Hey fellas - after 7 months in the garage for a complete performance overhaul + subframe restoration, I can't belive I'm saying this, but all that's left is a tune and alignment.

Regarding the latter, I've got IE fixed plates up front and am bring the car down1.25" on coilovers. This is a street car/ daily driver that might see occational track use, and I don't want to eat through tires going too aggressive. That said, I'm curious what folks recommend for rear camber? Thanks.

 

This is the before and after on our 2005 r53 - this runs 215/45/17 Pilot 4S on web spoke rims. My daughter says that it drives very well ( 75 - 85 Cali freeway life )

 

I meant to check my last alignment sheet when I was out earlier today, but I forgot. My recollection is that I'm running -1.5° camber at the back. Toe will be more critical for tire wear unless you get crazy with the camber, which you don't want to since the car is pretty understeery from the factory.

This is with adjustable plates up front at (I think?) ~ -1.7° camber and the smaller of the two Hotchkis rear sway bars in the middle position. I'm also running the dinky sport suspension front sway bar and Swift springs on Koni yellows. If I actually remember the next time I'm out at my car, I'll update this if it's wrong. Also, grain of salt on handling at the very limits since I don't track this car, but it's better balanced than it ever was when it was stock.

 

My setup is quite close to stock. Koni SRT shock/struts ( orange ). Power flex control arm bushings. And Pilot S4’s

 

Thanks all. And @deepgrey I'm running a Whiteline rear swaybar, on the middle setting as well. I'll go -1.5 on the back and unless there's a compelling reason, stick with the OEM specs for toe.

 

I would tell the alignment shop to match whatever you get in the front. If the front is -1.7°, then go -1.7° in the back. Since the rear will gain camber under compression faster than the front, as the car squats, it will get more stable.

 

Well, my memory was - somewhat predictably - slightly wrong. I’m at -1.4° rear camber.

 

Is everything completed now?
​​​​​​​Thanks for sharing it, you made my day.

 

Unfortunately no. When I took it to the shop, one of the adjustable rear control arms was bound and wouldn't adjust - I'm waiting for a replacement. Thankfully it was under warranty - can't wait to get driving!

Here are the specs I will go with. Anyone that feels this isn't optimal, please weigh in!

Front camber : - 1.25 IE fixed plates plus OEM = approx -1.6 degrees?
Front toe: 1/16"
Front caster: factory specs

Rear camber: -1.4
Rear toe: 0
Rear caster: factory specs

 

If you are going to daily the car, I would match the tow in on the rear axel to whatever they give you on the front. Factory specs call for almost twice as much toe in on the rear compared to the front. Zero toe will make the rear unstable, and it will be a handful on the road.

 

Thanks and good to know. Yet I've read on the forums added tow, at least with my slightly lowered setup, means uneven and excessive tire wear. Darn, this is more complicated than I thought...

 

It doesn't have to be complicated, you just have to know your use case. OEM rear camber is almost -2°. So if you are near that, go for stock toe numbers and tire wear should be reasonable.

 

Hi @OutlandishnessDue , here's the alignment specs for my kid's MINI R53 with Hotchkis lowering springs and adjustable rear control arms. Sits about .75 / 19mm lower than stock. The anomaly on the right front corner is due to a mushroomed strut tower. We banged it back down a little more so next time we align it, the specs will be closer to the left side.

Before the alignment, the previous set of tires wore out in less than 10K. That front toe setting killed the tires quick. Now with over 12K post alignment, tire wear is down to 5/32 on Conti DWS06 plus (205/45-17)

 

@Zsm much obliged!