear wheel carriers in the 2010 GT3 (and RS likely), it is tough to torque them to 74 lbs, I used a 4 ft long bar to tighten them.
11-08-2010, 08:13 PM
#17
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
When I had the 996 GT3 I bought a set of camber plates from Manthey Racing, they gave me another 0.2 degrees of camber compared to the stock 996 GT3 tops rotated, but they also gave me an extra degree of caster (ended up being 1.5 degrees more caster because I was running the rotated tops). The car was easier to drive, and I liked it better, the Manthey camber plates were expensive, something like $1300.
The 997.2 ended up with a nice amount of caster, 9.3 degrees, lovely. I can barely get 6.8 in the Fiat, no matter what I do with spacers changing the angles of the lower and upper a-arms.
11-08-2010, 08:26 PM
#18
Admin
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
+1
I don't know Rad, never even PMed him, but from the early years of the 6GT3 ownership, his tests (together with a few other members) were a great help. Back then I didn't even had another GT3 around here, let alone someone to test suspension setups and tyres and discuss it with.
So thank you as well.
PS. For that reason I even "look the other way" now that he went to the Dark Side. : )
I don't know Rad, never even PMed him, but from the early years of the 6GT3 ownership, his tests (together with a few other members) were a great help. Back then I didn't even had another GT3 around here, let alone someone to test suspension setups and tyres and discuss it with.
So thank you as well.
PS. For that reason I even "look the other way" now that he went to the Dark Side. : )
11-08-2010, 09:05 PM
#19
Rennlist Member
I love caster too. I got 8.5 degrees out of my S2000, and 3.5 of camber. 9.3 is great.
Yes, they are different between 996, 997.1 and 997.2, the 996 ones lose caster when rotated, the 997.1 doesn't and neither does the 997.2, which is amazing.
When I had the 996 GT3 I bought a set of camber plates from Manthey Racing, they gave me another 0.2 degrees of camber compared to the stock 996 GT3 tops rotated, but they also gave me an extra degree of caster (ended up being 1.5 degrees more caster because I was running the rotated tops). The car was easier to drive, and I liked it better, the Manthey camber plates were expensive, something like $1300.
The 997.2 ended up with a nice amount of caster, 9.3 degrees, lovely. I can barely get 6.8 in the Fiat, no matter what I do with spacers changing the angles of the lower and upper a-arms.
When I had the 996 GT3 I bought a set of camber plates from Manthey Racing, they gave me another 0.2 degrees of camber compared to the stock 996 GT3 tops rotated, but they also gave me an extra degree of caster (ended up being 1.5 degrees more caster because I was running the rotated tops). The car was easier to drive, and I liked it better, the Manthey camber plates were expensive, something like $1300.
The 997.2 ended up with a nice amount of caster, 9.3 degrees, lovely. I can barely get 6.8 in the Fiat, no matter what I do with spacers changing the angles of the lower and upper a-arms.
11-09-2010, 12:09 AM
#20
Rennlist Member
Yeah Rad is Da Bomb! Never buy / align / prep a track car he has owned without poking him for insight.
the problem is he cost me a big check for the Fast Fiat (albeit one with a 1980s stereo!) that on street tires ended up being faster than my GT2!
However, I'm not such a passionate wrench-man so I only follow advice on the lighter stuff. I leave trying out 285 fronts to others like mooty! I just like to drive...
the problem is he cost me a big check for the Fast Fiat (albeit one with a 1980s stereo!) that on street tires ended up being faster than my GT2!
However, I'm not such a passionate wrench-man so I only follow advice on the lighter stuff. I leave trying out 285 fronts to others like mooty! I just like to drive...
Last edited by cgomez; 11-09-2010 at 12:42 AM.
11-09-2010, 01:34 AM
#21
GT3 player par excellence
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
11-10-2010, 12:36 AM
#22
Rad, why can't you put the front bar full stiff on the '10 and '11s? What is the consequence if you do?
For those looking for track levels of camber (about -2.5), do you recommend both rotating and shimming (like on the 996) or just rotating?
The reason I'm asking is I am having a problem that I think you may be the only one knowledgeable enough to solve. I had an alignment done to -2.5 front, shimmed, struts not rotated, lower control arm put in the back hole (rather than the centered one), front bar was set full stiff. The problem was the suspension, under hard compression and a bump, would lock down one full inch lower than stock. If you turned the wheel 180 degrees in either direction, it would release and go back to the stock height. Two dealers couldn't figure it out. The struts were removed but didn't appear to bind in their travel. There were no obvious areas of rubbing. Putting the car back to stock and the front bar full soft seemed to resolve (or at least hide the problem).
I need to figure out what to tell them to do when they align it again (I NEED more camber up front). The choices are, rotate the struts, +/- shims, and should I use the center hole on the lower control arm or the back one? Do you think droplinks are needed in order to tighten the front sway bar to remove preload? I am having a lot of trouble finding any one knowledgeable source and I figure you are my best shot. Thanks in advance for your input.
