PDA

View Full Version : who is running a camber kit?



chnaman
12-17-2006, 07:05 PM
K-mac seems to be what most are running. Is there a dealer in the US that has them? Does k-mac make a kit for the rear also?

derek2079
12-17-2006, 07:35 PM
i need to run a camber kit

fred2ka4
12-17-2006, 09:04 PM
I have a brand new set, but I have not installed them yet. Do you need a part # to help you search for the kit?
The kit I have is only for the front, and I don't know if they make one for the rear. I'll take some pics and post them for you.

chnaman
12-18-2006, 06:11 AM
I have a brand new set, but I have not installed them yet. Do you need a part # to help you search for the kit?
The kit I have is only for the front, and I don't know if they make one for the rear. I'll take some pics and post them for you.

that would help me alot, thanks. Where did you buy your kit?

fred2ka4
12-18-2006, 07:48 AM
that would help me alot, thanks. Where did you buy your kit?

I bought it from a friend who was in Europe and got it while he was there, but someone here has to carry the kit.

fred2ka4
12-18-2006, 08:31 AM
Here go the pics with the part #'s and even though it says bolt on, you have to remove your upper controll arm and have the old inserts pressed out and the K-mac pressed in. That's one of the reasons I haven't done it yet, but it will get done soon.

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j91/fred2ka4/Napa-Anniversarypics073.jpg


http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j91/fred2ka4/Napa-Anniversarypics074.jpg

Here is their website, and even though they don't show a US distributor, maybe you can order direct.


http://kmac.3x3design.com/cms/main_page.html

vincere
12-18-2006, 09:11 AM
You can order these through Shox.com for around $219 plus shipping. They need to be pressed into the front upper control arms. If your control arms have been replaced, you need to make sure that the bushings are the same diameter as stock or the camber bushings may not fit. I have a set pressed in to control arms that have about 5 months of use that I may be interested in selling. I'm thinking of going to adjustable control arms. PM me if you are interested in these. I will sell them for a lot less than new control arms and bushings cost and they are already installed. I can also send along the original bushings that were pressed out with 0 miles on them. The KMAC bushings work well but they are a little difficult to change easily due to where they are located. I can dial in or out 3 degrees of camber with these.

tonggi
12-18-2006, 09:32 AM
would this fir the B5 S4?

salz2135
12-18-2006, 12:39 PM
would this fir the B5 S4?

pretty sure they won't

onemoremile
12-18-2006, 12:53 PM
Another pic:
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b397/onemoremile/IMG_2203_small.jpg



I bought them but never got around to installing them. Sold them last year when I sold my coilovers.

fred2ka4
12-18-2006, 02:42 PM
Another pic:
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b397/onemoremile/IMG_2203_small.jpg



I bought them but never got around to installing them. Sold them last year when I sold my coilovers.


Yours says 95-01 and mine says 95-99, but they both have the same part # (140916 Audi/ Passat)

I know nothing changed, but I wonder why the application years are different?

chnaman
12-18-2006, 06:28 PM
You can order these through Shox.com for around $219 plus shipping. They need to be pressed into the front upper control arms. If your control arms have been replaced, you need to make sure that the bushings are the same diameter as stock or the camber bushings may not fit. I have a set pressed in to control arms that have about 5 months of use that I may be interested in selling. I'm thinking of going to adjustable control arms. PM me if you are interested in these. I will sell them for a lot less than new control arms and bushings cost and they are already installed. I can also send along the original bushings that were pressed out with 0 miles on them. The KMAC bushings work well but they are a little difficult to change easily due to where they are located. I can dial in or out 3 degrees of camber with these.


You have mail

chnaman
12-18-2006, 06:29 PM
thanks for the pics.

chnaman
12-18-2006, 06:31 PM
its odd that shox.com sells these for less than buying directly from k-mac[confused]

fred2ka4
12-18-2006, 08:20 PM
its odd that shox.com sells these for less than buying directly from k-mac[confused]

I paid $150 for mine, out the door....[up]

What does shox.com sell them for?

b5v6
12-18-2006, 11:47 PM
is shox.com a sponsor on audizine? Shox.com will put together a group buy. Passatworld almost had a gb for these, just not enough interest. I need them and would love to see a gb. It just may not be on AZ.

onemoremile
12-19-2006, 12:40 PM
Yours says 95-01 and mine says 95-99, but they both have the same part # (140916 Audi/ Passat)

I know nothing changed, but I wonder why the application years are different?


