When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
how about some alignment specs for my manual steering 69? i know there are other threads but the ones i read were a little too in depth for me. the car has the stock rally's and will have tires very close the the stock size, but radials. it's just a street driven car, no track time.
thanks
Hi s,
It does depends on if the car has p/s or not.
For non-power: (* equals DEGREE)
Caster…. +1* (+- 1/2*) (must be within 1/2* of other side)
Camber…+3/4* (+- 1/2*) (must be within 1/2* of other side)
Toe In…. 3/16"to 5/16" (total)
Regards,
Alan
Why would you want so little castor and worst of all positive camber? I recently setup a C-2 manual steering to my specs and it drives beautifully. Castor 3.2 both sides Camber negative .4 both sides, and 1/8th tow in
thanks guys. the steering feels "dead" right now, it's stable and tight but just has no feel to it.also it doesn't snap back to center like it should. i din't know if stock specs would suffice with radial tires.
thanks guys. the steering feels "dead" right now, it's stable and tight but just has no feel to it.also it doesn't snap back to center like it should. i din't know if stock specs would suffice with radial tires.
Stock Specs are for Bias Ply tires from the 60's. If you want the steering to "snap back to center" add more caster....use Georges specs for your alignment if you have radial tires, its a good set up.
Stock Specs are for Bias Ply tires from the 60's. If you want the steering to "snap back to center" add more caster....use Georges specs for your alignment if you have radial tires, its a good set up.
I just told the Client that we will watch the ware in the fronts and maybe change the camber in the future. but it is just a simple nice setup for radial tires
Why would you want so little castor and worst of all positive camber? I recently setup a C-2 manual steering to my specs and it drives beautifully. Castor 3.2 both sides Camber negative .4 both sides, and 1/8th tow in
The reason for the reduction of caster on a non-p/s car in relation to a p/s car is that as caster is increased so is steering effort and turning raduis, GM wanted to make parking lot maneuvers as easy as possible in cars that had no power assist. On the opposite side of the coin, adding caster helps to make a p/s car a bit less "nervous" at speed.
The reason GM speced positive camber has to do with the way the camber changes(goes negative) as the suspension compresses and the delivered ride height.
I used the stock specs on my stock ride height bias ply equipped 68 and they work well but if I lowered the car, added radials or significantly changed spring rate I'd change things accordingly.
Last edited by dugsgms74; Feb 7, 2016 at 12:33 AM.
The reason for the reduction of caster on a non-p/s car in relation to a p/s car is that as caster is increased so is steering effort and turning raduis, GM wanted to make parking lot maneuvers as easy as possible in cars that had no power assist. On the opposite side of the coin, adding caster helps to make a p/s car a bit less "nervous" at speed.
The reason GM speced positive camber has to do with the way the camber changes(goes negative) as the suspension compresses and the delivered ride height.
I used the stock specs on my stock ride height bias ply equipped 68 and they work well but if I lowered the car, added radials or significantly changed spring rate I'd change things accordingly.
That all well and good if you spend all your time parking your Vette. But some of us drive them! Do you care how it drives and handles turns or just parking it?
Another question. Bump steer is the reason for camber gain on the front of a vette. How much time does your suspension spend compressed VS non compressed?
I'm not really sure how to even talk to people who have not improved their car from 1968