Lowered and Camber wear
05-25-2013, 09:33 PM
#51
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Washington
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
10 E63, Sold -07 E63
Almost all true, yes camber will get worst, but that can be corrected in general.
Decreased suspension travel does not make it worse unless you are bottoming out, in cases where cars are very very low. Simply lowering the car will not give you amazing handling by any means. But it will give you a noticeable feel.
Most car's are already equipped with "coil-overs" the coil over shock setup.
What most are upgrading to is adjustable coil-overs, or adjustable spring perch for height and adjustable shock for rebound on some cars for rear suspensions.
I miss my Ohlins from my S4, I wish Ohlins would make a setup for our car.
Or even my setup on my Subaru from back in the days. Full sway bars, cross bars, end links, subframe, adjustable coil-overs, adjustable arms. Just not much option for our E's.
Decreased suspension travel does not make it worse unless you are bottoming out, in cases where cars are very very low. Simply lowering the car will not give you amazing handling by any means. But it will give you a noticeable feel.
Most car's are already equipped with "coil-overs" the coil over shock setup.
What most are upgrading to is adjustable coil-overs, or adjustable spring perch for height and adjustable shock for rebound on some cars for rear suspensions.
I miss my Ohlins from my S4, I wish Ohlins would make a setup for our car.
Or even my setup on my Subaru from back in the days. Full sway bars, cross bars, end links, subframe, adjustable coil-overs, adjustable arms. Just not much option for our E's.
Lowering the car at all will make the camber worse, so it just depends on how poorly you want the tires to wear.
Also, lowering the car does not necessarily make the car handle better and in fact in many cases it makes it worse (as you have decreased the suspension travel). If you want the car to handle great and like it dropped, then you should get coilovers.
Also, lowering the car does not necessarily make the car handle better and in fact in many cases it makes it worse (as you have decreased the suspension travel). If you want the car to handle great and like it dropped, then you should get coilovers.
05-25-2013, 11:30 PM
#52
Super Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
04 E55 AMG, 03 350z Track Built/Single Turbo
I didn't exactly buy this car to road race or autocross, so I don't see why people are saying the airmatic is "not good enough". If you want a race car, you'd probably be better off picking many other cars than a 4000+lb four door luxury vehicle.
That said, I kept up with a modified STI up and down the Tail of the Dragon on almost-bald 18s. That's good enough for me.
I think the main draw in addressing camber for folks here, is tire life. If you can get the dropped look without roasting through tires every 10k, you're set.
That said, I kept up with a modified STI up and down the Tail of the Dragon on almost-bald 18s. That's good enough for me.
I think the main draw in addressing camber for folks here, is tire life. If you can get the dropped look without roasting through tires every 10k, you're set.
05-26-2013, 12:37 AM
#53
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Washington
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
10 E63, Sold -07 E63
We all have needs that differ from each other. Money, space, feel and whatever it may be.
It's completely fine if you find the airmatic works for you. For modders who like the car but want to improve upon it, the airmatic is not good enough. I could have bought a c63, but it's not big enough for my needs. So I chose the e63 as a personal preference. Easy to say, why put a front lip, or do 63 conversion bumpers, or rims if all of it "is good enough"
Also camber is not really the main culprit, when the very inside always sidewall wears down, especially when it's only in the -2. Most of the time it's toe, toe causes the tires to have a rubbing against the motion, causing the quick tire wear. Where as camber wear will not wear down as fast or as pronounced. A possitive toe for rwd car is good in some cases depending on suspension setup. Camber is good for cornering, but bad for people who do a lot of highway miles.
It's completely fine if you find the airmatic works for you. For modders who like the car but want to improve upon it, the airmatic is not good enough. I could have bought a c63, but it's not big enough for my needs. So I chose the e63 as a personal preference. Easy to say, why put a front lip, or do 63 conversion bumpers, or rims if all of it "is good enough"
Also camber is not really the main culprit, when the very inside always sidewall wears down, especially when it's only in the -2. Most of the time it's toe, toe causes the tires to have a rubbing against the motion, causing the quick tire wear. Where as camber wear will not wear down as fast or as pronounced. A possitive toe for rwd car is good in some cases depending on suspension setup. Camber is good for cornering, but bad for people who do a lot of highway miles.
05-27-2013, 12:59 PM
#54
Super Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
04 E55 AMG, 03 350z Track Built/Single Turbo
We all have needs that differ from each other. Money, space, feel and whatever it may be.
