Are you ****ing blind and can’t see how much lower your inner edge is?

it’s not theory it’s called science.




Put some more mile on them and they will look like mine when I had zero toe.




Brahhhhhhhhhh

3 seasons on pss and that much thread left. Must be your Sunday cruise car.

 

I had -2° of camber, of course the inside will wear faster. It's not because of 0 toe. The 0 toe is why they're lasting so long. Also, maybe if you paid attention to detail you'd see I live in Canada. Seasons for summer tires is quite a bit shorter than what they would be in GA.

I forgot to say flawed theory earlier, my bad. Your knowledge in this area of "science" is obviously limited. Good luck with your settings though.

 

I guess you don’t know the difference between camber and toe wear.

you have camber wear on top of -toe wear. That makes it difficult to see the toe wear itself. My tires looked just like yours when they were newer.

good luck with your setup, Just keep an eye on the inner edge it will go fast.

 

Inside wear was MUCH MUCH worse when I had factory spec toe in with -2° camber.

Your argument is that TOE accelerates inside/outside wear depending if it's + or - which is 100% accurate. However, you're suggesting, since the rear end squats during acceleration changing toe dynamically you need a static setting to neutralize toe to reduce wear. Is that an accurate assumption of your science?

 

That is not quiet what I’m trying to bring across.

Yes, toe changes dynamically. +toe is needed to reduce that effect not to neutralize it.
more or less to go for the happy medium. So the wear is reduced under acceleration and not too bad during coasting.

I had almost the same setup with -2.8 camber and 0toe and the picture of the tire earlier was the result.

The tire is almost done anyway but would have gotten a couple thousand more miles out of it if the inner edge wouldn’t be that low.

I went from 0 toe to 1/8inch (for normal people about 3mm) toe in combined. It will still go toe out under load but will reduce that wear by a bit.

I hope this clears it up and we can stop arguing.

 

The control: Solid axles on a simulated road surface roller. What would be the wear characteristics of the below?

1. Zero toe AND camber.
2. 1/8" toe in.
3. -2° camber.
4. -2° camber AND 1/8" toe in.

 

Here's a link to my tire in case you can't see my uploaded pic

https://i.imgur.com/aa1Dry6_d.webp?m...idelity=medium

So now, should I be buying camber bolts to reduce rear camber or was the toe the prime issue and that's been sorted, and the damage was done so the wear just kept going like this?

​​​

 

Oh, quiz time. Did you google that to test what I’m trying to explain.

I don’t care about a solid axle because it doesn’t flex the same as independent suspension. Totally different wear characteristics when it come to toe set up.
Most solid rear axles don’t allow toe adjustments anyway.

not sure if that was a trick question or if you didn’t really know that.

 

As it sits you are going to have the same or even worse tire wear than before. I would get most of the camber out and reduce the toe as well.
For what it’s worth I run .5 degree negative camber and 1/16 of an inch toe in per side for a total of 1/8 toe in rear and I have even rear wear.

 

I was attempting to use a control to grasp your understanding of wear characteristics. Toe wears the leading edge (as seen in the pics you posted). When you add camber to the mix the leading edge location changes.

I don't have time for your sarcasm. If you don't understand why inside wear is more predominate with negative camber AND positive toe. I'm not sure how else to explain it to you.

 

Sorry, but I wasn't sarcastic.
I have had this issue on two C63's with negative camber and o toe and both times the inner edge (not just the inside) of the tire wore out too fast. After adding some toe the inner edge on a the next tire (same brand) was just fine.
If you just look at you rear tire you can see the inner edge wearing down (not just the inside) You have quiet some meat left on the tire which hides that a little.

Forget about it. No reason to keep arguing about it. Lets agree to disagree.
You have a good weekend.

 

His total +toe is at about 1/8inch which is 0.28degree (0.26 is his after alignment). The spec sheet is in degree, it always get me when it comes to the toe measurement.

 

Here is my opinion on what you should do.
I have gone through the same issue on two different C63's and went through about one set of tires on each car before I corrected it. and went through about 4 more sets after I corrected it on my old C63 and the problem was corrected by having a little toe.

