Mvez

Ok guys, first let me apologize for not yet getting some pics of the new RS (Armando's old car), those are coming. Armando was incredible to deal with, so a quick shoutout to a great Rennlister.

I'm currently setting up the car for my first track event with it, and while Armando did a great job of adding the most important mods (toe links, etc.), I always seem to need more. Here's a rundown of the goodies so far, but I'm looking for a bit of direction for a baseline on camber, as I think I'm going to try -3 front, -2 rear (on RA1's). I like a car with alot of balance, and my E46 M3 is setup to be VERY neutral, so I prefer a car which is easy to drive at both ends, instead of setup for outright fastest lap times. I'm not racing, so I want it to be fun to drive at the limit. Any input is greatly appreciated from those who have similar setups.

Parts installed (or being installed):

Wevo SS engine mounts
New front springs - Swift 392# (rear linear springs will be installed very soon)
GMG sway bars - front and rear
CCW C14 wheels - 9"/12"
RA1's - 245/305
Apex Track Studs
Rennline Pedals

mdrums

I think some use too much camber in these cars.

997gt3north

- my guess is that you can dial back your front camber a tad with no negative handling consequences and only add small positives (tire wear, stability under braking, more even tire temps)
- that being said, my comments are based off stock front spring rates but I will have some data mid September with my higher rates
- I think 2.5-2.7 is a better range
- my -2.8 with R6s was the slightest bit too high using a temp gauge (but it is clearly track dependent - this was at Mosport)
- I believe 2.3-2.6F and 1.8-2.2R is a good range for R-Compounds depending on the track, tires, driving style

- the -3F, -2.5R range is Hoosier R80/100, Mich Slick Range

Izzone

I run 2.3 front, 1.6 rear camber with ra1

You have too much

997gt3north

my new setup for the Super Sports with only half day at the track was

-2.3 front
-1.75 rear

and tire wear was perfect

mdrums

Having too much camber is the same as having too little camber and that equals not getting as much rubber to the ground in the turn...either you are riding on the inside with too much camber or out side with too little camber. Also with too much camber your braking suffers.
Like you are saying the specs depend on the tires you are on, your driving style and the track.

TRAKCAR

+1 here toyo's

-2.4 F and -1.7 rear

Mvez

Thanks for the input. I guess my brain is warped from having to use -4F, -3R to get my M3 to handle right, and wear tires evenly....and that's for NT01's.

aussie jimmy

this is not a bmw saloon

mobonic

I agree with all the above, you do not need more than -2.8 front for R compound.. I would even go as much to say that anything over -2.5 fron is too much is its street driven too.

I would do -2.4 F & -1.8 R:

0 Toe Out front
2-3 Toe In rear

BBMGT3

I've got -2.2F, -1.5R, 2mm toe in @ rear. Front ARB one from stiff, Rear middle. Car balance becomes neutral to understeery but responds very well to trailbraking. A bit of a safe set-up; walls are awfully close at Yas marina...

TRAKCAR

Not all R compounds on the same. Rear -2.5 / -2.8 for R6 Hoosier 335 is perfect, I had even wear, minimal temp difference inside to outside. Toyo RA1, the outside of the tire never touched the surface and I still get slightly more inside wear with -1.7. I think that on some tracks -1.4 would also be fine.

I compare the Toyo RA1 grip livel to the MPSC that are OEM on the car and if you maintain factory spec allignment (Factory rake and minimal lowering) you are good. I only added front camber, but my fronts wear so little I may back it off a little next time from -2.5 to -2.0, just so it feels a bit better for daily driving.

utkinpol

streetable dot r-comps wear is a bad indicator as tires are too firm to show it fast enough. you really need to measure with pyrometer to see for sure where contact patch was. I run -3 front -2.5 rear - wear is also fine and equal.

on my front tires rubber gets scratched about of quarter inch higher of 'arrow' marks on side walls so for me that is an indicator of an optimal camber.

good experiment would be for somebody with data recorder to have some laps with higher camber then same laps with less camber, on same day and then compare data and lap times to actually see what the outcome will be. I do not think anybody actually ever measured RA1 or R888 or NT01 tires with pyrometer to establish 'optimal' camber settings, most of those discussions are empiric and based on 'gut guess'. my gut guess is that 0.5 deg camber does not change much in this case. less camber gives more contact for straight braking, more camber gives more contact at apex.
so i would say - if car feels stable enough at threshold braking on a straight then there is no need to decrease camber.

regards, paul.

if i will have time before next event next week i will reduce camber 0.5 deg and will post back.

Mvez

I'm stiffening my car over stock setup, and when you stiffen the car, you lose some dynamic camber gain and you need more static camber. I have tons of time on RA1's and NT01's, and they both like more camber as you stiffen the car. I'm not going with huge rates, but am adding about 170# of rate up front, with more bar front and rear, and that will require some more camber.

Also, the .1RS is about 70# softer in rear rate from the .2RS, which means the .1RS understeers considerably more in stock configuration, not even counting the bigger front tire/wheel. Soon I'll be installing either 672# or 728# rear springs, which will give more predictable, linear handling.

I'll post on how the setup goes and development. I honestly think this car can be a monster with just some simple springs, sway bars, engine mounts, and a good alignment.

Mvez

OK, just got the car back after all the upgrades mentioned, and the car is noticeably different, and completely better in every way. Even my shop was surprised at the difference.

For those who haven't, I would HIGHLY recommend the front spring upgrade. It drives absolutely no different on the street, and the car turns much better. For a 392# or a 336# swift spring, you will still want the 9" spring, as opposed to the 8", this prevents you from running into any lower locker/perch clearance issues if you are running a 9" front wheel. There is plenty of room on the shock to lower to the same ride height. You could run a shorter spring with helper, but honestly, there's not point up front. If you are worried about saving weight on your springs, you need to learn to drive better first.

Ended up with -3 front, -2.3 rear camber...my home track usually likes considerablly more camber than most others, so in an effort to preserve the golden RA1's, I'm going to err on the side of more camber, and back off from there. I've found it's always better to have more inside wear as opposed to railing the outside edges, since I flip my tires routinely anyway.

More driving impressions and pics to come after this weekend at the KYPCA event.