Noticed you didn’t provide PDT the contact info he called you out on. Why don’t you give it a rest. You sure like to argue. I noticed this in other threads you have participated in. You have a proclivity to argue and you have little tolerance for other view points.

 

It takes two to have a debate, and my "opponent" is the one who jumped in here first to dispute my position. He has one viewpoint, and I have another. Let others decide which direction to follow, but thanks for playing "hall monitor."

It's not very hard to Google "DSC Sport", and they are also a forum vendor. He demanded contact info, and I don't respond very well to ultimatums.

Lastly, I'm going with the advice of professional chassis engineers, both the manufacturer in this case, as well as independent chassis engineers, for C7 recommendations over the advice of someone who claims to have been an auto tech.

He keeps claiming those recommendations are going to produce uneven tire wear, claiming the driving experience is so much better at 0º camber on the C7 with no evidence, keeps ignoring the fact that many, including myself, are NOT experiencing any uneven tire wear with those recs. properly set. He's also ignoring the fact that many of these cars do not come properly set from the factory, and then using that as evidence that the GM specs are "wacky."

We do agree on the fact that alignments from the factory are "wacky," but that's because they are not precise factory specs.

 

I haven't disputed anything. I fully agree that people who track their cars will benefit from the set up you have suggested.

 

Get outta here with the ultimatum crap. I first asked you to do it because you seemed to have contacts there, and you claimed to be interested in a legit discussion, but you didn't. Which is fine. Its also fine that you follow along with the herd and don't think for yourself. I don't have that problem.

 

Or is it you have issues with others proving you wrong? Give him the contact you spoke about. Let him contact your “DSC contact” you spoke to. Do you have an issue with that? Maybe you don’t have a contact. Is that it? You’re now running away from him aren’t you? PDT seems to have the professional qualifications to address this topic. Let him speak to your so called source and let him follow up with it. Who knows maybe he will learn something that he can share with us and we all benefit from. Do you have a problem with other people’s opinions?

 

Since it so incredibly difficult to type two words in the Google search box for some of you folks, let me help you:

Mike Levitas
(410) 799-7798

You might also want to google Mike's name.

 

-1.2 degrees of camber will produce uneven tire wear on a car driven normally.
The truth is, that spec almost falls into the category of "nonsense" for a street car. I have explained repeatedly, that your driving style may not have the same problem, and I have explained why.
I am not ignoring how these cars come from the factory. I am attacking the factory specs, because I know why they are what they are. Stated in the simplest terms, skid pad numbers and lap times around popular tracks sell performance cars, but they do not serve the interests of those who drive in a normal way. Those who drive normally, will do very well by setting their cars up with normal specs. You should just admit that, or explain why over a full degree of negative camber should be considered normal. One or the other.

 

You know what ?
This ******* conversation is over.
Your man Mike just told me (in no uncertain terms) the specs they have developed are to be used with their active suspension controller.
Gimme a ******* break.

 

That was also a cell number and not a business line, and he asked me how I got it. I suggest you delete it like I have from the quote box.

 

You know what, I got into this thinking I was going to learn something. Now I just feel like I've been tricked.
The first thing out of Mikes mouth was their specs were to be used in conjunction with their active suspension controller, which is fine I guess, but its well beyond the scope of normal driving. We did talk about rear castor and how it relates to tire wear but I've never had an issue with castor specs. The reality here is they don't seem to serve folks who drive under what most people would call normal conditions. So really this is a dead issue for me. Ill keep setting up street cars, for street use. I suggest everyone else do the same.

 

I guess Foosh’s posts are just a pile of : then. What do you know.

 

This will be my last response on this thread, but it all boils down to what one calls "a car driven normally." C7s were built for corner-carving even at legal speeds, and I do a lot of that, but I also do 50% plain old highway cruising. I consider my car as one driven "normally," as an almost daily commuter. I do not drive like a street hooligan.

Many C7 owners drive exactly the way I do. I think we agree that a grandmotherly street, straight-line, cruiser will get no benefit from DSC-type settings, which are within GM specs. We do not agree that the car behaves much better at 0º camber settings, and we do not agree that the DSC setting produces more tire wear driven in my "normal" fashion.

After 15K miles, my original OEM set measures 6/16" from one side to the other and everywhere in the middle. It also feels better in straight-line highway cruising, which is also a major point of disagreement between us, and I have driven it both ways. Mine was close to 0º front camber from the factory, and it's far better now set up properly in terms of tracking straight and true down an arrow-straight highway.

What you say is "normal" may be "normal" for the garage queen, polishing set, but it is not "normal" for the majority of C7 owners who actually drive their cars like real cars on a wide variety of roads.

I think we may agree more than disagree, but we differ significantly in the areas of tire wear, normal use, and that "neutral" setting feels better in what you seem to think is "normal" driving.

Lastly, yes I mistakenly provided Mike's private cell, which has been corrected. I'm not surprised at his answer, as he was saying for max benefit, and they were developed as result of testing with the DSC Controller. However, the DSC Controller doesn't do anything fundamentally different than the OEM MSRC controller, especially with the new GM calibrations. It does make more predictive than reactive adjustments, which provides better damping.

Many non-DSC users align to the DSC specs and AGAIN, DSC precise specs are within GM's recommendations. Thus, aligning to DSC specs means you are aligning to GM specs, and your last shot was a complete "red herring."

 

I didn't even read your bullshit .... if you have any respect for him at all, then go and delete the mans cell number. He literally asked me how I got it and I had to apologize.

 

No reason to be insulting. It was deleted long ago, along with an apology to Mike. He's cool. The main business number is now posted for those who can't type DSC Sport in a Google box.

Yes I mistakenly provided Mike's private cell. I'm not surprised at his answer, as he was saying for max benefit, and they were developed as result of testing with the DSC Controller. However, the DSC Controller doesn't do anything fundamentally different than the OEM MSRC controller, especially with the new GM calibrations. It does make more predictive than reactive adjustments, which provides better damping.

Many non-DSC users align to the DSC specs and AGAIN, DSC precise specs are within GM's recommendations. Thus, aligning to DSC specs means you are aligning to GM specs, and your last shot was a complete "red herring."

Oh yea, it's "caster" not "castor."

 

Hmmm I thought Foosh said “This will be my last response on this thread” in post 32. you’re a man of your word. Just doesn’t know when to quit.

 

You sure didn't seem to have a problem insulting me yesterday, when I was asking a very fair question in an honest and respectful way.
I'm glad you apologized to Mike, that makes two of us. Thanks for putting me in such an awkward spot.
Gm specs are for magazine reviews and sales brochures. Not for people that drive in a normal way, as evidenced by the numerous threads and concerns about tire wear.
The bottom line here is this, you are the one suggesting certain specs while omitting critical information. You are the one relying on other people to support your bs, and they don't. You are the one who is just repeating what you have been told, and its you who doesn't know wtf your talking about.