My bet is that mine were produced after 99, yours before. Who knows? It isn't like they go bad from sitting in the box. I've heard they work for the B6 too but I can't verify it.

offroader1006
12-19-2006, 01:10 PM
why wouldnt they work for the S4?

same suspension.

tonggi
12-19-2006, 01:19 PM
^^ thats what i was thinking also. Its a hell of a lot cheaper than those adjustable control arms that cost 600 to 800 bucks!

audisnapr
12-19-2006, 01:28 PM
^^ thats what i was thinking also. Its a hell of a lot cheaper than those adjustable control arms that cost 600 to 800 bucks!

it all depends on what kind of adjustability you are looking for. the adjustable control arms will provide more than + and - 3* and will also help in caster adjustment. I've heard both good and bad on the CPP controls arms from users. I've heard that they are quite noisy, ie: squeeky and can be clunky. Having said that, they were really intended for dedicated track cars where noisy control arms are not an issue.

b5v6
12-19-2006, 01:45 PM
who would be interested in a gb? How many of you are also members of passatworld? Shox is not a sponsor for AZ, so no gb here. I have no problem putting one together.

offroader1006
12-19-2006, 01:46 PM
i would

endlesswinterco
12-19-2006, 08:13 PM
i would too

tonggi
12-21-2006, 08:39 AM
it all depends on what kind of adjustability you are looking for. the adjustable control arms will provide more than + and - 3* and will also help in caster adjustment. I've heard both good and bad on the CPP controls arms from users. I've heard that they are quite noisy, ie: squeeky and can be clunky. Having said that, they were really intended for dedicated track cars where noisy control arms are not an issue.

I just want to control the camber on my car

The camber is at -2.1 and -1.7

Its eating tires liek its its business, but then again its so low. I don't care much for caster. Can this kit help the front at all?

b5v6
12-21-2006, 12:01 PM
this kit is what you want then. Join passatworld and we'll get this going.

tkarwin
12-21-2006, 12:17 PM
Our cars like to run a lot of negative camber and a lot of positive caster, if you have that ability. Typically, ~-1.5 degrees in front and then -1.0 in the rear. If you get rid of the inherent negative camber in the front suspension, your car will understeer more.

It is basically Tire Wear vs. Handling.

b5v6
12-21-2006, 10:52 PM
typical, as in what most experience with modified suspension. However, still out of specifications.

onemoremile
12-21-2006, 11:07 PM
The car doesn't really like to be lowered. At more than an inch below stock sport the handling suffers. I've tracked the car at various heights and the sweet spot is definitely higher than a lot of folks run on the street.

Toe is what really eats tires. Camber doesn't really add that much wear to the tires. More weight is on less area so it does increase wear a bit but not nearly as badly as the scrubbing effect of a bit of toe.

tonggi
12-22-2006, 07:59 AM
this kit is what you want then. Join passatworld and we'll get this going.

I will when I get home, passatworld is b locked at work. BOO


I want to make sure this will fit my S4. I have to redo my front suspension anyway, its clunking because the bushings went bad. Sow hen I redo it I might as well add the camber kit.

BTW where cna we get a rear camber kit? someone told me I can get one from Stasis but I can't find it anywhere.

b5v6
12-23-2006, 12:53 PM
Toe is what really eats tires. Camber doesn't really add that much wear to the tires. More weight is on less area so it does increase wear a bit but not nearly as badly as the scrubbing effect of a bit of toe.
This may be correct as in a compared ratio. However, camber does cause wear to focus on a specific spot. Besides, why bring up toe when the toe is not an issue even with lowering. My toe is within spec, but I still can't get full life out of a set of tires with rotation intervals set at every oil change. The inner edge is wearing far too fast, that the belts are showing while meat is still above the wear indicators on the outside portion, and I'm running high air pressure.

Why are so many trying to act like camber kits aren't needed on these cars? Those that need them know they need them. It isn't even really an argument. There is nothing else causing the inner tire wear, camber adjustments are necessary.

b5v6
12-23-2006, 12:56 PM
I see no reason why this will not fit the S4. However, I'll give k-mac's site a look in attempt to reference part numbers.
As far as stassis parts, you may have to call them. There are some parts they don't advertise. K-mac may also sell the rear kit. I know they make a rear kit for certain Audi's.

