[Carrera2RS]

I may alter the toe and move to 0' not 4' as I think before I was running 0' it's just had a corner weight and ride height adjustment. Handling very well, but turn in not quite as good as before, overall excellent. Interested in front toe settings

[D.Yooras]

For vrooooom

The setup looks decent although setting up those particular targets on OG M2 wheels can be tough if you're looking for the utmost accuracy. In general, that aligner doesn't really "go out of calibration" but it's possible for the rack to go out of level by a minor amount due to wear and tear. All in all, that is a good setup they have at that shop.

The ride height measurement screen is prompted right after compensation (when the car is rolled forward) but prior to the caster sweep. Depending on the version of the software they have, it will offer the option to do live ride height (with specific targets) or measured height (from the lower rim edge to the fender). You'll know if it's in that mode because it will have a yellow band across the top that says "adjustment spec."

I've done the measurement both ways on my car with stock suspension, it uses the factory spec for camber (-1.83) but tightens the spec up to +.1 degrees and the toe is nearly 0mm in (yes, I use mm instead of decimal degrees because it's easier to discuss an actual number) whereas when you bypass the ride height input it gives you 3.2mm toe in.

It's just weird to see that much cross camber on a car that hasn't been in a collision and/or low mileage. The fact that caster is higher on the side that the camber is lower is interesting, almost like the thrust arm is pulling the suspension forward which is causing the track arm to lose track (which would effectively reduce camber). If you wanted to diagnose the issue, you need to know the SAI and the Included Angle, those two measurements will be able to tell what's going on in the front end.

Either way, I wouldn't loose sleep over a .25 degrees of cross camber on a car without camber plates. Unless they put driver ballast in the driver seat, those numbers will change when you sit in the car toward the direction of camber being more even (generally camber goes more positive on the driver side and slightly more negative on the passenger side).

Overall, for that shop to have spent that kind of money on alignment equipment, they are doing a good job and care about their work. The biggest thing with Hunter alignment equipment is that most shops don't know all the stuff it's capable of doing not to any fault of their own.

For Carrera2RS

Cut the rear total toe in half and run the same amount of toe in the front toe out (-) instead of toe in. Toe in is great for all uses except turn in and toe out is great for turn in but is not great at everything else, just the sacrifices we make as enthusiasts I suppose. Also, another aspect of note, these cars are heavily, heavily dependent on yaw rate so the setting you drive the car with (comfortable/sport/DSC off/etc) matters a lot when it comes to car feel because the active M diff behaves very different depending on which setting you're running.

[Carrera2RS]

Originally Posted by D.Yooras

For vrooooom

The setup looks decent although setting up those particular targets on OG M2 wheels can be tough if you're looking for the utmost accuracy. In general, that aligner doesn't really "go out of calibration" but it's possible for the rack to go out of level by a minor amount due to wear and tear. All in all, that is a good setup they have at that shop.

The ride height measurement screen is prompted right after compensation (when the car is rolled forward) but prior to the caster sweep. Depending on the version of the software they have, it will offer the option to do live ride height (with specific targets) or measured height (from the lower rim edge to the fender). You'll know if it's in that mode because it will have a yellow band across the top that says "adjustment spec."

I've done the measurement both ways on my car with stock suspension, it uses the factory spec for camber (-1.83) but tightens the spec up to +.1 degrees and the toe is nearly 0mm in (yes, I use mm instead of decimal degrees because it's easier to discuss an actual number) whereas when you bypass the ride height input it gives you 3.2mm toe in.

It's just weird to see that much cross camber on a car that hasn't been in a collision and/or low mileage. The fact that caster is higher on the side that the camber is lower is interesting, almost like the thrust arm is pulling the suspension forward which is causing the track arm to lose track (which would effectively reduce camber). If you wanted to diagnose the issue, you need to know the SAI and the Included Angle, those two measurements will be able to tell what's going on in the front end.

Either way, I wouldn't loose sleep over a .25 degrees of cross camber on a car without camber plates. Unless they put driver ballast in the driver seat, those numbers will change when you sit in the car toward the direction of camber being more even (generally camber goes more positive on the driver side and slightly more negative on the passenger side).

Overall, for that shop to have spent that kind of money on alignment equipment, they are doing a good job and care about their work. The biggest thing with Hunter alignment equipment is that most shops don't know all the stuff it's capable of doing not to any fault of their own.

For Carrera2RS

Cut the rear total toe in half and run the same amount of toe in the front toe out (-) instead of toe in. Toe in is great for all uses except turn in and toe out is great for turn in but is not great at everything else, just the sacrifices we make as enthusiasts I suppose. Also, another aspect of note, these cars are heavily, heavily dependent on yaw rate so the setting you drive the car with (comfortable/sport/DSC off/etc) matters a lot when it comes to car feel because the active M diff behaves very different depending on which setting you're running.

