6MT Coupes alignment specs
#1
05-21-2005, 12:19 PM
6MT Coupes alignment specs
I've done a search, lots of reading and this thread is just a needed confirmation from the suspension gurus.
Just had the Nismo S-tune suspension installed and went for the required alignment. Front camber and rear toe were a issue, of course. So I'm going to install the 350EVO front a-arms and the SPC toe bolts to help correct those two issues. I also believe I may need a set of rear caster and camber adjustment arms as well. Hello 350EVO ... I have a problem
What information I'm looking for is the correct alignment specs for the front and rear.
Factory service data specs:
Front Unladen (measurement in degrees)
Camber -1.25 min / +0.25 max / -0.50 Nominal
Caster 7.25 min / 8.75 max / 8.00 Nominal
Toe-in 0 inch min / 0.08 inch max / 0.04 inch Nominal
Total toe-in ???? and what is the inch measurement in degrees?
Rear unladen (measurement in degrees)
Camber -2.00 min / -1.00 max / -1.50 Nominal
Toe-in 0 inch min / 0.220 max / 0.110 Nominal
Total toe-in ??????
Thrust angle?????
I found some specs on the rear settings, in my search, which are:
Camber -1.50 degrees / Toe 0.14 degrees / Total toe 0.28 degrees / thrust angle 0.00 degrees
Can't seem to find the front ones, other than the service manual specs. But the alignment shops only show the toe measurements in degrees.
FYI my alignment specs as per the printout:
Specs are from ALLDATA web site, which most alignment shops use.
Primary Angles
Front right Caster Initial 8.65 / specs 7.00 to 8.50 / Final 8.52
Front left Caster Initial 8.63 / specs 7.00 to 8.50 / Final 8.52
Front right camber Initial -1.27 / specs -0.83 to 0.67 / Final -1.29
Front left camber Initial -1.20 / specs -0.83 to 0.67 / Final -1.22
Front right toe-in Initial -.013 / specs 0.00 to 0.08 / Final 0.08
Front left toe-in Initial -.003 / specs 0.00 to 0.08 / Final 0.04
Total toe-in Initial -.016 / spec 0.00 to 0.16 / Final 0.12
Rear right camber Initial -1.96 / spec -1.08 to -0.08 / Final -1.51
Rear left camber Initial -2.00 / spec -1.08 to -0.08 / Final -1.24
Rear right toe-in Initial 0.27 / spec 0.00 to 0.36 / Final 0.20
Rear left toe-in Initial 0.17 / spec 0.00 to 0.36 / Final 0.24
Total toe-in Initial 0.44 / spec 0.00 to 0.72 / Final 0.44
Thrust angle Initial -0.05 / no spec given / Final 0.02
There are some Secondary Angles reported but I have no idea what they mean. I need to do more research. They are SAI / Included angle / Setback / Track width Diff / Wheel Base Diff /
If anything to be learned from my experience is not to trust the specs most techs use but supply them with a desired spec sheet of your chosen specs. Granted I need to correct a few things before I go back for another alignment but next time I'll be a bit smarter about it.
In summary form this very long post is that I would like the correct specs for aligning the suspension on the G35 coupe
6MT and whether I may need the camber and trailing arms.
Plus a simple conversion for changing toe-in measurements to degrees, rather than inches or mm, would be appreciated.
Just had the Nismo S-tune suspension installed and went for the required alignment. Front camber and rear toe were a issue, of course. So I'm going to install the 350EVO front a-arms and the SPC toe bolts to help correct those two issues. I also believe I may need a set of rear caster and camber adjustment arms as well. Hello 350EVO ... I have a problem
What information I'm looking for is the correct alignment specs for the front and rear.
Factory service data specs:
Front Unladen (measurement in degrees)
Camber -1.25 min / +0.25 max / -0.50 Nominal
Caster 7.25 min / 8.75 max / 8.00 Nominal
Toe-in 0 inch min / 0.08 inch max / 0.04 inch Nominal
Total toe-in ???? and what is the inch measurement in degrees?