For those looking for track levels of camber (about -2.5), do you recommend both rotating and shimming (like on the 996) or just rotating?
The reason I'm asking is I am having a problem that I think you may be the only one knowledgeable enough to solve. I had an alignment done to -2.5 front, shimmed, struts not rotated, lower control arm put in the back hole (rather than the centered one), front bar was set full stiff. The problem was the suspension, under hard compression and a bump, would lock down one full inch lower than stock. If you turned the wheel 180 degrees in either direction, it would release and go back to the stock height. Two dealers couldn't figure it out. The struts were removed but didn't appear to bind in their travel. There were no obvious areas of rubbing. Putting the car back to stock and the front bar full soft seemed to resolve (or at least hide the problem).
I need to figure out what to tell them to do when they align it again (I NEED more camber up front). The choices are, rotate the struts, +/- shims, and should I use the center hole on the lower control arm or the back one? Do you think droplinks are needed in order to tighten the front sway bar to remove preload? I am having a lot of trouble finding any one knowledgeable source and I figure you are my best shot. Thanks in advance for your input.
11-10-2010, 09:19 PM
#23
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Rad, why can't you put the front bar full stiff on the '10 and '11s? What is the consequence if you do?
For those looking for track levels of camber (about -2.5), do you recommend both rotating and shimming (like on the 996) or just rotating?
The reason I'm asking is I am having a problem that I think you may be the only one knowledgeable enough to solve. I had an alignment done to -2.5 front, shimmed, struts not rotated, lower control arm put in the back hole (rather than the centered one), front bar was set full stiff. The problem was the suspension, under hard compression and a bump, would lock down one full inch lower than stock. If you turned the wheel 180 degrees in either direction, it would release and go back to the stock height. Two dealers couldn't figure it out. The struts were removed but didn't appear to bind in their travel. There were no obvious areas of rubbing. Putting the car back to stock and the front bar full soft seemed to resolve (or at least hide the problem).
I need to figure out what to tell them to do when they align it again (I NEED more camber up front). The choices are, rotate the struts, +/- shims, and should I use the center hole on the lower control arm or the back one? Do you think droplinks are needed in order to tighten the front sway bar to remove preload? I am having a lot of trouble finding any one knowledgeable source and I figure you are my best shot. Thanks in advance for your input.
For those looking for track levels of camber (about -2.5), do you recommend both rotating and shimming (like on the 996) or just rotating?
The reason I'm asking is I am having a problem that I think you may be the only one knowledgeable enough to solve. I had an alignment done to -2.5 front, shimmed, struts not rotated, lower control arm put in the back hole (rather than the centered one), front bar was set full stiff. The problem was the suspension, under hard compression and a bump, would lock down one full inch lower than stock. If you turned the wheel 180 degrees in either direction, it would release and go back to the stock height. Two dealers couldn't figure it out. The struts were removed but didn't appear to bind in their travel. There were no obvious areas of rubbing. Putting the car back to stock and the front bar full soft seemed to resolve (or at least hide the problem).
I need to figure out what to tell them to do when they align it again (I NEED more camber up front). The choices are, rotate the struts, +/- shims, and should I use the center hole on the lower control arm or the back one? Do you think droplinks are needed in order to tighten the front sway bar to remove preload? I am having a lot of trouble finding any one knowledgeable source and I figure you are my best shot. Thanks in advance for your input.
Your struts must be binding. In any case, go back to you center hole for the front LCA, no need to rotate tops to obtain just -2.5 (not enough in my opinion), just put shims, 10mm should be fine. If you want to run a wider front tire, rotate the tops, it takes 30 minutes per side, and you gain room for 20mm wider tires, or even more.
The front bar at full stiff is a problem with the 996, 997.1 and 997.2 GT cars, too much pre-load, the angle of the links make them bend. On the 996, the car will hit the LCA, on both 997 you lose a lot of suspension travel. If you need to use that hole, just soften the rear bar one hole.
11-10-2010, 10:28 PM
#24
Rad, thanks for the reply. The original alignment was done by a speed shop but I was thinking of trying the dealer this time so they can't blame someone else for a defective part if it comes to that.
Is there any way the front bar on full stiff could have caused the binding?
Is there any way the front bar on full stiff could have caused the binding?
11-10-2010, 10:46 PM
#25
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Rad, thanks for the reply. The original alignment was done by a speed shop but I was thinking of trying the dealer this time so they can't blame someone else for a defective part if it comes to that.
Is there any way the front bar on full stiff could have caused the binding?
Is there any way the front bar on full stiff could have caused the binding?
However, the not so genius idea to move the trust arm to attach on the eccentric hole in the LCA could do. You're pushing the whole wheel carrier longitudinally, taking away vertical movement and adding lateral stress, that cause spring binding and strut binding, and looking from the front of the car the struts are already in angle. Hence my suggestion to go back to the LCA center hole.
