Mad Negative Camber. Why?

Mad Negative Camber. Why?

Author
Discussion

nicky.mattsson

Original Poster:

2,636 posts

199 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
Hi all

Having looked through loads of threads and also seen it on the road can anyone elighten me as to why some people - especially the VW boys run really mad negative camber on the rear?

Is it for handling?

Nick

Paul Drawmer

4,864 posts

266 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
You already know the answer:

The reason they run mad -ve camber is the same as the use of undersizes tyres on oversize rims.
The ONLY thing that matters is 'The Look'. Cars used a fashion accessories, were form wins over function every time.

Bourj

209 posts

196 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
VW Air cooled Beetles naturally have negative cambers at the rear when lowered.

SunderJimmy

3,238 posts

181 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
It looks fking dire, I think they were nurtured wrong because it's not natural wanting wonky-ass wheels.

pits

6,423 posts

189 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
Paul Drawmer said:
You already know the answer:

The reason they run mad -ve camber is the same as the use of undersizes tyres on oversize rims.
The ONLY thing that matters is 'The Look'. Cars used a fashion accessories, were form wins over function every time.
You have never lowered any car a significant amount then? Lower you get on normal cars the more camber you get, it happens with pretty much most cars not designed to be lowered that much.

Old dubs do it because they have the weight of the gearbox and engine pulling down on the suspension, swing axle dubs are especially bad for this, the later IRS get less camber but still quite a bit


Worst that really happens is your tyre wear is un even, however on severe camber you will destroy wheel bearings, they do not like that one bit.



As for the VW scene, yeah they do it alot, 2 of the type 3s I had both sat on the floor, lowering is ok on dubs, the only thing I dont like is the stretched tyres which look ghey and narrowed front beams on old dubs

triggersbroom

2,376 posts

203 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
BMW X5 has masses of negative camber too. AMG also give their cars this treatment.

nicky.mattsson

Original Poster:

2,636 posts

199 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
Paul Drawmer said:
You already know the answer:

The reason they run mad -ve camber is the same as the use of undersizes tyres on oversize rims.
The ONLY thing that matters is 'The Look'. Cars used a fashion accessories, were form wins over function every time.
So in a nutshell they its done for the same reason that the chav down the road has put 50inch wheels on his Saxo, it looks good (apparently)??????

DjSki

1,305 posts

194 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all


Pretty cool.....no?

Paul Drawmer

4,864 posts

266 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
pits said:
...
You have never lowered any car a significant amount then? Lower you get on normal cars the more camber you get, it happens with pretty much most cars not designed to be lowered that much.

Old dubs do it because they have the weight of the gearbox and engine pulling down on the suspension, swing axle dubs are especially bad for this, the later IRS get less camber but still quite a bit

Worst that really happens is your tyre wear is un even, however on severe camber you will destroy wheel bearings, they do not like that one bit.

As for the VW scene, yeah they do it alot, 2 of the type 3s I had both sat on the floor, lowering is ok on dubs, the only thing I dont like is the stretched tyres which look ghey and narrowed front beams on old dubs
Yes I have lowered cars, but only to reduce CofG and not for looks. When I have done that, I have adjusted the camber to make it correct, sometimes this means new parts to make it right again at the reduced ride height.

Yes swing axles do change more with differing ride heights. I'm not sure that the op was referring to the old VWs.

Worst that really happens is that you significantly reduce the contact patch, lowering grip. The is rather worse in dynamic terms than uneven tyre wear and premature failure of wheel bearings.

The OP mentioned 'Mad' -ve camber, so we are talking extremes here, not just designed in camber recovery in roll.

Paul Drawmer

4,864 posts

266 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
DjSki said:


Pretty cool.....no?
Not for me.
It's form over function; it won't do anything dynamically better than before it was fcensoredd about with.

Edited by Paul Drawmer on Sunday 29th November 09:55

cheddar

4,637 posts

173 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
DjSki said:


Pretty cool.....no?
Looks broken......no?

nicky.mattsson

Original Poster:

2,636 posts

199 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
I can kind of understand it on a Beetle, i think it looks ok, but what i cant get my head around is why other cars i see have done it. arlier on this year on my way into Santa Pod i saw a EK Civic with it, so i thught it might be something to do with handling.... obviously not.

Oilchange

8,421 posts

259 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
Chap I once knew ran a silly amount on an Esprit with 295 section tyres on the back, the insides wore so quickly, down to the threads that one of the tyres blew which nearly killed him when he ended up swapping ends whilst going round a corner.
He didn't know they were wearing so much on the insides as the outsides were practically untouched.
The mechanic should have gone to prison for setting his car up like that...

DjSki

1,305 posts

194 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
Each to their own lads and agreed that it is form over function. The work done to them probably affects their dymanics in a negative way but done well they look great.

Many people on here buy newer, lower powered and dynamically poorer cars than buying secondhand or older, higher powered models.....they are still enthusiasts though.....

pbirkett

18,047 posts

271 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
Dont see the point personally, but I wouldnt expect most PHers to see the point. However, the simple fact is, not everyone buys cars for the cross country pace. Some actually do buy for looks. Now to me, it doesnt exactly look good, but each to their own.

petrolsniffer

2,461 posts

173 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
looks stupid and eventually its dangerous





Yes that is a honda mpv with a bmw front...

OllieC

3,816 posts

213 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
The BTCC bmw's always fascinated me, crazy looking amounts of rear camber, but still race winners


J500ANT

3,101 posts

238 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
petrolsniffer said:
Near me they use Renault Ambulances for patient transport, they have a button that "collapses" the rear suspension for ease of loading, reminds me of ^^^

Buffalo

5,435 posts

253 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
nicky.mattsson said:
Is it for handling?

Nick
I ran nearly 3 degrees neg camber on my Race set up (road registered) MG for a while, unintentionally, but it was nonetheless set up correctly. It was not very pleasant, in most situations the handling suffered because the tyre contact was smaller - it certainly felt it. To handle well in the bends you had to be heavy handed with it to get the car to lean over onto the tyre patch. This is not sustainable driving for 9 out of 10 drives on public roads.

Having said that I once over-cooked it by accident and thought I was a gonna, but no, it canked over, sat down hard on the full tyre patch and I went round like I was on rails. I would have been astounded had I not been on my hands and knees praying! wink

Mr MoJo

4,698 posts

215 months

Sunday 29th November 2009
quotequote all
Bad.

Worse.

But I will confess to liking this, old Beetles somehow make it work IMO paperbag