Rear unladen (measurement in degrees)
Camber -2.00 min / -1.00 max / -1.50 Nominal
Toe-in 0 inch min / 0.220 max / 0.110 Nominal
Total toe-in ??????
Thrust angle?????
I found some specs on the rear settings, in my search, which are:
Camber -1.50 degrees / Toe 0.14 degrees / Total toe 0.28 degrees / thrust angle 0.00 degrees
Can't seem to find the front ones, other than the service manual specs. But the alignment shops only show the toe measurements in degrees.
FYI my alignment specs as per the printout:
Specs are from ALLDATA web site, which most alignment shops use.
Primary Angles
Front right Caster Initial 8.65 / specs 7.00 to 8.50 / Final 8.52
Front left Caster Initial 8.63 / specs 7.00 to 8.50 / Final 8.52
Front right camber Initial -1.27 / specs -0.83 to 0.67 / Final -1.29
Front left camber Initial -1.20 / specs -0.83 to 0.67 / Final -1.22
Front right toe-in Initial -.013 / specs 0.00 to 0.08 / Final 0.08
Front left toe-in Initial -.003 / specs 0.00 to 0.08 / Final 0.04
Total toe-in Initial -.016 / spec 0.00 to 0.16 / Final 0.12
Rear right camber Initial -1.96 / spec -1.08 to -0.08 / Final -1.51
Rear left camber Initial -2.00 / spec -1.08 to -0.08 / Final -1.24
Rear right toe-in Initial 0.27 / spec 0.00 to 0.36 / Final 0.20
Rear left toe-in Initial 0.17 / spec 0.00 to 0.36 / Final 0.24
Total toe-in Initial 0.44 / spec 0.00 to 0.72 / Final 0.44
Thrust angle Initial -0.05 / no spec given / Final 0.02
There are some Secondary Angles reported but I have no idea what they mean. I need to do more research. They are SAI / Included angle / Setback / Track width Diff / Wheel Base Diff /
If anything to be learned from my experience is not to trust the specs most techs use but supply them with a desired spec sheet of your chosen specs. Granted I need to correct a few things before I go back for another alignment but next time I'll be a bit smarter about it.
In summary form this very long post is that I would like the correct specs for aligning the suspension on the G35 coupe
6MT and whether I may need the camber and trailing arms.
Plus a simple conversion for changing toe-in measurements to degrees, rather than inches or mm, would be appreciated.
#2
05-23-2005, 12:48 PM
Originally Posted by G35 6MT
I've done a search, lots of reading and this thread is just a needed confirmation from the suspension gurus.
What information I'm looking for is the correct alignment specs for the front and rear.
I found some specs on the rear settings, in my search, which are:
Camber -1.50 degrees / Toe 0.14 degrees / Total toe 0.28 degrees / thrust angle 0.00 degrees
Can't seem to find optimal values for the front settings, other than the service manual specs. But the alignment shops only show the toe measurements in degrees and I don't know the conversion from inch (mm) offset to degree setting.
In summary form this very long post is that I would like the correct specs for aligning the suspension on the G35 coupe 6MT and whether I may need the camber and trailing arms.
Plus a simple conversion for changing toe-in measurements to degrees, rather than inches or mm, would be appreciated.
What information I'm looking for is the correct alignment specs for the front and rear.
I found some specs on the rear settings, in my search, which are:
Camber -1.50 degrees / Toe 0.14 degrees / Total toe 0.28 degrees / thrust angle 0.00 degrees
Can't seem to find optimal values for the front settings, other than the service manual specs. But the alignment shops only show the toe measurements in degrees and I don't know the conversion from inch (mm) offset to degree setting.
In summary form this very long post is that I would like the correct specs for aligning the suspension on the G35 coupe 6MT and whether I may need the camber and trailing arms.
Plus a simple conversion for changing toe-in measurements to degrees, rather than inches or mm, would be appreciated.
