Camber adjustment.

Discuss mechanical problems here.
Forum rules
By using this site, you agree to our rules. Please see: Terms of Use
MoggyTech
Minor Legend
Posts: 1466
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 12:06 pm
Location: Livingston Scotland
MMOC Member: No

Post by MoggyTech »

Well a good nights sleep has settled the nerves. :D

Would like to add, that odd camber angles between front wheels on a Minor is not that uncommon, especially if the chassis legs have been replaced at some time. While not desirable, if tyre wear isn't uneven, and if the error is say only 1 degree I would leave well alone.

On my traveller, I have 0.5 degrees negative camber on the N/S wheel and .75 degress positive on the o/s wheel. Tyre wear is even across the treads, and the car drives in a straight line.

Perhaps what is even more important, is to check the eyebolt is square to the chassis leg, and not at an angle due to chassis leg corrosion.

Very valid point in previous post above, about packing eyebolt out, and ending up with a car that crabs if the wheel ends up the wrong distance from the center line of the car.

Before doing suspension geometry changes, I would advise doing a chassis datum point check on a level garage floor. Investigate the cause of any significant errors. A chassis rail that has been replaced with even a small angular error between center cross member and the front chassis rail, will give camber error.
[img]http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f264/Ghostrider117/sig.jpg[/img]
http://www.freewebs.com/moggytech
Kevin
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 7592
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Watford, Hertfordshire.
MMOC Member: No

Post by Kevin »

jommetry
Now thats my sort of word :D
Cheers

Kevin
Lovejoy 1968 Smoke Grey Traveller (gone to a new home after13 years)

Herts Branch Member
Moderator MMOC 44706
JimK
Minor Addict
Posts: 937
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:28 pm
Location: Salisbury/New Forest
MMOC Member: No

Post by JimK »

While not desirable, if tyre wear isn't uneven, and if the error is say only 1 degree I would leave well alone.
Tyre wear is uneven, with the outer shoulder of the offside tyre wearing very significantly more. The nearside tyre is wearing evenly across the tread, so I don't think it's hard cornering that's done it...
Before doing suspension geometry changes, I would advise doing a chassis datum point check on a level garage floor. Investigate the cause of any significant errors. A chassis rail that has been replaced with even a small angular error between center cross member and the front chassis rail, will give camber error.
As soon as I've found a flat surface I'll do that, but I have to reassemble the front of the car first. I can start now by measuring the chassis rail separation at various points along the car. If it changes toward the front I know where to look in more detail. I'll dig out my 4-foot level and hold that against the chassis, too.
Jim - New Forest, the Wiltshire bit
bmcecosse
Minor Maniac
Posts: 46561
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 11:24 pm
Location: ML9
MMOC Member: No

Post by bmcecosse »

The location points for the upper link damper are very strong - and unlikely to move unless the car has been in a pretty big shunt! So - any abnormal camber is v likely to be down to the chassis legs. I would say better to have the wheels both the same as far as camber - and not worry too much about small variation from centreline. MT - I would bring that +ve camber front wheel up to same as the -ve wheel - it's bound to be better!
Last edited by bmcecosse on Fri Jul 18, 2008 1:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ImageImage
Image
jaekl
Minor Addict
Posts: 652
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 7:40 pm
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
MMOC Member: No

Post by jaekl »

Sorry about the delay in responding to the castor discussion, but we are kinda slow over here. Assuming the tie rod can be used to adjust camber overlooks the suspension design. Extra strain would be put on the eybolt bushings and the torsion bar would have to curve. Under this assumption simple suspension travel would cause castor changes. The tie rod bushings take up these variation and the bushings couldn't support the strain required to pull the lower trunnion forward enough to change castor. It really doesn't need to be stated but if castor is out then there either was some structural damage or the chassis leg was not repaired properly.
bmcecosse
Minor Maniac
Posts: 46561
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 11:24 pm
Location: ML9
MMOC Member: No

Post by bmcecosse »

The lower suspension arm is mounted in bushings - the tiny angular movement for the small castor changes required is easily handled there. The torsion bar certainly doesn't 'curve'!
ImageImage
Image
MoggyTech
Minor Legend
Posts: 1466
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 12:06 pm
Location: Livingston Scotland
MMOC Member: No

Post by MoggyTech »

bmcecosse wrote: MT - I would bring that +ve camber front wheel up to same as the -ve wheel - it's bound to be better!
I've thought about it Roy but tyre wear is very even across each tread, and chassis rail alignment is spot on each side from center line. If I added a 5mm spacer to go from 1 degree Pos to 0.7 degree neg on the offside, that means the offside wheel would be an extra 5mm out from car centre.

One of my bumper main support bars than comes through the front panel, is slightly off to one side (Offside) and is out from center line. I suspect the car may have had front accident damage before it was restored in 1997.

That said, the damper cross member behind the engine is true, and to be honest, I cannot figure out why I have that Positive camber on the OS wheel.

The car drives straight as a die hands off wheel, so I am just currently following my own creda of, "If it aint busted don't fix it" :lol:
[img]http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f264/Ghostrider117/sig.jpg[/img]
http://www.freewebs.com/moggytech
bmcecosse
Minor Maniac
Posts: 46561
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 11:24 pm
Location: ML9
MMOC Member: No

Post by bmcecosse »

Mine too - "Si fractum non sit - noli id reficere". Used it for years. Well - if the tyre wear is ok maybe best left - but i doubt 5mm off centre line would be noticed! Is the car dead level both sides equal height from ground ? In the middle pic above it appears slightly down on the driver side (but maybe just the picture giving that effect) - and will obviously go down more when you sit in ! May be worth lifting that side a little until it sits level with driver on board -and then check the camber like that ?
ImageImage
Image
IslipMinor
Minor Legend
Posts: 2147
Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 9:10 pm
Location: Oxford, UK
MMOC Member: Yes

Post by IslipMinor »

The lower the front suspension, the more the lower wishbone needs to be spaced out, just to maintain the standard geometry. Mine are about 10mm out each side, which is the limit for the eye bolts that I have. This results in 0.5° -ve camber and nearly 1° more castor, which for me is a good thing as it gives improved 'turn in'. The steering is a bit heavy at zero speed parking, but probably not really, just compared to 'modern' power steering?

I haven't checked what the castor is with standard ride height (it hasn't been there for nearly 40 years!), so it could be more than standard in the first place.

Not sure why there should be a concern about increased track, other than the wheels should obviously be the same distance from the car centreline - but within what tolerance? The combination of the eye bolts being spaced out, Midget disc brake hubs and wider wheels, gives nearly 4 inches more track at the front, and nearly 3 inches at the back (no spacers or hub changes) and the stability at any speed and road surface is superb. Nothing upsets it, not even a cross wind.
Richard


bmcecosse
Minor Maniac
Posts: 46561
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 11:24 pm
Location: ML9
MMOC Member: No

Post by bmcecosse »

And - the wheels fill out the arches v nicely too!
ImageImage
Image
Post Reply