Alignment
Melting Slicks
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,587
Likes: 873
Would recommend a shop that can apply the pdaft alignment specs on your car for street use (if you are in the I street drive it 90% of the time, occasional track category)
The stock C6 alignment tends to wear out the inner portion of the tires on the fronts.
The stock C6 alignment tends to wear out the inner portion of the tires on the fronts.
Last edited by SladeX; May 14, 2019 at 10:11 AM.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,396
Likes: 525
From: Lower New York
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvette Engines RANKED by Peak Torque (70+ Years of Muscle!)
Joe Kucinski
Corvette ZR1X Will Be Pacing the Indy 500, And Could Probably Race, Too!
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvettes Coming to Mecum Indy 2026!
Brett Foote
Top 10 C9 Corvette MUST-HAVES to Fix These C8 Generation Flaws!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Revolutionary 'Corvette Firsts' Most People Don't Know
Joe Kucinski
5 Reasons to Upgrade to an LS6-Powered Corvette; 5 Reasons to Stay LT2
Michael S. Palmer
2027 Corvette vs The World: Every C8 vs Its Closest Competitor
Joe Kucinski
Melting Slicks
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,587
Likes: 873
The factorry alginment specs allow for more toe in than the pdaft specs, a little bit more toe in and the negative camber (as much as -1 degrees) is more than enough to produce uneven wear on the inner front where you will have half the life of most manufacturer specifications.Combined for most alignment techs to just get it in the "green" for manufacturer settings rather than think of ideal settings vs consequences and you have a recipe for inner tire wear across more than a statistical anomaly would account for.
factory specs
front
camber -0.45 +/- 0.60 (+0.15 .. -1.05)
caster 7.90 +/- 0.60 ( 7.30 .. 8.50)
toe in 0.20 +/- 0.20 total ( 0.00 .. 0.40)
rear
camber -0.45 +/- 0.50 (-0.05 .. -0.95)
toe in 0.00 +/- 0.20 total (-0.20 .. +0.20)
So you have 1 tech at a GM doing fairly decent work to get it close to right?
The reason pdaft exists (who's done more extensive testing than just 3 vettes) and the complaints on this forum alone across 05-13 tend to indicate that the factory specs are not quite as robust as your experience would indicate.
factory specs
front
camber -0.45 +/- 0.60 (+0.15 .. -1.05)
caster 7.90 +/- 0.60 ( 7.30 .. 8.50)
toe in 0.20 +/- 0.20 total ( 0.00 .. 0.40)
rear
camber -0.45 +/- 0.50 (-0.05 .. -0.95)
toe in 0.00 +/- 0.20 total (-0.20 .. +0.20)
So you have 1 tech at a GM doing fairly decent work to get it close to right?
The reason pdaft exists (who's done more extensive testing than just 3 vettes) and the complaints on this forum alone across 05-13 tend to indicate that the factory specs are not quite as robust as your experience would indicate.
Last edited by SladeX; May 14, 2019 at 11:01 AM.
Race Director
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 13,262
Likes: 3,150
From: SW Florida
2021 C6 of the Year Finalist - Modified
I purchased my 2011 GS when it was new. When the car had 13,000 miles on it, the original tires were wore out.
During this period of time, I had never hit any large pot holes in the road that could effect the alignment.
Prior to replacing the tires, I had the alignment checked, and it was waaaaaay out of align specs (both front and rear) ... No wonder the tires only lasted 13,000 miles.
I wanted to make sure that the tires now last a long time, so I had the alignment set to the following:
_____________________________
. . . . ... . . . Front . .. . Rear
Camber ... - 0.5° . . . - 0.3°
Total Toe . .. 0.0° . . . . 0.0°
Caster . .. .. 7.8° . (non-adjustable)
_____________________________
Note: The more negative Camber you have, the more it will wear out the inside tread of the tires ... (performance alignment Camber specs calls for lots of negative Camber = lots of tire wear)
Note: The more negative or positive Toe you have, the faster the tires will wear overall (ideal would be 0.0° Toe)
.