Let me know when you join Passatworld, so I can keep track of who is joining from here. It will help me determine if it is worth my effort to cross post. Also, if you can, take the time to pass the message to other Audi members, cause many won't see this.

I will when I get home, passatworld is b locked at work. BOO


I want to make sure this will fit my S4. I have to redo my front suspension anyway, its clunking because the bushings went bad. Sow hen I redo it I might as well add the camber kit.

BTW where cna we get a rear camber kit? someone told me I can get one from Stasis but I can't find it anywhere.

onemoremile
12-23-2006, 08:15 PM
This may be correct as in a compared ratio. However, camber does cause wear to focus on a specific spot. Besides, why bring up toe when the toe is not an issue even with lowering. My toe is within spec, but I still can't get full life out of a set of tires with rotation intervals set at every oil change. The inner edge is wearing far too fast, that the belts are showing while meat is still above the wear indicators on the outside portion, and I'm running high air pressure.

Why are so many trying to act like camber kits aren't needed on these cars? Those that need them know they need them. It isn't even really an argument. There is nothing else causing the inner tire wear, camber adjustments are necessary.


How does your pressed toe spec look? As the front wheel arc through it's travel the camber and toe both change. Every bump you hit could be scrubbing the rubber off your tires. Since only the inside edge is on the ground it takes all the wear. Figure that if you've got all the car's weight on half the tire any wear from toe is exaggerated considerably.

What these cars need is to not be lowered without sufficient analysis of the suspension design. This isn't a simple double wishbone system that just goes up and down. There is a lot more to it than that. Like I mentioned previously, I've run faster laps with the car at about a 1 finger gap than with it tucking. Turn in feel isn't quite as sharp but it is definitely faster around a race track.

brlukosk
12-23-2006, 09:28 PM
This spring I am going to have to buy a camber kit as well..

I have a tight 2 finger gap all around and my camber is at least -1.5 all around.

It is wearing my tires, but not bad enough to have to replace them.

Problem is, I think that my pressed toe spec could be all screwed up. I dont think that the VW dealership I get my alignments at can even do it. They are generally a bunch of idiots when it comes to asking any questions that specifically have to do with the alignment process.

Do you guys have better luck at audi dealers? (70 mile drive)

onemoremile
12-23-2006, 10:52 PM
I was told that the tool used to check pressed toe doesn't work on a car lowered much farther than stock sport.

I had this much camber:
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b397/onemoremile/camber.jpg

with it this low:
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b397/onemoremile/trackattack.jpg


I ran 15 minutes of a 20 minute session and checked the front left tire at the inner, middle, and outer edge with a pyrometer. The inside was substantially hotter than the outside. The outers were warm to the touch but not nearly as warm as they would have been if I had been using the whole contact patch. I checked the left tire since it is a clockwise track and the left front gets the most abuse. Although I didn't have a pyrometer handy I felt the tires with the suspension up an inch. They felt the same all the way across. Maybe autocrossers could use all that negative camber but it seems wasted on the track.

Everybody wants to assume that the closer the body is to the ground the better the handling. I've parked next to Porsche GT3 and GT3 Cup cars as well as Ferrari 355 and 360 Challenge Stradale. Know what? They were all higher than my car in that pic above and had more fender gap. They were all a hell of a lot quicker around the track too. Although a Porsche Carrera GT didn't run it did show up and I'd bet it had a finger and a half gap, maybe two.

b5v6
12-26-2006, 08:08 PM
I'm a little unsure of your intentions with this thread.

Are you suggesting those with wear issues switch their suspension back to stock/stock sport? If now, what exactly do you suggest those with wear issues do? Aside from that, I cannot understand what your intentions are through your posts. Granted, you are probably right about how well these cars handle, but the point in lowering is to alter the center of gravity. For example, the Porsches and Ferraris may not be as low as the significantly lowered Audis on here, but you can guarantee their center of gravity is lower and their stock spring rates are more than likely higher.

Aside from that, there are now 6 members who want in on passatworld, and I'm pretty sure none of them are from the audi forums. If you would, take the time to join, even if it is for the GB. It may be worth the while, especially since PW doesn't require sponsorship to offer GB.

onemoremile
12-27-2006, 09:17 AM
There is a delicate balance between low center of gravity and a poor camber and toe curve. Rather than put stock suspension back on I'd just set the coilovers to a more appropriate height. Looks are everything to a lot of people. Looking fast and being fast are often two different things. A lot of folks have their suspensions so low that it feels quick (sharp turn in and whatnot) but is probably actually slower around a course. Probably more dangerous on a bumpy road too due to the lack of suspension travel. The tires do have to stay on the ground to do their thing.