It's completely fine if you find the airmatic works for you. For modders who like the car but want to improve upon it, the airmatic is not good enough. I could have bought a c63, but it's not big enough for my needs. So I chose the e63 as a personal preference. Easy to say, why put a front lip, or do 63 conversion bumpers, or rims if all of it "is good enough"
Also camber is not really the main culprit, when the very inside always sidewall wears down, especially when it's only in the -2. Most of the time it's toe, toe causes the tires to have a rubbing against the motion, causing the quick tire wear. Where as camber wear will not wear down as fast or as pronounced. A possitive toe for rwd car is good in some cases depending on suspension setup. Camber is good for cornering, but bad for people who do a lot of highway miles.
It's completely fine if you find the airmatic works for you. For modders who like the car but want to improve upon it, the airmatic is not good enough. I could have bought a c63, but it's not big enough for my needs. So I chose the e63 as a personal preference. Easy to say, why put a front lip, or do 63 conversion bumpers, or rims if all of it "is good enough"
Also camber is not really the main culprit, when the very inside always sidewall wears down, especially when it's only in the -2. Most of the time it's toe, toe causes the tires to have a rubbing against the motion, causing the quick tire wear. Where as camber wear will not wear down as fast or as pronounced. A possitive toe for rwd car is good in some cases depending on suspension setup. Camber is good for cornering, but bad for people who do a lot of highway miles.
05-28-2013, 08:04 PM
#56
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Orbiting the planet
Posts: 4,478
Received 1,488 Likes
on
986 Posts
This place is a joke.
Great news, one of the engineers from SPC replied to me. They are currently working on a rear camber kit for the 2003-2009 E-Class. It seems they will be making offset bushings, prototypes are in testing and they hope to be for sale towards the end of summer.
05-28-2013, 09:21 PM
#57
Super Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
04 E55 AMG, 03 350z Track Built/Single Turbo
That is great news. I've used SPC camber arms (and toe bolts) in the past, and they've been great. Let's hope they don't feel the need to up the price due to the target audience.
07-31-2013, 05:28 PM
#59
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The Granite State
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
8 Posts
.
Any updates?
I am running lowered with about 2.3* and 2.5* of negative camber up front and by tires are corded after 1500 miles.... the rears have just as much negative camber so I suspect they'll be toasted soon as well.
I've got a complete set of KMAC bushings coming in soon (Front and Rear), but in the meantime I'm putting the car back up to stock height and putting the factory alignment back on the car.... burning up $1000 in tires every couple thousand miles just to get "the look" is totally not worth it to me.
Unfortunately, based on my own measurements and data there is no possible way to set the alignment up correctly at two different ride heights using the ELM. One of them can be made perfect, but the other one will have way too much toe (either in or out) and the camber will change far too much....
Bummer.
-G
I am running lowered with about 2.3* and 2.5* of negative camber up front and by tires are corded after 1500 miles.... the rears have just as much negative camber so I suspect they'll be toasted soon as well.
I've got a complete set of KMAC bushings coming in soon (Front and Rear), but in the meantime I'm putting the car back up to stock height and putting the factory alignment back on the car.... burning up $1000 in tires every couple thousand miles just to get "the look" is totally not worth it to me.
Unfortunately, based on my own measurements and data there is no possible way to set the alignment up correctly at two different ride heights using the ELM. One of them can be made perfect, but the other one will have way too much toe (either in or out) and the camber will change far too much....
Bummer.
-G
07-31-2013, 05:59 PM
#60
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Washington
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
10 E63, Sold -07 E63
According to the shop I go to, when we hit speeds at 70 the car drops a few more. I am not sure of the value, but when the car drops lower at speeds over 70mph the camber will change. So if factory is -2+, at 70mph+ that camber value could be well over -3. So my guess is that if we can get camber set to -1 while lowered then we can expect that when the car lowers itself, the value of the camber should be around just -2. I will try this if it is possible.
07-31-2013, 06:10 PM
#61
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The Granite State
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
8 Posts
.
According to the shop I go to, when we hit speeds at 70 the car drops a few more. I am not sure of the value, but when the car drops lower at speeds over 70mph the camber will change. So if factory is -2+, at 70mph+ that camber value could be well over -3. So my guess is that if we can get camber set to -1 while lowered then we can expect that when the car lowers itself, the value of the camber should be around just -2. I will try this if it is possible.