So say 5 minutes toe in rear not 10 and 5 minutes toe out on the front ? If I recall my GT3 runs with 0 at the front. By the way I am running BMW negative camber front hubs and AST coiler suspension

[vrooooom]

What’s a SAI & the Included angle?

I got the car used (< 2000 kms) I don’t think it’s been to an accident and it doesn’t look that way. I’ve been under the car several times. Can potholes caused that discrepancy? Would you just leave that be? It’s my first time to bring a car for alignment to be honest.

Carrera2RS numbers look like he’s got a camber plate, correct? Otherwise it wouldn’t be so perfectly matched and beyond the stock number.

[Carrera2RS]

Originally Posted by vrooooom

What’s a SAI & the Included angle?

I got the car used (< 2000 kms) I don’t think it’s been to an accident and it doesn’t look that way. I’ve been under the car several times. Can potholes caused that discrepancy? Would you just leave that be? It’s my first time to bring a car for alignment to be honest.

Carrera2RS numbers look like he’s got a camber plate, correct? Otherwise it wouldn’t be so perfectly matched and beyond the stock number.

I have -ve camber hubs, they are way better than camber plates IMO, they are direct replacements for the original hubs and add -0.5 degrees of negative camber and only cost a little bit more than negative camber top mounts

[D.Yooras]

Originally Posted by vrooooom

What’s a SAI & the Included angle?

I got the car used (< 2000 kms) I don’t think it’s been to an accident and it doesn’t look that way. I’ve been under the car several times. Can potholes caused that discrepancy? Would you just leave that be? It’s my first time to bring a car for alignment to be honest.

Carrera2RS numbers look like he’s got a camber plate, correct? Otherwise it wouldn’t be so perfectly matched and beyond the stock number.

SAI is steering axis inclination, the aligner your car was aligned with measures it when they measured caster. You can read more about it here but the short version is it's the angle of the suspension from the lower pivot point through the upper. That measurement vs camber helps determine if the strut is bent.

You can get that measurement from the shop that did the alignment if they are using "work management" on the aligner. If not, you might be able to read the number on your pictures of the aligner screen, SAI is shown in the third title down (on the left side of the screen), lowest bar graph. Pot holes could cause that issue but usually they bent wheels and control arms which result in lower caster numbers rather than higher ones.

If that were my car, I wouldn't worry about it too much. I would measure all your ride heights on the level ground and write them on the alignment sheet so you have a reference for later (additionally, differences in ride height can affect camber so it's good to know where they are anyway). Coilover (and suspension in general) have a tendency to settle over time so the car will start to sit lower from it's initial setup. If you have the ride height numbers you can raise it back to the same position it was later with minimal adverse affect on the alignment.

[D.Yooras]

Originally Posted by Carrera2RS

I have -ve camber hubs, they are way better than camber plates IMO, they are direct replacements for the original hubs and add -0.5 degrees of negative camber and only cost a little bit more than negative camber top mounts

It's an interesting debate on that actually. I don't have enough information to say which one is better given the same alignment numbers, but here's an interesting detail to consider.

Depending on how they achieve the correction, there is little/no change in the actual geometry of the suspension other than camber of the wheel at the hub (which would affect included angle only). BMW either mills the hub mounting surface at .5 degree off of nominal or they bore the strut shackle/sleeve that same amount off of nominal. Either of these methods leaves the geometry practically untouched.

Camber plates, on the other hand, change may aspects of the suspension geometry, for better or for worse. The biggest changes are the SAI (which is directly influenced by moving the top mounting point of the suspension) which alters the camber curve and somewhat alters the toe curve. Camber plates change the angle of the entire suspension which increases negative camber gain during compression.

In theory, the camber correction spindles would have none of these affects. That said, every Porsche 911 since the 996 cars have strut front suspension where the strut mount is slotted for camber adjustment which is the same thing camber plates do. The GT3 cars have factory front lower control arms that you can shim to make them longer or shorter which has a similar, although more intensive, affect.

My thought is, if the Porsche engineers thought it was acceptable to adjust camber that way, it's probably a net-positive rather than a negative.

[vrooooom]

Thanks Yooras. I’m posting this other screen I saw which should likely be more informative but with smaller fonts. Not going to pretend I understand what’s going on. I’m just at Camber, Toe & Caster. Sorry so little knowledge on cars.

As expected the SAI is also diff angle.

[D.Yooras]

It looks like your camber difference is primarily from the differences in SAI added to the difference in included angle and their relationship is additive.

There is a slight difference between both spindle angles and the upper/lower mounting areas. Either the subframe is slightly shifted further to the left side of the car or the strut mounts are in slightly different positions. Even though the strut mounts are pretty controlled, there is a bit of play when installing them.

Again, it's not really worth getting upset about but looking at the strut mounts is fairly easy so that's where I would start if you want to investigate.

[Carrera2RS]

I am heading back to Litchfield next week and they will set the toe differently, so I can feedback on what I end up with and how the differences feel