Red, yes I you did interpret me correctly. I would like -.75 I realize i might loose some handling but at least my tires will wear better. When my car was stock at -1.0 I still went bald on the inside first. But i do agree I think -1.2 to about -1.5 is optimal for handling.

 

The problem at stock height with 350z/g35's was attributed to too much toe in, not too much negative camber. You are targeting the wrong problem IMO

 

redlude is correct. It's toe that kills your tires, not camber. However, it's important to understand that when you lower your car you not only gain negative camber you also gain toe out, and it's the toe out that's the problem when it comes to tire wear. You can run well over 2 degrees of negative camber without accelerated tire wear if you have the toe settings corrected. You want no more than 1/8th of an inch of total toe in/out on. I like a bit of toe out up front for quicker turn-in response and a bit of toe in on the rear for improved high speed stability, plus I run 2.5 degrees of negative camber up front and 2 degrees negative out back, since I take my G to the track regularly. I have no tire wear issues to speak of.

 

Modified Dave and Redlude, what are your thoughts of Stillen's front camber adjusters?... I plus 2 sized my wheels and now the front camber is a little too far negative (primarily on passenger side)... I don’t remember the specs - I think Stillen only has + .25 correction but most don’t have more than that anyway... I have read great things about SPL and 350 Evo... can’t find much about Stillen.

TIA

 

OCG35, do you have any pics of your current setup so we can see how much camber you've got? Have you had an alignment done? If so, what's your alignment set at?

I have the Stillen arms on my G and they seem very solid. But you're right that they're only designed to add 0.25 degrees of camber front stock. Most of their adjustability is in the negative direction, meaning they're designed with dialing in negative camber for the track. But they're still very streetable IMO, as long as you're not lowering your car too aggressively. My car is reasonably low for a daily driver, and I'm running -2.5 degrees of front camber on both sides. With the minimal toe out I'm running up front, the car drives perfectly on the street and there's no tire wear beyond normal, but is ready to attack the track on weekends. For me, it's the perfect setup.

However, if you're more concerned about being able to add camber because your car is super low and you need to pull some camber out, then the Stillen arms probably aren't the best way to go.

 

The pics I have don’t show the negative camber too much… its not all that far neg anyway, I think its -1.75 or something, I’d have to look at the sheet which isn’t with me right now… the car is low, but not slammed… these are the only pics I have access to right now:

Passenger is a bit worse than driver side



this is the only other pic I have that is remotely useful as reference... rears are good - you can kinda see front neg camber a little in this pic:

 

Yeah, you can see how the car has more front camber than rear. The rears look pretty much stock in terms of camber, which is I assume what you're aiming for.

Looks like whatever method you've lowered the ride height with has lowered the front a bit more than the rear, which is part of why you have more front camber than rear. The other reason is that the front double wishbone suspension gains more negative camber from lowering than the rear multi-link setup does.

From a performance standpoint, having more front camber than rear is quite often the correct way to set a car up. You want the front tires to have a lot of grip in the turns, which negative camber helps with, but the rears you want a bit more upright so they can put the power down in a straight line by using the full contact patch.

Anyway, all that to say, you'll either have to raise the ride height up front (which will add positive camber) or find an upper control arm with more positive camber adjustment than the Stillen arms provide, since I think you have at least 0.5 degrees more negative camber up front than you do out back.

 

mpapers: cwylie is also interested in buying my spacers. I have been PMing him about it.. i just now realized it was not you PMing me (I didnt match up the names)... so i kinda feel bad now.

I don't want to be unfair to anyone, I am willing to give a good price to either of you, but maybe you should PM me with an offer and we can just go from there?

Sorry about the confusion

-Mike

 

hey sorry for bumping this old thread but i was thinking of picking up an ichiba front camber kit.

im currently going to be dropped on 350z h techs but in the future i plan on going to coilovers. my setup will be oem 19s with 25 spacers all around if that matters, i dont think it does though...

 

I ended up with SPL a-arms - they are very good quality and highly adjustable. Recommended.

 

custo front arms ftw

 

cusco=ichiba

 

oh yah CUSCO lol



but really cusco is the same ichiba?

 

same design at leasta, most likely sourced from same plant since ichiba has a tendency to just relabel products from other manufacturers with their name at a lower price. The rear camber kits are just relabeled spc arms with red powdercoating

 

i thought spc wus by eibach or something like that