FYI ..... I've installed the SPC camber bolts on the Toe and Camber on the passengers rear side and I'm waiting for delivery on the SPC arms and another set of camber bolts to finish the suspension project. These camber bolts can really make a difference in being able to bring the suspension into alignment. The range of adjustment is quite amazing and with the adjustable arms, it should be even better. Stay tuned for details
#3
05-23-2005, 02:00 PM
Optimal for...? tire wear? handling? appearance?
Your final measurements aren't too bad. You're getting a tad of thrust angle
because your front right is toe-in more than left, and the rear left is toe-in more
than your right. not bad though.
Your front camber looks good, your rear is a tad uneven, but not too bad.
Not sure how to convert inches into degrees. Most alignment shops in my area
run degrees so we don't have to specify which wheel size, etc. and just more
universal.
Your final measurements aren't too bad. You're getting a tad of thrust angle
because your front right is toe-in more than left, and the rear left is toe-in more
than your right. not bad though.
Your front camber looks good, your rear is a tad uneven, but not too bad.
Not sure how to convert inches into degrees. Most alignment shops in my area
run degrees so we don't have to specify which wheel size, etc. and just more
universal.
#4
05-23-2005, 04:06 PM
Originally Posted by kenchan
Optimal for...? tire wear? handling? appearance?
Your final measurements aren't too bad. You're getting a tad of thrust angle
because your front right is toe-in more than left, and the rear left is toe-in more than your right. not bad though.
Your front camber looks good, your rear is a tad uneven, but not too bad.
Not sure how to convert inches into degrees. Most alignment shops in my area run degrees so we don't have to specify which wheel size, etc. and just more universal.
Your final measurements aren't too bad. You're getting a tad of thrust angle
because your front right is toe-in more than left, and the rear left is toe-in more than your right. not bad though.
Your front camber looks good, your rear is a tad uneven, but not too bad.
Not sure how to convert inches into degrees. Most alignment shops in my area run degrees so we don't have to specify which wheel size, etc. and just more universal.
Your right I should be more specific on what I'm looking for.
I want it all?
I'm more interested in maximizing tire wear with some impact on handling but don't want to give up totally on handling either. I found the factory specs were pretty nice to optimal(for the street), if the tire wear on the factory originals are a good indication. So far the factory specs are the best alignmet specs I've seen, except for the toe-in specs listed in terms of inches (mm). I just figured/hoped that with the wider tires installed on the car, that a more optimal suspension alignment configuration was available.
Tracking the car would require more camber to help in performance and, of course, tire wear is not such a high priority. With the EVO front suspension arms , I hope the track/street adjustments will be able to be done with ease.
Thanks for your reply ..
#5
05-23-2005, 05:54 PM
no prob. 
you want it all. hahahaha.
but you're camber setting on the front is pretty good. most people on coupe are
running -1.8 to -2 on lowered setups... Im running -1.8 and it's wearing flat. The
toe-in (not sure how many degrees that is on yours) is wat kills tires. but it
doesn't seem like you have too much toe-in so it looks like a good compromise of
wear and performance to me.
you want it all. hahahaha. but you're camber setting on the front is pretty good. most people on coupe are
running -1.8 to -2 on lowered setups... Im running -1.8 and it's wearing flat. The
toe-in (not sure how many degrees that is on yours) is wat kills tires. but it
doesn't seem like you have too much toe-in so it looks like a good compromise of
wear and performance to me.
#6
05-24-2005, 12:11 PM
Originally Posted by kenchan
no prob. you want it all. hahahaha.
but you're camber setting on the front is pretty good. most people on coupe are
running -1.8 to -2 on lowered setups... Im running -1.8 and it's wearing flat. The
toe-in (not sure how many degrees that is on yours) is wat kills tires. but it
doesn't seem like you have too much toe-in so it looks like a good compromise of
wear and performance to me.
you want it all. hahahaha. but you're camber setting on the front is pretty good. most people on coupe are
running -1.8 to -2 on lowered setups... Im running -1.8 and it's wearing flat. The
toe-in (not sure how many degrees that is on yours) is wat kills tires. but it
doesn't seem like you have too much toe-in so it looks like a good compromise of
wear and performance to me.
