Post your alignment specs.

Sitting on Bilstein PSS10 w/ Vorshlag camber plates
Turner aluminum/derlin subframe and diff bushings
powerflex lower inner bushings in the rear

Richbot wrote

Setup:

'08 with ZCP springs
Dinan front fixed camber plates

-2.2 degrees front, -1.8 rear, 0 toe front, -1/16" rear

I like how your setup is so simple and have sent you a PM.

I installed Swift lowering springs and e46 m3 zcp wheels w/mss in May (tires were almost new). I had the car realigned immediately after. Today I noticed that I have very bad inside tread wear on my rear passenger tire. I also noticed that the front passenger is also starting to wear on the inside edge. I stopped by the shop that completed the alignment and they said I most likely hit a pothole that threw the alignment out. I'm skeptical of that.

Based on the results below, would these alignment specs cause edge wear like this? I've owned a few e46 m3s and I'm familiar with camber wear from back rtabs but I was unaware that e92 suffer from a similar problem. All the suspension parts are tight even though I'm at ~90k.

I'm gonna have this shop check the alignment again but I don't want to put on new tires and go through the same thing in 3 months.

Here's before and after. They weren't a performance shop, so no camber adjustments on the coil overs. I'm very low but it's strange that the rear left camber is at -3.4*. Assuming that negative camber is contributing to my car pulling slightly to the left on the road. Thoughts?

Suspension:
B&G Lowering Springs

Wheels: AG M359
19x10 +25 Squared

Tires:
275/30/19 Squared

New member here on the forums. I'm taking my car in this week to be realigned and I was thinking about doing -1.5 degrees of camber all the way around and maybe .05 degrees of toe in for the rear. Any input on this setup? The car feels pretty loose in the rear even though I put a new set of Michelin PSS on the rear.

Currently running:
KW Sleeves (1.2in drop in the front and 1.0in in the rear) with 12mm MS spacers all around. Wheels and tires are OEM ZCP specs.

Thanks for the help!

patrona55 wrote

New member here on the forums. I'm taking my car in this week to be realigned and I was thinking about doing -1.5 degrees of camber all the way around and maybe .05 degrees of toe in for the rear. Any input on this setup? The car feels pretty loose in the rear even though I put a new set of Michelin PSS on the rear.

Currently running:
KW Sleeves (1.2in drop in the front and 1.0in in the rear) with 12mm MS spacers all around. Wheels and tires are OEM ZCP specs.

Thanks for the help!

Bad idea in my opinion. You need .10 degrees of toe on each side on the rear for stability under braking and acceleration. Less than that, especially a total toe of 0.05 degrees, and you'll have instability.

You can run zero toe up front if you feel the need to run a lower toe setting somewhere on the car. It'll be more darty at the front, but it's a whole lot easier to control a front end that's darty than the rear. Also, set your camber up front at least 1/2 degree more (negative) than the rear.

If you aren't tracking the car, just run it in the stock alignment range.

admranger wrote

Bad idea in my opinion. You need .10 degrees of toe on each side on the rear for stability under braking and acceleration. Less than that, especially a total toe of 0.05 degrees, and you'll have instability.

You can run zero toe up front if you feel the need to run a lower toe setting somewhere on the car. It'll be more darty at the front, but it's a whole lot easier to control a front end that's darty than the rear. Also, set your camber up front at least 1/2 degree more (negative) than the rear.

If you aren't tracking the car, just run it in the stock alignment range.

Thanks for the feedback! Good thing I posted the specs before I took the car in.

I had the guide pins pulled on my E92 ZCP today and the alignment came out like this:

F Camber -1.5/-1.5
Caster 7.0/6.9
Toe -0.05/-0.05

R Camber -1.9/-1.9
Toe 0.11/0.11

The car is driven a couple times a week and tracked five or six times a year. If I went to a camber plate system to get -2.0 camber up front would it make a significant difference at the track? Are there any camber plates on the market that don't raise ride height?

I’m on 255/35/19 and 275/35/19 AD08R tires.

Stock competition pack (before/after).

but with incorrect ballast


And then with correct ballast




Aside from less good alignment on first attempt, the difference between after on the first photo and before on the second is the impact of not ballasting the seats and boot correctly.
Biggest impact interestingly is front toe falls closer to spec with correct ballast. And even without pulling pins.
(Wonder how many pull pins and align without correct ballast)

That said each step was incrementally better to drive. But now with hindsight the after is night and day compared to before any calibration
Alignment.

Getting ready to pull my pins and get an alignment soon. ZCP E90, stock suspension, 255/275 PS4S. The car is a weekend/canyon toy; no daily driving/commute but also no tracking. I'm looking for a fun and spirited yet planted and stable setup that won't prematurely wear the tires.

I'm thinking this:

-1.8* front camber (or max/equal)
1/32" front total toe-in [OR zero toe]
Max/factory caster (not sure if there's any adjustment here with factory hardware; around 6.5-7*)
-1.4* rear camber (or .3-.5* less negative camber than the front)
1/16" rear total toe-in [OR 1/32'' total toe-in]

Thoughts? Suggestions?

Bump - heading in soon. Any feedback on my weekend specs above?

wyatth wrote

Bump - heading in soon. Any feedback on my weekend specs above?

Yep, specs you listed look to be right. I'd shoot for zero toe up front - just make sure alignment place you go to is willing to give you the time. Most places now don't truly care about setting an equal balance side to side etc.

Stock ZCP wheels and suspension.
-1.7 camber front L/R (max negative, pins pulled)
-1.9 camber rear L/R (within factory range, I should reduce this to -1.2)

Even with plenty of spirited cornering on the street, the rear camber was too much. On the track, it would have been fine, but I’d have needed -2.4 up front for the track, and I can’t achieve that.

New rear tires tomorrow; I’ll try to get it on the rack and bring the rear down some.

Reading through this thread but don't seem to be able to confirm if there is a difference between ZCP and standard alignment. Have an appointment with a shop who "should" know but always nice to have an idea when going in.

Getting my first alignment during my 5y ownership so will be interesting to see how much have moved if anything.

Thanks

^ I have never heard of different factory/recommended alignment specs for a ZCP. Perhaps they run a smidge more [neg] camber naturally from the drop?

wyatth wrote

^ I have never heard of different factory/recommended alignment specs for a ZCP. Perhaps they run a smidge more [neg] camber naturally from the drop?

You're probably right Wyatth which is why I can't find anything.

Thx

Back from the shop with below result. Toe pretty far off but guess it could have been worse considering this probably was the first alignment since new/8 years.

The ZCP specs was different vs non ZCP according to the shop' data, seems to be slightly more aggressive compared to the specs on this thread. Ah well, steering wheel back to center and hope for a stable holyday trip on the road next week.

Alignment done several months after coilover install. No before just after.

Timujin wrote

Alignment done several months after coilover install. No before just after.

Far from expert but that's pretty aggressive on the front is it, due to tracking?

Curious to learn - thx

No tracking yet. Just maximizing stock mounts without camber plates & factory pins in place.