ScottBell Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Ok...that's your opinion and that's fine. I 100% prefer 15x8 +36 949s to my 15x7 +43 Volk TE37s. Actually 110%. Why? Width. I know the older 949 Racing 6UL wheels are 15x8 +40. Those didn't touch anything on my car when a friend borrowed it and swapped his wheels onto it...well the tires rubbed the body in the rear but that was because he had 225 Hoosiers and I had not yet rolled the body work lol. Plus, last I looked those were not available in 5x114.3 for the Hype_r. I'll concede that on the same car, same tire the 8" will be faster, just a personal preference of mine. Also, some series have a 7" limit and I already own 20 of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILIKETODRIVE Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Yeah...949 is really a Miata resource...so 4x100 only. And HC2 is limited to 7" width... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fixxxercask Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I have a 350Z and I have been taking 4 points for control arms for years. Yea it's a lot for just camber adjustment, but that is my only option up front and we all have to play by the same rules. The Z has no factory front camber adjustment. The arms I have still don't get me enough camber either. The ones I want are 3 more points because they have spherical bushings in it. So I would be taking 7 points just for front camber arms. So I feel your pain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearhead1186 Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 I have a 350Z and I have been taking 4 points for control arms for years. Yea it's a lot for just camber adjustment, but that is my only option up front and we all have to play by the same rules. The Z has no factory front camber adjustment. The arms I have still don't get me enough camber either. The ones I want are 3 more points because they have spherical bushings in it. So I would be taking 7 points just for front camber arms. So I feel your pain. Aren't spherical bushings already accounted for when you take the 4pts for control arms. E9. Replace, modify, or remove control arms (other than plates, shims, slots, or eccentric bolts/bushings for simple camber/caster adjustment only) or RWD/AWD rear trailing arms (may have spherical/metallic joint for the connection to the spindle/knuckle) +4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 the outboard end is free, the inboard end is not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearhead1186 Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 the outboard end is free, the inboard end is not Understood. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fixxxercask Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 Yes exactly. The ones I have (only spherical ones on the market that I know of) have spherical on both ends so I have to take three more points. So I am taking 7 points just to get the desired camber in the front. It's ridiculous but oh well. I deal with it and move on. Since I am taking those extra 3 points for spherical's, I went ahead and bought spherical bushings for the every suspension part on the car. May as well do them all if I am taking points for them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 Since I am taking those extra 3 points for spherical's, I went ahead and bought spherical bushings for the every suspension part on the car. May as well do them all if I am taking points for them... And that is exactly how you deal with that, if it's imperative that you have spherical bearings in the first place. Or, you could fabricate the attachment points to the chassis so that they used non-spherical and non-metallic bushings and save yourself +3. I was told by somebody recently that 350Zs gain negative camber in bump/roll, which eliminates the need for a lot of static negative camber. Is there any truth to that? If so, then it works to your advantage, since a Z would have little negative camber for braking and would gain negative camber in corners. If not, well, then maybe he was talking out of his a55. Here is a similar situation: There is an IRS toe link on 1999-2003 Mustang Cobras that only sets toe; it does not affect camber, caster, anti-squat, etc. These rear ends are apparently bad in bumpsteer. So, there are various bumpsteer kits for the Cobra IRS that are nearly identical to the front bumpsteer kits (which are +2); logic suggests that the same +2 would take care of the rear end as well. However, for the rear, it has been determined by the national director that the +2 does not apply back there; +4 for control arm and +3 for spherical bearing apply instead, no matter what the product engineers and I say. As such, I'll have to deal with the existing bumpsteer issue, as it's not worth +7. Frogs and warts, frogs and warts... Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockLobster Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 (edited) Double post. Edited August 12, 2014 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockLobster Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Rules are not to penalize double a-arm cars but to ideally equalize with strut cars. A double A-arm front suspension is so far superior to a strut car due to added camber through suspension travel that the strut cars were given some way of adding static camber to equalize this. Of course basically what ive learned about TT and PT is the answer always circles back to..."just sell it and buy a miata". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hufflepuff Posted August 21, 2014 Author Share Posted August 21, 2014 Rules are not to penalize double a-arm cars but to ideally equalize with strut cars. A double A-arm front suspension is so far superior to a strut car due to added camber through suspension travel that the strut cars were given some way of adding static camber to equalize this. Of course basically what ive learned about TT and PT is the answer always circles back to..."just sell it and buy a miata". or a HONDA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.