I would almost agree but I would like to minimize tire wear for everyday driving, with the occasional spirited driving, and be able to adjust the camber for track use. If I ever decide to track that is. Using the service manual specs that would mean a camber of -0.50 in the front and -1.50 in the rear. Since the Nismo suspension kit moves the over/understeer 18 % to the rear, it makes more sense to have more camber there.
Toe-in setting looks pretty good in the rear and the front toe-in could be improved. The right side is at max toe setting (0.08) and the left is at nominal (0.04).
What I've decided to do is install the SPC camber bolt kits for the toe and camber and SPC adjustment arms, which are in transit. I will be installing my set of EVO front camber arms while waiting for the SPC delivery. I have one side of the toe and camber SPC bolts installed in the car, presently, and I am impressed with the range of adjustments. Also, with the adjustment arms installed in the rear, it is my believe that I should be able to install any lowering kit, within reason, and still be able to align it properly. Plus the added bonus of being able to change the camber for a track session.
The specs I may consider using are the factory settings for a 350Z, keeping in mind of the tire scrubbing issues with earlier 350Z's. Makes me wonder if it was the alignment specs causing part of this issue. Once I find them, I'll have to compare them with the G35's specs and make a decsion.
More to follow.
#7
05-29-2005, 03:46 PM
In my research I believe I've found the ideal compromise for alignment settings that will minimize inside tire wear and still offer factory handling. I've combined the alignment specs for the G35 and the 350Z, done some reading and applied some knowledge to theorize the alignment setting, I wish to use with larger and wider tires.
Feel free and I encourage to give feedback. The whole point is to make it work for everyone.
Camber kits are definitely in order to make this work with any kind of spring drop. Expect to pay a lot for the tech to spend extra time to meet the specification allowable differences. They are extremely tight and will be difficult to achieve. But worth every penny spent after it's done.
******disclaimer*******
I haven't installed my camber kits yet and have yet to inquire on the cost of a wheel alignment. For a spec this tight, I'd expect to have the alignment done at a BMW or Porsche dealer and pay accordingly. When I install my camber kits, I'll check the range of adjustment and see if these numbers are achievable.
Stay tuned
Alignment Specs
Rear:
Camber
Minimum -1.50 deg
Nominal -1.25 deg
Maximum -1.00 deg
*0.050 deg max allowable difference between left/right*
Total toe-in Total toe-in distance A-B
Minimum + 0.040 deg (1.5 mm)
Nominal + 0.051 deg (1.9 mm)
Maximum + 0.067 deg (2.5 mm)
* max allowable difference between left/right 0.007 deg (0.25 mm)*
Front:
Camber
Minimum -0.75 deg
Nominal -0.50 deg
Maximum -0.25 deg
* max allowable difference between left/right 0.050 deg*
Total Toe-in Total toe-in distance A-B
Minimum 0.000 deg (0mm)
Nominal 0.028 deg (1 mm)
Maximum 0.055 deg (2 mm)
* max allowable difference between left/right 0.007 deg (0.25 mm)*
Castor is not adjustable and should be reported as 7.25 deg to 8.75 deg with a nominal of 8.00 deg.
Feel free and I encourage to give feedback. The whole point is to make it work for everyone.
Camber kits are definitely in order to make this work with any kind of spring drop. Expect to pay a lot for the tech to spend extra time to meet the specification allowable differences. They are extremely tight and will be difficult to achieve. But worth every penny spent after it's done.
******disclaimer*******
I haven't installed my camber kits yet and have yet to inquire on the cost of a wheel alignment. For a spec this tight, I'd expect to have the alignment done at a BMW or Porsche dealer and pay accordingly. When I install my camber kits, I'll check the range of adjustment and see if these numbers are achievable.