You could go 0.5 degree less on your camber. I wouldn't because of the cost of the adjustable arms and 0.5 degree isn't that much.

If you decide to go higher (+) on you camber make sure you adjust your toe again because the camber adjustment will give you more toe as well. stay around 1/8inch total or 0.28degree total toe in.
If you don't want to adjust your camber leave everything where it is.

 

How do I have toe wear with zero toe set? Because it toes out when I'm hard on the throttle which is maybe 0.5% of the tires rotational lifespan? It's 100% camber wear only.

Your logic states I'd have toe wear if both toe and camber were at 0 which makes absolutely no sense.

I am fine with agreeing to disagree. All good.

 

First off to the OP , I've never seen a 204 C63 with -1.1 camber in the front. They all start with -1.40' or more mind you this is degrees and minutes so equal it's to -1 2/3 degrees of camber. That's just strange. Did someone lift the car? lol. Either that alignment rack is out of adjustment, or you've got a freak. If it's the latter it is beneficial to you and your tire life extension quest. As more negative camber wears worse. So the million dollar question. Why did your tires wear like crap. New alignment looks on the money .I'd leave it alone, given their machine is good.

You bought all season cars for a sports car! That may work on a crappy domestic that was not designed for anything other than street use, but this an AMG. Those tires aren't designed for any negative camber, they are for A-B econo crap boxes, fwd cars and grandma mobiles. Not performance driving. Any tire rated for "snow / sleet / winter" does not belong on a C63. The suspension geometry is way to aggressive and will make the tires wear like crap regardless of how you drive or how good your alignment is. This same thing happens with cheap b.s. tires. Yes I realize conti's are of good quality but it's the wrong application. Go buy some "performance" yokohamas and they will do this on a C250 because they are trash.

Next up Jasonoff, I don't think you drive that hard. 3 seasons and that's what those tires look like? How many miles is that? 3 seasons on a normal daily driver would be around 10k mi, Those look like maybe 5-6kmi. They should be pretty much bald as hell at 5k if you drove it hard. If you get 10k out of a set of rears on a C63 you're doing pretty good, as in you're a grandpa driver and either do a lot of highway miles or don't drive it as intended. Your tires are wearing ok, It's not the magical alignment specs though it's the tire application. You put the proper tire designed for a sports car and higher camber rates so naturally they appear to wear much better than the majority of people buying cheap trash that doesn't belong on a C63. You're still getting a decent amount of wear on the inside. We both know a little of that because of the negative camber. If you brought the toe in a little in the rear it would help get a little more mileage out of them like 5-10%, but not really a game changer. The neutral rear toe isn't necessarily bad it's just not ideal, specially when it squats under heavy load and toes out, which can make it very sketchy if you're in any sort of turn. However it's close enough to spec it won't cause tire murder.

Ultimately like all C63 owners come to find out, this isn't a car to crunch numbers with. You will never make it economical or be able to try and justify it as a daily over a normal car or even a mustang. The consumables are substantially higher. Fuel, Brakes, Tires etc... It's sort of one of these cars that's very awkward and unique in that it has a high compression race engine in a luxury car that somehow handles phenomenal for its size and weight. It can be daily driven and totally reliable but you will pay a price to enjoy that. You may go through a set of rears every year if not 2 sets. You will likely only get 200 miles per tank. Low fuel warning comes on literally at 1/4 of a tank because the tank is so small. The more you try to cut corners and save money the more you will ruin the driving experience and the whole point of the car.

 

forgot to harp on those stupid adjustable Heim joint control arms. If it's track only car go for it. If it's a street car run away. That junk will fall apart in a few thousand miles. Not to mention adjusting requires pulling the wheels off, reinstall equipment etc... night mare. Stick with quality engineered factory parts designed for street use.

 

Guys let's keep calm about this, no need to argue

That being said I've only heard good things from these tires, obviously there are much better ones for the purpose.

Anyways thanks to everyone for your help,
/Close


​​​​