I don't know about 'strings and a level' but with a set of Dunlop gauges it's easy to achieve settings to within 5 minutes which is 0.083 of a degree. Unless you plan on getting NASA to redesign and upgrade every component on the car this is more accuracy than you'll ever need.

As I said and Charlie echoed, chassis setup is basic geometry and can be done with very basic tools if the person using them knows what they're doing.



What do you mean by 'upset the stance'?



Totally true, I've seen cars that can only be described as dangerous because the were set up by some fool who got the right figures on a $50,000 machine but didn't know what he was doing.

 

[QUOTE=Retro78;1577795328]No need to go to any shop for an alignment. Get more accurate results with some string and a level.

this is what my "string and level" comment was about

upsetting the stance was also mentioned in this thread,it refers to the front suspension going to full jounce when jacked up,something that was nessary to compensate the alignment heads on the older alignment machines,some people using the older machines. never figured out the importance of getting the car to proper ride height after it was jacked up.

I am not trashing anybody that used strings and levels,bender guages or any other method,believe me i have done my fair of that sort of thing.with very good accurate results,you just have to know what you are doing.

in the proper hands alignment machines are very good tools,but there are so many people out there using them that don't have a clue what the numbers mean,just as long as they are green its good to go. there are also a lot of people out there wanting their cars aligned that got the specs out of a magazine article that don't have a clue what they are asking for and what they are doing to their car.
in my opinion 95% of the guys in all makes and models of cars with "racing"or "performace" alignment specs are way behind the cars performance capabilities in OE configuration. as you guys who race know you have to be very good to take a car of and kind to the limit all the time and most people are not that good.

 

Sorry if I misunderstood you, and I totally agree about people getting their geometry specs from a magazine or forum, unless you fully understand what each geometry figure does you shouldn't go off OE spec.

As for figures given in inches

 

Correction...I was looking at the copy of the cash register receipt I signed for my credit card which was sort of faded, perhaps from lack of ink. $240--I wish!!

Here's the invoice readout:

Alignment 4 wheel, Lazer alignment-4 wheel-basic------$74.95

Additional labor charge for speciality-------------------$190.00

Add in 6% state sales tax and the grand total comes to, drum roll please

$280.85

 

73, VBP Performance Plus suspension and VBP's advanced driver alignment specs. $69 Pep boys, took 2.5hrs, chain stores :~)

 

[QUOTE=Golden;1577813478] unless you fully understand what each geometry figure does you shouldn't go off OE spec.

words of wisdom

factory alignment specs are not somthing that just happens,there is extesive testing behind those numbers and tolerances.unless you have a specific thing you want to do with a car (any car not just corvettes) in my opinion its best to go with the OE specs.the engineers behind those numbers have years of experience and the ones i've met are all very VERY good behind the wheel of a car,trust me they know what they are doing.

 

I have to disagree. Factory specs are designed to keep a crappy driver from spinning out.

Most muscle cars have a factory spec with positive camber in the front and very little caster. Take a turn and it will plow.

Dialing in a little negative camber and bumping the caster up will transform the car.

 

that is exactly my point ,they make it so people who are not the best drivers stay out of trouble. "take a little turn and it will plow" all you have to do is slow down and it no longer plows,if it doesn't plow sooner or later its going to spin, if you spin it you are in far far more trouble just watching the world go around.
playing with the alignment will "tranform the car" is 100% true. but MOST drivers are not capable of getting out of trouble once they go over the edge.contrary to what most sportscar drivers think just because you have the car does not make them capable of driving it to its potential

 

You have just demonstrated mine and Don's point exactly, by showing that you don't really understand what the various alignment figures do.

The reason many muscle cars have initial positive camber is because when the front suspension deflects it goes into negative camber. Winding in negative camber on a standard car will give you excessive negative camber in hard cornering and actually reduce front end grip.

Yon can't just recommend settings as an isolated item, alignment specs need to be tailored to the entire suspension set-up, from tire through to bushing.

It's like someone asking what the best carb is for a car and you saying a 1250 CFM Dominator. It might be a great carb but if the person asking has a stock 327 it's completely inappropriate.

 

When turning, any bushing deflection will show up as even more positive camber on the outside front wheel. Then body roll further increases pos camber.

Yes, I do have an understanding of basic alignment factors. It's not rocket science.

 

I don't want to be rude but you've just done exactly the same thing again.

Many double wishbone suspension systems run unequal length wishbones, this means the upper arm travels through a tighter arc than the lower, pulling the top of the wheel in when deflected up.

 

The extra $190 was probably because you helped.

This is like so many things: A good surgeon could do heart surgery with a butter knife, but a bad surgeon couldn't do it with the latest laser equipment. You're either a good mechanic and know your stuff or you're a wrench turner.

 

[sigh] . Yes I'm familiar with the concept of camber gain. And no, the C3 camber gain is not enough the keep the outer tire at the proper angle with the factory camber/caster.

 

in my opinion the bottom line here is this, unless you have a specific purpose for your car such as autocross,or racing the safe bet is to go with OE specs, the reason is this, most people are not capable of taking their cars to its handling potential,its not the car that is slowing them down its the driver.anytime you gain something in handling you give up something somewhere else,that is the nature of the beast.i want my car to be safe for anybody that gets behind the wheel no matter what their driving abilities or road conditions happen to be.

if you happen to be able to outdrive your current setup by all means experiment around

my intention here is not to tick off the people on here who are truly good drivers, i know there are quite a few.so please don't take it that way.FWIW i am not one of them.

my intention is to let people know that when changing things there is always, ALWAYS something you are giving up somewhere. if there were no compromises all cars would be set up like formula 1 race cars and there would be no debate.

 

I'm not questioning your knowledge as much as trying to point out that you can't make sweeping statements like 'Dialing in a little negative camber and bumping the caster up will transform the car' as it all depends on the spec of the car.

 

Haven't ticked me off, and IMHO you've actually made some good points here. My earlier post was more intended for viewers following allong at home than anything else, just to make sure they didn't read too much into your comments on stringing.

 

Maybe so, but so far I have not come across a 60s/70s muscle car that didn't drive much better with those two changes.

 

That might be true but even on a standard car, simply changing something like OE crossplys for modern radials radically alters the handling of the car. So if you have an NCRS car with crossplys, applying your general settings may not have the desired effect.