During this period of time, I had never hit any large pot holes in the road that could effect the alignment.
Prior to replacing the tires, I had the alignment checked, and it was waaaaaay out of align specs (both front and rear) ... No wonder the tires only lasted 13,000 miles.
I wanted to make sure that the tires now last a long time, so I had the alignment set to the following:
_____________________________
. . . . ... . . . Front . .. . Rear
Camber ... - 0.5° . . . - 0.3°
Total Toe . .. 0.0° . . . . 0.0°
Caster . .. .. 7.8° . (non-adjustable)
_____________________________
Note: The more negative Camber you have, the more it will wear out the inside tread of the tires ... (performance alignment Camber specs calls for lots of negative Camber = lots of tire wear)
Note: The more negative or positive Toe you have, the faster the tires will wear overall (ideal would be 0.0° Toe)
.
Last edited by Turbo6TA; May 14, 2019 at 11:44 AM.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,396
Likes: 525
From: Lower New York
The factorry alginment specs allow for more toe in than the pdaft specs, a little bit more toe in and the negative camber (as much as -1 degrees) is more than enough to produce uneven wear on the inner front where you will have half the life of most manufacturer specifications.Combined for most alignment techs to just get it in the "green" for manufacturer settings rather than think of ideal settings vs consequences and you have a recipe for inner tire wear across more than a statistical anomaly would account for.
factory specs
front
camber -0.45 +/- 0.60 (+0.15 .. -1.05)
caster 7.90 +/- 0.60 ( 7.30 .. 8.50)
toe in 0.20 +/- 0.20 total ( 0.00 .. 0.40)
rear
camber -0.45 +/- 0.50 (-0.05 .. -0.95)
toe in 0.00 +/- 0.20 total (-0.20 .. +0.20)
So you have 1 tech at a GM doing fairly decent work to get it close to right?
The reason pdaft exists (who's done more extensive testing than just 3 vettes) and the complaints on this forum alone across 05-13 tend to indicate that the factory specs are not quite as robust as your experience would indicate.
factory specs
front
camber -0.45 +/- 0.60 (+0.15 .. -1.05)
caster 7.90 +/- 0.60 ( 7.30 .. 8.50)
toe in 0.20 +/- 0.20 total ( 0.00 .. 0.40)
rear
camber -0.45 +/- 0.50 (-0.05 .. -0.95)
toe in 0.00 +/- 0.20 total (-0.20 .. +0.20)
So you have 1 tech at a GM doing fairly decent work to get it close to right?
The reason pdaft exists (who's done more extensive testing than just 3 vettes) and the complaints on this forum alone across 05-13 tend to indicate that the factory specs are not quite as robust as your experience would indicate.
Race Director
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 13,262
Likes: 3,150
From: SW Florida
2021 C6 of the Year Finalist - Modified
Melting Slicks
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,587
Likes: 873
GM specs are NOT the most ideal and if you follow the thought process of most alignment techs, getting it within spec doesn't mean jack alk as Turbo6ta has pointed out as well. You are taking this way too personally. I've had the gm specs for 2 of my vettes across 6 sets of tires. The last 2 sets laster longest with the tighter padft street performance specs which are ALSO within gm spec, but narrow the range to ensure tire wear and contact patch according to your driving style.
You aren't being constructive when you say just center it within gm specs. We are providing a proven combination to ensure ideal tire wear for other members, not anything crazy that requires anything more than showing a printed sheet to the tech doing the alignment
Melting Slicks
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,396
Likes: 525
From: Lower New York
Race Director
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 13,262
Likes: 3,150
From: SW Florida
2021 C6 of the Year Finalist - Modified
Simple
Melting Slicks
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,396
Likes: 525
From: Lower New York
Very much so, but alignment is the most overblown, overthought single item on here, other than tires.
Le Mans Master
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,652
Likes: 2,106
From: Left Coast, San Diego
