PatternDayTrader

I made it pretty clear in my post this is sort of something that borders on personal preference, and like you stated, the primary use is the most important consideration. I know you wont ever do it, but if you drove a street car set up with that much negative camber, back to back with a zero camber car, then you would change your mind. The exception is if you only drive on perfect roads.
Forgetting that aspect, how does the c7 suspension perform better by weighting the inside edges of the tires ?

Foosh

And I made it pretty clear that I've had perfectly even tire wear over 15K miles all in street use @ -1.2º negative camber. My usage is 50% rural roads, and 50% highway/city.

It was your "street cars don't do very well with a negative camber setting," statement which prompted my response. That broad overgeneralization just is not a true statement. Even on the highway, it tracks straight and true.

Also BTW, a bad toe setting chews up the inner side of tires more than negative camber does. Any cornering at all with a negative camber setting centers the contact patch for max grip (and even wear) on the g-loaded side. 0º camber in cornering reduces the size of the contact patch. That's how negative camber produces better handling and a higher skid-pad rating.

You're also mistaken in your prediction that I'd prefer the car if I went back to more neutral camber. Been there, done that with the car before I had it properly aligned. It was night and day better after the DSC alignment.

PatternDayTrader

I agree with the toe setting comment, provided you remove the inner side qualification. A car with too much toe in (not toe out) will likely wear the outside edges, but this is not important and actually depends more on the car.
As far as the camber comment about centering the load across the tire contact patch, what is it about the c7 geometry that makes you think that ? I am sure you realize the outside tire (in a corner) will actually decrease in its camber measurement due to the inclination of the steering axis, and body roll. Obviously if your corner with enough speed (force) then negative camber will help center the contact patch because of flex in the sidewall of the tire, but who drives like that on the street ? You might, but that is not typical.
I'm not trying to be combative, I'm acknowledging that its not impossible, and if that's the case then I want to know how. Anecdotal stories, rumor, hearsay and popular opinion don't count.
Its worth mentioning, I've spent quite a lot of time on this issue in an effort to try and justify the whacky negative camber setting these cars come with, and I'm not finding it. So if you know, then lets hear it.

PatternDayTrader

No one cares about the skid pad unless they are driving on a track.

PatternDayTrader

So we are clear on this, I agree with the DSC specs if the car is going on a track, and the pdf you attached earlier doe not specify a street only spec.
Probably because they are a performance oriented shop or something similar.

whitec7

Where we live in Iowa it's all straight lines. Never going to track the car.

PatternDayTrader

My vote is if you are going to drive it like a normal car, then set it up like a normal car.
Very slight positive camber, one tenth of one degree is perfect, and zero toe in.

Foosh

You're just not getting it.

Many of us drive twisty country roads, and it makes a big difference taking a tight curve at 60 mph as well. It's beneficial on both street and track, and great handling is just plain fun on the street as well. The skid-pad was used just as an example of the principle of how camber can be beneficial My set up allows me great handling and completely even tire wear for my use, again all street.

As I've said repeatedly if all you do is straight highways on cruise control, sure, set it at 0º. But, that begs the question, why the hell would even want a sports car built for handling like C7 to do that?

PatternDayTrader

Oh I'm getting it alright.
There is nothing inherently unique about the c7 suspension that causes a negative camber spec to be necessary, if there was, then it would be common knowledge.
Obviously, if you are going around corners at 60 mph then it might be preferable or even helpful, but otherwise you are just loading the tires in an uneven way along with the wheel bearings.
As far as why someone would want a sports car that handles well, I can only speak for myself, and that would simply be I like cars that handle well even if I don't expect to visit the limit of adhesion in every corner.

Foosh

If you can't understand how a vehicle, any vehicle leaning into a corner at a reasonable g-loading changes the camber geometry I can't help you [hint, think tire flex]. It's simply the laws of physics. -1.2º of camber is pretty minor, but does significantly enhance cornering by providing a bigger contact patch under load. That is a street/occasional track setting. Track settings recommend more negative camber.

And if you're the type of person who calls the chassis recommendations of an army of professional chassis engineers "wacky," it's not even worth discussing. It never ceases to amaze me when I run across an amateur around here who somehow convinces themselves they know more than experts.

Over and out . . .

PatternDayTrader

I understand it perfectly. In fact I understand it much better than you.
Call me amateur, or any other insult, all you want, but the bottom line here is very few people drive their cars on the street in a way that makes negative camber helpful. There is however a very large number of people who complain about premature tire wear (me included) as a result of this wacky spec, and we haven't even begun to discuss tramlining, and the need for excessive driver input on a less than perfect road surface. All of these things diminish the driving experience for the majority of owners.
Why do you suppose the army of engineers spec the car that way? Could it be so the factory can brag about published skid pad figures ? Or lap times around Nurburgring ? Sure sounds good at the sales brochure ...

PatternDayTrader

By the way. Tire flex is not what changes camber geometry. Tire sidewall flex is one reason why camber geometry is designed to change when turning the steering wheel, but you knew that already ... because your so much smarter than me.

Jaylars

2017 GS. I drive this, often! Thanks again for the numbers Foosh. If for some reason they don't work, I'll change them to my liking the next time.