If folks are intent on keeping their cars that low then a camber kit should help tire wear. Although the toe curve may get even stranger. A four arm setup like ours doesn't let you change one thing without influencing everything else.

I had the race shop that helped set up my car for the track check this out. We found all sorts of problems with it too low. We installed the front suspension without the springs and raised and lowered the car with a jack under the front subframe. We did this to see what happens to camber and toe through the range of travel. I've lost the documentation (garage roof leaked right onto my files) but it was very interesting. I'll see if I can replicate this testing this summer.

Real race cars are much lower than street cars. They also have modified suspension pickup points to correct the suspension geometry. If you want to get our cars to handle you could try calling Dick Shine (yeah, I know, LOL) at Shine Racing Service. He did amazing things for understeer happy VW VR6 cars.
http://www.srsvw.com/infocenter/philosophy.html

b5v6
12-27-2006, 10:25 AM
not all are running adjustable coil overs.

My reason for wanting a camber kit is for wear, not for handling. There are a couple shops around here that may be willing to test the geometry of the suspension. I may have to enlist one after the camber kit is installed.

offroader1006
12-27-2006, 11:48 AM
yeah, i just want to be able to adjust it better than just shifting the subframe around.

on the subject of lower cars vs handling. it has more to do with the heighth of the COG in relation to the roll center off the suspension. the cars may have more of a wheel gap, but a much lower COG and higher roll center. so you really cant just compare pervceived ride height.

look at DTM cars, they are stupid low, but only because they have tubed out frames where the suspension is mounted higher. lower is better, but only when you can adjust your suspensions roll center to make use of the lowered COG.

onemoremile
12-27-2006, 12:47 PM
It is a fairly complicated science once you get into it. I had thought about using a Faro arm to measure the suspension and pickup points and model everything up in CAD but it was too much work. I just tried a few settings to find what worked best. The thing that really surprised me was that my findings went against the recommendations published by Stasis.

Just saying "lower is better" is just plain wrong. Balancing all of the pertinent specs is the way to go. The COG is very important but so is using all of the tire's potential. The only time you can really just go as low as the spring rates will allow is on a live axle car. They don't have camber or toe curves. They also tend to suck on a race track. If you look at any race series you'll see that they all have nearly identical power to weight ratios, braking capabilities, and tire sizes. The real difference between winning and losing is in the suspension tuning.

Just to give you guys an idea of what is involved:
http://www.mitchellsoftware.com/geo_2.htm

http://www.mitchellsoftware.com/Geo_2.gif

onemoremile
12-27-2006, 12:52 PM
One area that the camber kits will really help is in braking. The best braking is when the tires are at 0 camber with the suspension compressed to where it would be when experiencing brake dive. If an overlowered car has a lot of static negative camber then it will be even worse under braking.

One of the reasons that a live axle RWD car can launch so well is that it keeps it's tires flat to the ground. An independent rear "pulls" the outside edges of the tires up when it squats. The best braking and acceleration will always be with the most contact patch on the pavement.

I know most forum members with lowered cars only care about looking the part but it is still worth mentioning.

offroader1006
12-27-2006, 01:00 PM
Just saying "lower is better" is just plain wrong.

if your going to quote, quote the whole statement.

"lower is better, but only when you can adjust your suspensions roll center to make use of the lowered COG."


Balancing all of the pertinent specs is the way to go. The COG is very important but so is using all of the tire's potential. The only time you can really just go as low as the spring rates will allow is on a live axle car. They don't have camber or toe curves. They also tend to suck on a race track.

Thats basically what i said, just not as brief. You have to factor in roll center, as well as a few other angles.

onemoremile
12-27-2006, 02:34 PM
I didn't quote you. [:p]
Regardless we're on the same page. Another important term is roll couple. It is the relationship between COG and roll center.

Sport Compact Car had a great series call "Making It Stick" that described everything well and had very nice illustrations. Unfortunately only part 1 (sticky tires) is on their website. I found reposts of part 2 and 3 but they didn't have the illustrations. Without them it is pretty hard to understand.

Here is a great read for anyone interested in getting the most out of their car. Of course, by now we've gone way off topic...
http://www.miata.net/sport/Physics/