Shardul commented somewhere on MBW that it is possible to disable that feature in STAR. I most DEFINITELY want to do that as well on my car.... having the suspension drop an additional 10-15mm at speed is sure to change the alignment in a significant way. I'd prefer to know that the settings I get on the alignment rack are the ones I'll continue to have "at speed" as well.
If anyone knows exactly how to do this in STAR please post up the steps... that would help a LOT of people here.
Link:
https://mbworld.org/forums/5682555-post3.html
-G
Last edited by GregMB; 07-31-2013 at 06:15 PM. Reason: found the Shardul post...
07-31-2013, 06:28 PM
#62
MBWorld Fanatic!
If stock settings don't ruin the front tires, then I don't see an issue with setting it to factory specs on a lowered car and allowing the dynamic lowering feature to do it's thing.
On a side note, KMAC bushings for the front should be the next group buy around here. I'd be in on that....
On a side note, KMAC bushings for the front should be the next group buy around here. I'd be in on that....
07-31-2013, 06:41 PM
#63
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The Granite State
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
8 Posts
.
If stock settings don't ruin the front tires, then I don't see an issue with setting it to factory specs on a lowered car and allowing the dynamic lowering feature to do it's thing.
On a side note, KMAC bushings for the front should be the next group buy around here. I'd be in on that....
On a side note, KMAC bushings for the front should be the next group buy around here. I'd be in on that....
From what I've seen on my last round of experiments on the alignment rack, even small changes in ride height change the toe-in value quite a bit... a setting that is "perfect" standing still, will be quite a bit different as the car lowers itself at highway speeds.
I've been speaking with Kevin at K-MAC quite a bit lately. My guess is that he'd consider a group buy now that he's a vendor here.
-G
07-31-2013, 07:11 PM
#64
MBWorld Fanatic!
07-31-2013, 08:25 PM
#66
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
7 Posts
Ducati
You know...
I had an idea a while back on an inexpensive way to correct the front camber, but sold my car before I could investigate it. If anyone wants to hear my idea, PM me.
I had an idea a while back on an inexpensive way to correct the front camber, but sold my car before I could investigate it. If anyone wants to hear my idea, PM me.
07-31-2013, 09:45 PM
#68
MBWorld Fanatic!
08-04-2013, 01:15 AM
#69
MBWorld Fanatic!
08-04-2013, 06:31 PM
#70
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida-Germany-New York
Posts: 1,123
Likes: 0
Received 30 Likes
on
25 Posts
2004 E55,1969 300SEL6.3,2011 ML350 BlueTec Diesel,2005 ML400 CDI
If stock settings don't ruin the front tires, then I don't see an issue with setting it to factory specs on a lowered car and allowing the dynamic lowering feature to do it's thing.
On a side note, KMAC bushings for the front should be the next group buy around here. I'd be in on that....
On a side note, KMAC bushings for the front should be the next group buy around here. I'd be in on that....
If you have lowered your car (with STAR) beyond the dynamic lowering limits, the car will not lower itself beyond those limits. Accordingly, the alignment settings will remain constant. Just replaced Nitto's with 40K+ miles with Yokohama Advan V105's. Rear Nittios had slightly more wear on the inside due to -2 deg camber. FWIW
08-04-2013, 09:37 PM
#71
Super Member
Lowered and balanced with STAR + KMAC's on the front suspension and Evosport toe-links on the rear. All alignment done after lowering.
If you have lowered your car (with STAR) beyond the dynamic lowering limits, the car will not lower itself beyond those limits. Accordingly, the alignment settings will remain constant. Just replaced Nitto's with 40K+ miles with Yokohama Advan V105's. Rear Nittios had slightly more wear on the inside due to -2 deg camber. FWIW
If you have lowered your car (with STAR) beyond the dynamic lowering limits, the car will not lower itself beyond those limits. Accordingly, the alignment settings will remain constant. Just replaced Nitto's with 40K+ miles with Yokohama Advan V105's. Rear Nittios had slightly more wear on the inside due to -2 deg camber. FWIW
08-04-2013, 10:55 PM
#72
MBWorld Fanatic!
11-27-2013, 10:43 PM
#74
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Orbiting the planet
Posts: 4,478
Received 1,488 Likes
on
986 Posts
This place is a joke.
The new wheel/tire setup is hooking good on the street, getting the camber closer to zero will help even more. After a short drive you can feel the inside rear tread getting hot while the outside tread is ambient temp...from my track days that means too much camber.