Stay tuned
Alignment Specs
Rear:
Camber
Minimum -1.50 deg
Nominal -1.25 deg
Maximum -1.00 deg
*0.050 deg max allowable difference between left/right*
Total toe-in Total toe-in distance A-B
Minimum + 0.040 deg (1.5 mm)
Nominal + 0.051 deg (1.9 mm)
Maximum + 0.067 deg (2.5 mm)
* max allowable difference between left/right 0.007 deg (0.25 mm)*
Front:
Camber
Minimum -0.75 deg
Nominal -0.50 deg
Maximum -0.25 deg
* max allowable difference between left/right 0.050 deg*
Total Toe-in Total toe-in distance A-B
Minimum 0.000 deg (0mm)
Nominal 0.028 deg (1 mm)
Maximum 0.055 deg (2 mm)
* max allowable difference between left/right 0.007 deg (0.25 mm)*
Castor is not adjustable and should be reported as 7.25 deg to 8.75 deg with a nominal of 8.00 deg.
Trending Topics
#9
05-29-2005, 11:24 PM
#10
05-30-2005, 12:36 AM
From my experience it looks something like this running lowering
springs that are tad stiffer than stock + aftermarket dampers
set at a streetable setting.
Front: Total 0.08 to 0.10 (degrees)
Rear: Total 0.28 to 0.30 (degrees)
Ive seen some people running the rear down in the 0.22
range, but not sure how much it degrages straightline stability.
I was feeling a wee tad bit of wandering at 0.24 on rear S-Techs
for coupe so i switched out the rear springs to Prokits that are
much higher rate when compressed and gave it tad more
toe-in to 0.30. The wandering was dramatically reduced.
Then added the D-specs and played around with the setting
until I rid the wandering completely while getting a nice comfy
ride.
If you run a stiff coilover setting you can probably reduce
the toe-in from the above setting since the sus arms will not
travel as far...but not sure if one would want to compromise
performance on a performance setup just to save the tires.
springs that are tad stiffer than stock + aftermarket dampers
set at a streetable setting.
Front: Total 0.08 to 0.10 (degrees)
Rear: Total 0.28 to 0.30 (degrees)
Ive seen some people running the rear down in the 0.22
range, but not sure how much it degrages straightline stability.
I was feeling a wee tad bit of wandering at 0.24 on rear S-Techs
for coupe so i switched out the rear springs to Prokits that are
much higher rate when compressed and gave it tad more
toe-in to 0.30. The wandering was dramatically reduced.
Then added the D-specs and played around with the setting
until I rid the wandering completely while getting a nice comfy
ride.
If you run a stiff coilover setting you can probably reduce
the toe-in from the above setting since the sus arms will not
travel as far...but not sure if one would want to compromise
performance on a performance setup just to save the tires.
#11
05-30-2005, 02:31 PM
Originally Posted by kenchan
From my experience it looks something like this running lowering
springs that are tad stiffer than stock + aftermarket dampers
set at a streetable setting.
Front: Total 0.08 to 0.10 (degrees)
Rear: Total 0.28 to 0.30 (degrees)
Ive seen some people running the rear down in the 0.22
range, but not sure how much it degrages straightline stability.
I was feeling a wee tad bit of wandering at 0.24 on rear S-Techs
for coupe so i switched out the rear springs to Prokits that are
much higher rate when compressed and gave it tad more
toe-in to 0.30. The wandering was dramatically reduced.
Then added the D-specs and played around with the setting
until I rid the wandering completely while getting a nice comfy
ride.
If you run a stiff coilover setting you can probably reduce
the toe-in from the above setting since the sus arms will not
travel as far...but not sure if one would want to compromise
performance on a performance setup just to save the tires.
springs that are tad stiffer than stock + aftermarket dampers
set at a streetable setting.
Front: Total 0.08 to 0.10 (degrees)
Rear: Total 0.28 to 0.30 (degrees)
Ive seen some people running the rear down in the 0.22
range, but not sure how much it degrages straightline stability.
I was feeling a wee tad bit of wandering at 0.24 on rear S-Techs
for coupe so i switched out the rear springs to Prokits that are
much higher rate when compressed and gave it tad more
toe-in to 0.30. The wandering was dramatically reduced.
Then added the D-specs and played around with the setting
until I rid the wandering completely while getting a nice comfy
ride.
