I know this is very generic but do you feel that -3 camber on the RF is enough?
Printable View
I know this is very generic but do you feel that -3 camber on the RF is enough?
no. especially if you dont have enough camber gain
What do you feel I need to get it too? Having problems with the shock hitting the upper if I go anymore.
move the shock mount or flip shock over is possible.
Can you run gas bsb shocks upside down?
i would call BSB and ask, i run twin tube qa1 stuff.
If the front end geometry is correct, you won't get camber gain. It will stay the same during chassis roll. Best suggestion is to look at your tire wear or heat across the tire after a long run (full heat race or feature). The amount of camber you need depends on the track size, banking, etc.
Just my 2 cents worth.
dont tell jimmy o or lanigan that...Quote:
Originally Posted by LFMotorsports
if you dont have camber gain in the rf something is wrong and your losing alot of potential traction with that corner. you see cars start to turn in good then loose the rf once the car starts turning that is what lack of camber gain cause's. if the car stayed completly flat and didnt roll over you wouldnt need any gain, but it dont when the car roll's over it is angling the top of the tire out which is causing you to loose camber. by using camber gain when the car rolls over it keeps camber in the rf tire keeping the entire tread of the tire on the track if it is set right. how much camber if the outside of the tire is hot after a race that is because of a lack of camber gain.
Every car is a little different. The best way I know if I have enough camber is looking at track photos with the car going through the corners. It's pretty easy to tell if the RF and the LF for that matter are tipped in or out. I had 4.5 degrees negative on my RF and could see the my RF was pretty close but the top of the tire was tipped out a little. So I'm at -5 degrees and see how that looks and feels.
The bottom of the tire is what you need to look at in the pictures. The top will deform in the opposite direction of the bottom. The outer tread needs to be in the track, but you do not want half the sidewall in the track.
RF Chassis dive will cause negative camber gain and RF Chassis Roll causes it the stand up the RF tire. Dirt Cars dive and Roll. how much yours does we don't know without using some software, its hard to roll a chassis in the shop sometimes. I always set mine to at least maintain static if I start with -5 and it rolls it will go to around -3.5 and with the arm I have (7.5) it goes back to static and depending on how much travel I use it will gain a degree or two depending on travel. You want to avoid a ton of transition in your contact patch cause that can give up traction as bad as the wrong static camber can. Temps tell half of a story it will only show you how it is most of the time it won't tell you how your tire contact patch does through its transition into the corner. -5 isn't a bad starting number on dirt
Our hard IMCA tires don't deflect at the top, the whole sidewall rolls under. I just like to imagine a line down the center of the tire and make sure it's perpendicular to the track surface.Quote:
Originally Posted by Confused?
That is the same tires we run. A tire cannot deflect in one place without altering it somewhere else.
RF camber:
We had a $10000 to win Mod race locally and the rumor in the pits was some of the "big dog" Usmts guys are running a cheater RF pinto spindle that adds some neg camber like the LM custom built spindles do....
Any body know anything about this rumor ??
They are probably the new AFCO 7* spindles. The Pinto spindles are supposed to be 10* spindle inclination but AFCO are making some a 7* inclination.
They are illegal in IMCA but don't know about USRA/USMTS.
7 degree pinto spindles are available a lot of places now. AFCO jumped on the band wagon.
USMTS dq'd a couple guys for them earlier this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Confused?
Here is a pic of my old car, which you can tell it needed more negative camber in the RF. But I also had the same problem with shock clearance with the upper a-arm.