If I get my 19 GS aligned to Stingray specs will the stop the Ackerman effect the steering? I don’t track, I am interest in tire wear. Thanks.

 

Alignment won't "fix."

 

[QUOTE=CPB;1607416828]Alignment won't "fix."[/QUOT

Does the Z51 have this suspension?

 

Only "fix" to Ackerman Effect is all season tires.

 

And that just masks the noise/feeling with lower-grip levels.

 

There isn't a "this suspension." All C7's exhibit the behavior.

 

I had an 18 Stingray and I don’t remember it being this bad. I guess it was the tires.

 

Yeah, if you run something with a much higher UTQG it will reduce what you hear/feel on front end. The geometry that causes the effect is still happening. Narrower tires like on a stingray = less contact path (less grip)

Just know you'll also be reducing cornering ability and stopping distance in the process.

 

Let me show my ignorance, what is UTQG? I am going to keep the same size tires but go to all season tires because there is a lot of cold clear weather where I am and a lot of rain in the summer

 

UTQG is the rather nebulous rating of how fast a tire wears, which loosely translates to how sticky it is. Lower numbers wear faster, and are stickier. Stickier tires accentuate the ackermann effect. Ergo, higher treadwear ratings mean less jittering at full lock.

In Minnesota, I'm running DWS06+ in the summer and Vredestein something-or-another winter tires in the snowy months on my GS. Neither tire has given me an issue with regards to the ackermann effect.

 

Most summer tires will outperform most all-seasons at wet traction. All-season is the jack of all trades so that you can run below freezing temperatures.

The category of tire is more telling than the treadwear in many cases.

UTQG is the treadwear rating system. It isn't perfect between brands, but gives a good idea. Generally the lower means more grip, but less mileage possible. These are generalizations.

Some rules of thumb with examples.
40 - 80: Generally these are r-compound tires and not always featuring tread at all. These are often non-DOT.
180-200: usually fall into Extreme Performance Summer (track day tires, poor grip even at ambient temperatures, most are not great at rain) ExtremeContact Force, Rival S, RE71RS, etc
300-360: Often called Max Performance Summer, amazing grip for street driving, excellent rain performance, not meant for freezing temperatures. Pilot 4S, ExtremeContact Sport
300-360: There are some called Ultra Performance Summer. Worst grip, but longer wear than the Max Performance Summer tires. Not for freezing temperatures. PS31, Firehawks
400+: This gets into the All-season category. They don't like being pushed on the street, but offer adequate grip levels in most conditions. ExtremeContact DWS, PA51

 

That description makes it sound like the UTQG rating system is definitive. Here is a copy of part of an article that was in a recent distribution from Grassroots Motorsports on UTQG ratings. Some motorsports organizations have rules on what type of tires can be used during competition with a typical rule stating street cars are required to run 200 Tread Wear tires. This was in an email that was blasted to members on January 9th."UTQG: Real or an Illusion?
Unlike DOT regulation compliance, which is a safety program, the Uniform Tire Quality Grading system began as a consumer information effort to better educate buyers purchasing tires for their specific purposes.

All tires are compromises, and none is best at everything. Want better traction? You’ll need to pay the price of durability and heat tolerance. Want a long-lasting tire that can be used in a wide range of temperatures? It probably won’t be the stickiest.

And tires that do lots of things really well are typically the most expensive to build, needing significant development time to get the combination dialed in perfectly. This is typical of OE fitments, though new car sales spread those costs across a larger volume than replacement tires.

The UTQG system was designed to make all of this simpler for tire buyers. Testing procedures were spelled out for each of the three grades commonly seen on street tire sidewalls: Traction, Temperature and Treadwear.

Traction is determined by skidding a tire across a calibrated wet surface and measuring the coefficient of sliding friction. Temperature is measured in a high-speed endurance test on a machine at ever-increasing velocities. The higher the speed it can tolerate, the better the rating.

Rating treadwear is more complicated, with subject tires fitted to a convoy of three vehicles, which drive a prescribed route alongside a single vehicle fitted with a standard control tire. These tests are typically conducted by third-party specialists under contract from tiremakers, and the test routes are in San Angelo, Texas.

Effective when originally rolled out in 1978, the test has become outdated as it encompasses only 7200 miles of street driving–a small fraction of the lifetime of typical modern tires. Mileage is compared to that of the control tire and then extrapolated to generate the final relative treadwear rating for the sidewall. But the process doesn’t stop there, as this number is a maximum. Tiremakers are allowed to de-rate a tire for marketing purposes. The general buying public often equates lower treadwear to a stickier, better-performing tire. We see this in online discussions all the time, and tiremakers are perfectly happy to participate in this charade.

The Emperor Has No Clothes
Imagine a city with speed limit signs and no police. Good neighbors will play nicely, but bad actors can have a field day. This is what has happened over time with UTQG treadwear ratings.

The UTQG system was a great idea when everyone participated fully, but the testing required is extensive and expensive–especially for smaller tiremakers and/or niche products. Further, NHTSA does no back-end compliance checking on Treadwear ratings for those same reasons–it’s expensive and logistically complex. Instead, it relies on manufacturers to do the right thing and either empirically test or use engineering data to properly project treadwear. But none of that is submitted to NHTSA for new tires, just the final ratings.

Large tiremakers, particularly those that are members of the industry’s trade organizations, cannot afford the negative publicity or liability to their entire line should irregularities come to light in any specific model. They have teams of lawyers in their risk management departments with large lists of requirements that their street tires must meet, well beyond what DOT or UTQG specifications dictate. In today’s worldwide economy, they also typically have to meet the more stringent requirements of other large markets, such as the EU.

Small, low-volume tiremakers can build whatever they want, stamp it 200tw and sell it in the U.S. There is no external oversight, either from peer review or NHTSA. They have nothing to lose and everything to gain–as in winning. Further, they typically don’t have the budget to empirically test or engineer a proper rating.

Small, motivated manufacturers can also pivot quickly. Running changes with new compounds or internal constructions can appear without notice, or possibly even show up only for single important events–say, for example, national championships.

We’ve been down this road before in the early R-comp days, and while it produces amazing technology and pace, it’s chaos to competitors who aren’t in the know. The rules might say that “special tires for special people” are not compliant, but how would you know? Same goes for running changes made outside of the rules season for eligibility."

Bill

 

I felt like my description said it is pretty generalized and that it's more of a guideline. Treadwear isn't consistent between brands, but within the same brand you'll have a good idea of what a 200 is vs the same brand's offering of a 360.

Everyone selling a 200 is basically using that number to signify you have a SCCA legal competition tires that is also DOT. If they pick a number lower or higher, that's extremely telling right now. Like the Trofeo RS being a 180.

 

Ackerman Steering has existed since before the automobile.
The website below explains how this works.
To remove this feature is to re-engineer the entire front end linkage.
To remove this feature is to cause excessive wear to your front tires.

https://flowracers.com/blog/ackerman...ring-geometry/

I'm guessing the "tire wear" the OP is looking to eliminate is related to Caster / Camber / Toe.
Caster is the ability of the car to return to straight ahead if you let the steering wheel return to center. The more caster, the stronger the return is.
Camber is the "knock knee" or "bow legged" vertical orientation of the tires. Negative Camber (knock knee) gives a good plant, but too much wears out the inside track of the tires.
Toe can be related to "Pigeon Toe" or "Duck Toe" track of the tires, in the lateral plane. Improper Toe will wear out a tire in a matter of a month if it's way out of spec.

Hope this helps.