If you run a stiff coilover setting you can probably reduce
the toe-in from the above setting since the sus arms will not
travel as far...but not sure if one would want to compromise
performance on a performance setup just to save the tires.
But for most part-time warriors that only occasionally enjoy spirited corner driving style, I believe my alignment suggestions would be best starting point for good tire wear and drivability.
The Pilot Sports generate significant levels of lateral force, even at very small slip angles. Thus a large toe-in or toe-out settings can have big effects. A good starting place is near zero toe or minimum factory spec value for toe-in at the front. The rear axle, moderate toe-in(usually the minimum factory spec for toe-in) is a good place to start.
With that being said, one must always remember that during cornering the suspension flexes and the rear toe-in will change. If the rear toe-in goes positive during cornering, their is risk of losing some control. Most manufactures will provide more than enough toe-in to account for that and maintain a healthy toe-in spec. (minimize wandering, as you describe). With the larger Pilot Sports I believe their is enough adhesion to maintain a smaller, but within factory specs, rear toe-in. The G35 coupe specs are from 0.00 deg to a max of 0.16 deg(A-B=5.6mm), whereas the 350Z spec is 0.00 deg to 0.07 deg(A-B=2.7mm). I decided to use the 350Z spec for rear toe-in, with the result of having less oversteer from the toe-in. (I'm seeking a more neutral balance alignment)
Other tires, such as the SO3, as you have, may require more/less toe-in and more/less camber. The important point to remember is that these suggested specs are no more than a starting point and as kenchan has stated, adjust the settings to your tire selection, and feedback in your driving style. Eventually you'll find the correct alignment specs for you and your car.
#12
05-30-2005, 10:55 PM
#13
06-26-2005, 09:51 AM
The wrenches have been put away and the scratched hands have healed. The suspension is in and has been aligned. The car handles like a dream and should only have minor inside tire wear from the camber.
The specs I used are:
Front
Camber
Minimum: -0.75 degree
Nominal: - 0.50 degree
Maximum: -0.25 degree
Toe-in
Minimum: 0.0 mm
Nominal: 1.0 mm
Maximum: 2.0 mm
For my tires and rims
0.00 degree
0.03 degree
0.06 degree
Rear
Camber
Minimum: -1.75 degree
Nominal: -1.50 degree
Maximum: -1.25 degree
Toe-in
Minimum: 1.5 mm
Nominal: 2.0 mm
Maximum: 2.5 mm
For my tires and rims
0.04 degree
0.05 degree
0.07 degree
This spec has provided me a well balanced car that corners well at high speeds and should provide excellent inside tire wear characteristics. Over time I'll be measuring the wear on the tires and monitoring for tires for feathering. The downside is that the alignment was not corrected for road crown and the car will wander a bit on uneven road surfaces.
Updates to follow
The specs I used are:
Front
Camber
Minimum: -0.75 degree
Nominal: - 0.50 degree
Maximum: -0.25 degree
Toe-in
Minimum: 0.0 mm
Nominal: 1.0 mm
Maximum: 2.0 mm
For my tires and rims
0.00 degree
0.03 degree
0.06 degree
Rear
Camber
Minimum: -1.75 degree
Nominal: -1.50 degree
Maximum: -1.25 degree
Toe-in
Minimum: 1.5 mm
Nominal: 2.0 mm
Maximum: 2.5 mm
For my tires and rims
0.04 degree
0.05 degree
0.07 degree
This spec has provided me a well balanced car that corners well at high speeds and should provide excellent inside tire wear characteristics. Over time I'll be measuring the wear on the tires and monitoring for tires for feathering. The downside is that the alignment was not corrected for road crown and the car will wander a bit on uneven road surfaces.
Updates to follow
#15
10-13-2005, 11:54 AM
Originally Posted by roneski
Very handy post. Thanks.
Maybe we should ask Godzilla to sticky? It took me awhile to find it again.
As a update the tire wear has been nominal and with only 5000 miles and a quick check there is NO inside wear. The car will be parked shortly for the winter and a closer look at the tires will be done.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
